HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/09/2011 Regular Council MeetingCOUNCIL MEETING
March 9, 2011
The Council Meeting of the Council of the County of Kauai, was called to
order by the Council Chair at the Council Chambers, 3371 -A Wilcox Road, Lihu`e,
Kauai, on Wednesday, March 9, 2011 at 9:34 a.m., after which the following
members answered the call of the roll:
Honorable Tim Bynum
Honorable Nadine K. Nakamura
Honorable Mel Rapozo
Honorable JoAnn A. Yukimura
Honorable Jay Furfaro, Council Chair
EXCUSED: Honorable Dickie Chang
Honorable Derek S. K. Kawakami
APPROVAL OF AGENDA:
Mr. Rapozo moved for approval of the agenda as circulated, seconded by
Mr. Bynum, and unanimously carried.
Chair Furfaro: Next item.
Mr. Nakamura: Next matter is approval of the minutes of the
following meetings of the Council.
MINUTES of the following meetings of the Council:
Public Hearing of February 9, 2011 re: Bill No. 2395
Special Council Meeting of February 22, 2011
Public Hearing of February 23, 2011 re: Bills Nos. 2396, 2397 and 2398
Mr. Rapozo moved to approve the Minutes, seconded by Ms. Nakamura, and
unanimously carried.
Chair Furfaro: Now let's go to communications please.
Mr. Nakamura: First communication is communication
C 2011 -76.
COMMUNICATIONS:
C 2011 -76 Communication (02/16/2011) from Council Chair Furfaro,
requesting the Administration's presence to provide the Council with an update on
the County's Islandwide Road Resurfacing Program.
Chair Furfaro: To the County Clerk and I would like the
Engineering Department to follow my discussion on this item, is it the County
Engineering Department intent today to get an approval of the island roads
resurfacing program that they've submitted?
Oil
COUNCIL MEETING . March 9, 2011
Mr. Nakamura: No, this is just a discussion Mr. Chair.
Chair Furfaro: This is just a discussion. Okay, and so if you
can advise me after this discussion if you are resubmitting an intent for the
approval of the items being discussed today?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
LARRY DILL, COUNTY ENGINEER: That would be my goal, if
possible, yes.
Chair Furfaro: Okay so that would not necessarily happen
today but we need to do a follow up communication, Mr. Dill. I'm going to suspend
the rules on that note and ask Mr. Dill if he has a presentation or is prepared to
respond to some of the questions that were submitted over to your office.
Mr. Dill: Good morning. For the record Larry Dill,
County Engineer. I apologize for the lateness of this submittal but we do have a
letter for you responding to the questions that were submitted to us on the first set
of questions. We did receive a second request, it was just this past Monday, we
have not had time to adequately respond to those and we're requesting a deferral on
that second list. We are prepared to discuss the items on the first list that came
over as subsequent to the previous meeting.
Chair Furfaro: That might have been a little bit of internal
housekeeping issue. I had submitted questions from two (2) Councilmembers and I
had inadvertently not included questions that came via a different network to my
office and so that must be the second list that you're referring to?
Mr. Dill: Yeah, we just received that Monday
afternoon and... while the first list got...
Chair Furfaro: The problem is ours.
Mr. Dill: Okay.
Chair Furfaro: I suggested that a vehicle be used to get the
questions to my office, I didn't make myself clear but you do have questions from
three (3) different Councilmembers, now.
Mr. Dill: Okay, I have received two (2) memos.
Chair Furfaro: Yes.
Mr. Dill: Okay.
Chair Furfaro: One (1) set of questions from two (2)
Councilmembers and a third (3rd) set of questions from... and a second set of
questions from a third (3rd) Councilmember.
Mr. Dill: Okay.
Chair Furfaro: And that is why we will move on the deferral
after today's discussion.
3
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
Mr. Dill: I am prepared though from the late memo or
the latest memo, I should say, to discuss some of those items perhaps but we don't
have an official communication to you for those.
Chair Furfaro: Well as much as you can discuss today,
would be greatly appreciated. The floor is yours Mr. Dill.
Mr. Dill: Thank you. In response to the February 25th
memo, I'm just going to run through the questions and the answers you have in
front of you in the letter that I hope you all have a copy of dated March 8th? The
question was...
Ms. Yukimura: I don't have that, I don't think.
Chair Furfaro: Mr. Dill, we may not have that. I
have questions...
Ms. Yukimura: We're on roads.
Chair Furfaro: Hold on just a second so we can get
those copies.
Mr. Dill: Okay.
Chair Furfaro: Are we making copies of Mr. Dill's responses,
is that what we're doing? Thank you. Mr. Dill, I'm going to continue to give you the
floor while we're making those copies.
Mr. Dill: I just gave away my letter to make the copies
so I don't have my notes in front of me.
Chair Furfaro: Let me pose a question to you Mr. Dill while
we're waiting for that...
Mr. Dill: Oh okay. Here we go.
Chair Furfaro: Good.
Mr. Dill: So first question asked in regards to the use
of glassphalt /recycled glass as part of the County's repaving /resurfacing program.
Has the County of Kauai utilized this product before? Was it successful or
problematic? And do we plan to utilize it again?
Both contractors were utilized in the past in an attempt or experiment if you
will to see if that was something that we wanted to pursue. It was problematic and
so at the moment both contractors that are on the island...
Chair Furfaro: Let's do a timeout until we get a horn
adjusted here from somebody's vehicle.
There being no objections, the Council recessed at 9:41 a.m.
The Council reconvened at 9:42 a.m., and proceeded as follows:
4
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
Chair Furfaro: Mr. Dill.
Mr. Dill: Okay. Again both paving contractors on the
island have stopped using glass in their mix for the three (3) reasons that are noted
in the letter. That is that the glass didn't do well as far as adhering to the asphalt
binder, so the flexible pavement wasn't as strong as when using the regular
aggregate. It's related to point number two (2) as well the glass weakens the a.c.,
since the glass itself is not as strong as the regular aggregate and its ability to bare
the traffic weight. Also there were problems, if I could summarize number three (3)
in contamination and that they couldn't get glass product in sufficient quantities
that suited the purpose. What's not noted on here is that the sufficient quantities
are also... they would have to ship glass from off island which made it a much more
expensive venture because you don't simply produce enough glass on this island to
make that feasible.
Item number two (2) was requesting a copy of both the County's previous and
new road resurfacing contract. Please indicate the new provisions (i.e., additional
Contractor responsibilities, etc.) that were discussed on the Council floor. We have
emailed over so you do have in your office here copies of those contracts, I have a
couple of hard copies there, a hundred and sixty -eight (168) documents, so they're
pretty thick. We can provide you with these copies as well as you have them
electronically now as well. As far as...
Mr. Rapozo: Mr. Dill, excuse me...
Chair Furfaro: Hold on just a second.
Mr. Rapozo: I'm not following those questions with what I
have; I have completely different questions here.
Chair Furfaro: Staff? Excuse me, will you take a walk over
and look at Mr. Dill's, what he's reading because it was handed to him by his, one of
his managers and make sure that that is the document that you have passed out
to us.
Mr. Rapozo: I'm assuming we're referencing...
Chair Furfaro: Let me just clarify this first. Is that the
same document?
Mr. Rapozo: Well I have the March 7 questions, five (5)
questions starting off with how many miles roads...
Chair Furfaro: This is not just for you, it's for all the
members...
Mr. Dill: Councilmember Rapozo the March 7 memo is
the one we're requesting a deferral on because we just received it
Monday afternoon.
Mr. Rapozo: Okay, well that's what was handed to me so I
don't have what you're...
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
Chair Furfaro: I'm getting to the same place. What you're
reading from, that you got from Ed, is not what's been circulated to us.
Ms. Yukimura: I think we just got it.
Chair Furfaro: Okay, just got it. Okay. Dated March 8?
Mr. Dill: Correct.
Chair Furfaro: Thank you and thank you for bringing that
to our attention Mr. Rapozo. Do you have your copy back now?
Mr. Dill:
Yes.
Chair Furfaro:
Let's start all over.
Mr. Dill:
Okay.
Chair Furfaro:
Okay.
Mr. Dill: First question was regarding the use of
recycled glass in our asphalt mix. Both paving contractors...
Chair Furfaro: Let me just ask, does everyone find where
those answers for those? Go ahead, you can go...
Mr. Dill: Okay, alright.
Chair Furfaro: Next one.
Mr. Dill: Do you want me to go over the reuse of
recycled glass?
Chair Furfaro:
No, no, we're good with that.
Mr. Dill: Next item was regarding basically comparing
the previous and new road resurfacing contracts. We have forwarded up to your
office, so you have a copy of that document now and it's the large, thick document
and so you have that to review. Basically the new road resurfacing contract which
J the 2009 -2010 contract has not been (inaudible), so we still have that opportunity
to modify and to incorporate the provisions that was discussed in Council and the
main thing there is listed from the Council discussion last time was inclusion of
thermoplastic pavement markings as opposed to paint striping. We've done
temporary paint and then come back later to do permanent paint. We're going to go
direct to the thermoplastic painting now, which is a much heartier alternative, it
will last a lot longer. More expensive upfront, but last and cost wise, makes a lot
more sense. We're going to make sure that we identify and repair failed pavement
areas prior to resurfacing, whereas in the past it may have been that we simply
repaved or resurfaced right over top of areas that should have been repaired prior
to. Again that's going to add some cost upfront, it'll help lengthen the lifespan of
the pavements and reduce over the lifecycle cost. The subject of the edges of the
pavement and addressing those that we talked about last time, so we're going to
make sure that the contracting includes provisions to make sure that the edges of
the pavement are prepared for us and that they're addressed afterwards to make
6
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
sure that we're not left with a drop off on the edge of the pavement when the work
is done at the conclusion of the contract.
Item number three (3) was asking about why the variation in "per ton" cost of
asphalt cement on various parts of the island. The basis for that is simply the
trucking cost, the distance for the asphalt (inaudible) is the further you get from the
(inaudible) plant, the more expensive it is to get the asphalt delivered to the site
where you're doing the construction. There some other minor things, things like
quantities, of course usually you get a larger quantity for a project you get a better
unit price. Also when you get down past Hanalei, trucks going over the Hanalei
Bridge again you got a smaller truck with a smaller quantity that can go over the
bridge and that tends to drive up the cost as well. Generally speaking, the cost is
based upon the hauling distance from the plant.
Chair Furfaro: Larry, before we go any further, I just want
to clarify some of the confusion and you're new to the position and we have some of
the agreements with you, we have just now received from the Administration the
actual signed copy of your report. Typically we should make sure that when we
come to session that we have someone from the Administration who has
acknowledged this can be released to us. I apologize for the confusion but it would
be good for us in the future to make sure that the material that you end up
distributing at the table... if you can confirm that the Administration has in fact
done the appropriate cover letter and signed off on what's being distributed.
Mr. Dill: Okay, thank you. I appreciate that.
Chair Furfaro: That is the confusion this morning,
thank you.
Mr. Dill: Alright. Moving on to item number four (4),
will there be any field equipment or any other equipment or training needed for the
operation for the "MicroPaver" pavement maintenance management system? If
equipment or training is required, is it budgeted and when is implementation
expected to be complete?
With this new software we do not anticipate any field equipment being
necessary. Training is available for this software via web based training, so any
cost associated with that can be easily accommodated with an existing training
budget that we have already in place. We have already moved forward with the
acquisition of the software so we should have it within two (2) weeks, I have in
writing, hopefully sooner than that but certainly within two (2) weeks.
Implementation will be an ongoing process, it's difficult for me to sit here and say it
will be a hundred percent (100 %) implemented in such and such date because it's a
matter of inputing more and more information, doing roadway inspections, inputing
it into the system and then as that grows the implementation will grow. But we
certainly do believe that it will be implemented by the end of the next fiscal year
and will be in use long from the beginning of the fiscal year.
Number five (5) the request is to provide our comprehensive plan for the
County's road resurfacing program. For example, how are roads selected for paving,
how are they scheduled for repaving, when will the bids go out for that work? When
will they be awarded, when will the work begin and how many miles of roadway
will be included for fiscal year? To date because we have not had a comprehensive
preventive maintenance management plan for the roads, it's been a pretty informal
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
process and it's based upon inspections that are done by the (inaudible) overseers
and the supervisors in the Roads Division, as well as calls from the public who call
in to indicate that certain roads, that they are requesting attention on. Typically
known as the worst /first scenario, we try to pick up the roads that are in the worst
condition and then take care of those first and proceed on down the list from there.
Those are based on I want to say the experienced observations of the supervisors
and they've been on this job a long time and know which roads need attention.
However, the implementation of the pavement management system will allow us to
be a lot more objective and a lot more logical in scheduling that work. Also the
beauty of the pavement management system or one of the beauties is that, we'll be
able to catch roads before they get into a very bad condition. When they get into a
very bad condition, you got to reconstruct the road in its entirety. We've been
discussing programs to implement sealing, slurry sealing of the roadways when
they get down to a certain level of condition and that can save the road and get it
back up to a much higher standard. The slurry seal is a much less expensive
alternative than repaving or of course reconstruction of the road. So by slurry
sealing the road on a certain timeframe as indicated by the pavement condition
index that's given to us by the MicroPaver system, we can catch those roads before
they get beyond that point of no return and again extend the lifecycle of that road
and reduce the lifecycle cost.
Speaking specifically now with regard to the list that's before us today,
the 2009 -2010 proposed Islandwide Resurfacing, subject to approval by this body
and our Administration... once we got that we already got a contract drafted. As
you mention we've got to make some modifications to now based on the discussions
here as the provisions of that contract. We anticipate that will be finalized, bids can
be advertised approximately three (3) months after approval by the Administration
and the Council. It's because we have to go through the procurement process of
course and then work should begin after the contract is awarded and execution and
notice to proceed given approximately two (2) months after that.
Chair Furfaro: Larry, I want to make sure you're clear on
something... it is the Administration that signs off on the project list and so forth
prior to coming to the Council.
Mr. Dill:
I understand.
Chair Furfaro: Okay. Section eight (8) of CIP requires the
final approval submitted by the Administration, signed off by the Mayor to this
body before any money is released.
Mr. Dill:
Chair Furfaro:
squared away.
Mr. Dill:
Chair Furfaro:
Okay.
I just wanted to make sure we're
Okay, I understand. I appreciate that.
Okay.
Mr. Dill: And then finally the 2009 -2010 proposed
resurfacing lists includes about twenty -two (22) miles of roadway that they're going
to be resurfacing with that contract.
8
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
Number six (6) please provide the Department's plan since there are only
four (4) months remaining in the Fiscal Year. We are in the process now of still
closing out the Islandwide Resurfacing contracts for FY 2007 -2008. Those
contracts... those are the resurfacing list that is done in those years but the
contracts do take a year or two (2) to complete the actual work. So there has been
work ongoing in this fiscal year from previous year's fiscal contracts that is still
being completed. So that work is an ongoing process. There was no Islandwide
Resurfacing list and contract that was done for fiscal year 2009 because of those
other projects still ongoing. The funds that were budgeted for that are rolled into
the list that we have before you today and we'll be moving forward in that regard.
As I just mentioned the schedule we are anticipating for the 2009 -2010 project.
Item number seven (7), when will the Council receive the Islandwide Road
Resurfacing Plan for fiscal year 2011 -2012? We plan to provide that to you late first
quarter of that fiscal year or early in the second quarter of fiscal year 2012.
Finally, what would be the impact of incorporating "HAPI" the Hawaii
Asphalt Pavement Industry standards to the current County's road resurfacing
contracts? This is consistent with what we said before that now we're raising the
bar as far as the quality of the work that we're trying to do to the roadway
resurfacing. Basically that's going to immediately impact the cost of the road
resurfacing is going to go up but the overall lifecycle cost will go down. So that will
be the twofold pack of incorporating those sorts of standards.
That's response to the first letter, memo.
Chair Furfaro: Larry if you can, I'm going to recognize
Mr. Bynum but before I do I want to share something with you, and again I just
want to make sure as you reacquaint yourself with the County and so forth... Now
on the highway fund you're correct, the moneys do roll over in a CIP fund but that is
not true of the accounts and I just want to make sure that you're aware of that.
Mr. Dill: Right.
Chair Furfaro: There are other commitments in project
maintenance repairs and so forth that you actually have to encumber the funds.
Mr. Dill: Yes.
Chair Furfaro: Before it gets rolled over, just so we're
clear there.
Mr. Dill: Okay, thank you.
Chair Furfaro: The other portion is from the list I see you
submitting to us and if I do a quick run and tab, you're probably about three
hundred thousand (300,000) over what is available to you in the funds. So I'm
making the assumption when you do submit the new list, you're going to take that
three hundred thousand (300,000) in consideration for the next road budget that
you put together?
Mr. Dill: Yes and as you note our estimates are over
the remaining balance.
E
COUNCIL MEETING
March 9, 2011
Chair Furfaro: That's why I'm saying that.
Mr. Dill: We are fairly optimistic that the bids will
come in within the budgeted amounts so our budget estimates I think are pretty
conservative.
Chair Furfaro: On that note, I'll let Mr. Bynum have
the floor.
Mr. Bynum: Good morning Larry, I wanted to preface my
remarks with the recognition that you're new in your position. The big question for
me and I have some others is why road resurfacing didn't go out last summer as
we... the Council was told previously that the target date was last summer so why
didn't we put out the road resurfacing contracts?
Mr. Dill: I don't have an answer for that question
today but I will have to get back to you.
Mr. Bynum: The current balance is like six and a half ..
six point one (6.1) million that's unencumbered?
Mr. Dill: Last year's budget showed a balance, I think
about February of last year, about six point two (6.2) million dollars. The
appropriation was about one point seven (1.7) million, which brought the balance to
about seven point nine (7.9) million. Since that time we have brought that balance
down to about five point two (5.2) million through contracts that have been issued
and work that has been completed.
Mr. Bynum: From the previous fiscal year?
Mr. Dill: Correct.
Mr. Bynum: And the reason why this is important is we
have a lot of unemployed people on Kauai right now...
Mr. Dill: I understand.
Mr. Bynum: And we have a large backlog of CIP dollars.
You have already pointed out that we're getting good bids, we're getting good kind
of bang for the buck... in terms of when we put bids out and this Council last year
asked the Administration... stressed its urgency, our sense of urgency of getting
these jobs out on the street. Both because we're getting good value for the dollar
and because we have high unemployment in the trades and we were assured at that
time that the islandwide road resurfacing which is a big chuck of dollars would be
out in summer of 2010. I have this whole spreadsheet of all of the CIP projects and
the projected completion date of the projects and the projected completion date we
were given for road resurfacing was June of 2010. I don't understand why that
didn't happen or why the Administration wasn't back here telling us, hey we're not
going to make this deadline. We've had a lot of discussion about CIP over the last
couple of years and a lot of commitments but you know we haven't seen a lot of
follow through on some of those dates. In the Public Works Committee, we're going
to be asking for an update on this spreadsheet.
Mr. Dill: Okay.
10
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
Mr. Bynum: Which we were assured was a living
document that would be updated on a regular basis, right? I'll be requesting an
updated document for all of the CIP projects that we were trying to track. I
appreciate the answer number two (2) here about new contracts, having the
thermoplastic pavement markings, repairing the failed pavement before... so in
essence we were... we had contracts where we were paving over portions of road
where we knew underneath there was failed pavement, we weren't meeting those
standards of replacing those failed pavement. Isn't that a prescription for failure
right away?
Mr. Dill: I believe so, yes.
Mr. Bynum: So that's a fundamental change that you're
instituting at Public Works now that are future road contract, so they are going to
meet the HAPI standards?
Mr. Dill: Well HAPI is a professional organization and
are not a standards producing body. As I understand it they provide...
Mr. Bynum: Recommendations?
Mr. Dill: Right. Okay so with the MicroPaver
management system it's a standard based software and HAPI would relate to those
standards. It meets the standards; it was developed by the Federal Highway
Administration (inaudible) Corps of Engineers and Federal Highway
Administration, so we look to those bodies for standards.
Mr. Bynum: Just to be specific when we drive down a
road that's going to be repaved soon, we can all see places where the pavement is
starting to chunk up.
Mr. Dill: Right.
Mr. Bynum: Typically what... and I don't think was
happening routinely and you're saying is that first we come through and identify
those areas and like paint them, we've seen that too right? And then come in and
re -patch those prior to doing the surface over the top, correct?
Mr. Dill: Correct.
Mr. Bynum: And that will extend road surface life.
Because this is also for me a safety issue, when the roads are substandard and it's
energy issue too. When the roads are substandard they're not safe. One of my
concerns going way back was about the edge dressing that you addressed in this.
And I think we improved for a period of time, it's just observation, we improved
dramatically because we weren't doing the edge dressing maybe eight (8) years ago
or nine (9) years ago and then we started doing it and I'm talking more about the
follow up, coming back after the road is paved and bringing the edges back.
Because when cars go off of a steep edge, they lose control and plus that breaks
down the edge of the pavement, have I got that right?
Mr. Dill: Yes.
11
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
Mr. Bynum: Which also further degrades the life or the
length or the history of the road? So these are really good news, this is the first
time we've seen a commitment that this will be part of the contract, that it won't be
county workers required to do the preparation and... but it will be part of the
contract that we send out, correct?
Mr. Dill: That's our intent. I do want to qualify that
though because it may be that our roads crew, in doing the work it may be efficient
for them in some instances to do some of that repair work prior to letting that
contract. So it will be addressed either in the contract if it hasn't been done by our
in house crew.
Mr. Bynum: Well part of this and I don't know how much
of this is true, but our road guys are often called on to do other task...
Mr. Dill: Absolutely.
Mr. Bynum: For the County, a whole bunch of them in
fact and I assume that they are the routine maintenance, ongoing maintenance for
the road and when they get distracted into other areas, maybe that falls down.
Things as simple as the County... well I won't go into that... Another thing that I've
been interested in is this thermoplastic pavement markings, is there an intention
for us to do that in house when we do repainting? Are we going to purchase that
equipment and make the change from paint to thermoplastic?
Mr. Dill: We plan to and we're looking at that now to
see what type of equipment we would have to pick up in order to do that in-
house, yes.
Mr. Bynum: So those were budget questions I asked last
year in the budget whether there was that intention and it was like well it's too late
for this year but I'm hoping in the budget this year, we're going to see a request for
the proper equipment to do that.
Mr. Dill: Okay.
Mr. Bynum: I want to continue to applaud the idea of
getting objective data and analysis to determine which road gets paved when and
I'm going to just restate my expectation that the... there isn't a political intrusion
into your work about what priorities are made for those roads by mayors or
councilmembers or you know... if community groups want to say, what's with my
road, we give them clear answers, but we don't bump them up onto the top of the
line unless there's objective criteria for doing that. It's my belief that politics have
been intruding into that in the past; I don't have any evidence for that, that's just
my belief. I would be counting on the Director or the County Engineer to resist that
kind of political influence and to alert us if that's occurring. But I really like the
direction that you're going here with adopting better standards to make sure when
we resurface the roads that they're going to remain durable and safe for a long time.
And just an aside, the energy issue is well paved roads reduce all of our fuel cost.
When we're on rough and tough roads, it impacts when we drive, so there's a lot of
good reasons to have adequate roads. The biggest thing and I feel responsible for
not knowing this that I'm being self critical that I had no idea that a whole year
worth of road resurfacing had gotten lost in my opinion. Because we were given
assurance that it was going to be completed by summer of 2010 and I relied on those
12
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
assurances. I want to take some responsibility for that. If I'm the Chair of Public
Works, I should have known that. I was focusing on a lot of other CIP projects but
that's a huge one, that's a big ticket item. It's important that we keep up with it. I
mean if we missed a whole year I assume that means we're behind even further
than we were. I know you're not personally responsible for that but I don't
understand. I'd like an answer to that question. Why did we miss a whole year?
What was the reason? And I know I heard you say that you can't give me that
answer right now.
Mr. Dill: I would like to mention again that the fiscal
year 2009 -2010 resurfacing list, we'll use all funds that have been approved and
budgeted. So a lot of that catch up will be happening with this contract we're going
to be letting out.
Mr. Bynum: Alright, so we're going to get back on track?
Mr. Dill: I don't know if it's going to happen all on this
contract but a lot of them will happen on this contract.
Mr. Bynum: Well I'll be paying closer attention than I
was and you know I take responsibility for that because I should've known. I was
focusing on these big ticket items and just assumed that that was happening.
Thank you very much.
Chair Furfaro: Larry on that note Mr. Bynum took some
responsibility for not tracking this closer as he was the Chair of Public Works but I
want to make sure you understand, you know this Council... we can't direct you but
we made the funds available and anything you can do to get us back on track, would
be greatly appreciated. I'll leave that comment and I'm going to turn this portion of
the meeting over to Vice Chair Yukimura because I need to step out and I think she
asked for the floor now. May I do that?
Ms. Yukimura: Certainly.
Chair Furfaro: I'm going to step out for a minute.
Chair Furfaro relinquished his Chairmanship over to Council Vice Chair Yukimura.
Ms. Yukimura: But as the presiding officer I'd like to ask
others who have questions first? Councilmember Rapozo.
Mr. Rapozo: Thank you. Thanks Larry, I appreciate your
responses, I mean it's interesting what you portrayed out or presented today is
really what the former Councils have asked for and I think it's really reasonable. I
know Mr. Mickens is probably quite ecstatic today because a lot of the stuff that
he's been talking about and raising at this Council floor, looks like anyway that it's
going to be realized in the next few years and that's for me is pretty encouraging.
Things as simple as doing the shoulder work have always been a problem. The fact
that we pave roads without prepping it properly, we waste so much money in the
past and (inaudible) is not going to do anything. Going forward though I think
Mr. Furfaro summed it all up saying that the Council is here to help... roads in my
opinion, with the exception of public safety is one of the highest priorities of this
county, it's the core function of this county. It's to provide safe and comfortable
travels for our tax payers and I was shocked to find out last week when I was
13
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
chatting with Councilmember Nakamura that in fact we had missed the whole
cycle, I wasn't aware of that. That just cannot happen. With your answers and
your... you know I think we're on track or getting back on track and I appreciate
that and I'm glad Mr. Bynum is going to keep an eye out because I think often times
when we as a Councilmember approve a budget we just assume that it's going to get
done. We have that trust with the Administration and a lot of times it falls through
the cracks and we'll never know, we hear the complaints from the public, they'll call
and say Mel when are you going to fix my road. I've driven on Waimea, you know
the road that goes up to, where the old Dairy Queen is, it goes up to... by the time
you get to the top of that road, you got to go visit the dentist because your teeth are
all loose and that's one road that should be paved. I mean when you look at a... you
come up with your list, there's no way you're going to cover every road but that road
is simply substandard, just simply substandard and there's many like that. The list
is a good start and I think the attitude is actually more, for me anyway is more
refreshing, just the attitude of yourself and your staff...
Mr. Dill: Thank you.
Mr. Rapozo: That in fact we want to get back on track
and those three (3) little bullet items that you have, I think that if we can
accomplish that in the contract, the people will be very satisfied and I think this
Council will be very satisfied. So thank you and good luck and let us know if there's
anything that we can do to help.
Mr. Dill: Thank you.
Mr. Rapozo: Thank you Councilmember Yukimura.
Ms. Yukimura: Yes, thank you Councilmember Rapozo.
Councilmember Nakamura.
Ms. Nakamura: Hi Larry.
Mr. Dill: Good morning.
Ms. Nakamura: I have a question to follow up on item... the
question number five (5) in your list here. It says here that once the Council
approves the funding that it takes three (3) months to go through the bidding
process and award the contract and then a couple more months then to get the
contractor started. Is that, kind of...
Mr. Dill: Yes.
Ms. Nakamura: Does that sort of summarize?
Mr. Dill: More or less, that's the procurement process.
Ms. Nakamura: Right the process. Now I was wondering
once the contractor has been awarded the bid then how long does it typically take
then to execute on the contract?
Mr. Dill: Not having done this before... I don't have an
answer to that question. Let me ask our Roads Division. Apparently two (2)
14
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
months because the preconstruction meetings need to happen, an investigation of
the scope of the roads.
Ms. Nakamura: Two (2) months before the work begins or...
so once the contract is awarded, you have two (2) months before the work actually
begins and then from that point on, how long does it take to complete
the resurfacing?
Mr. Dill: It's weather permitting a lot of the
work obviously...
Ms. Nakamura: Sure but typically?
Mr. Dill: A minimum six (6) it could take.
Ms. Nakamura: Six (6) months?
Mr. Dill: Yes.
Ms. Nakamura: So really the whole process five (5), six (6),
seven (7) ... so that's thirteen (13) months, just about a year then to complete the
work on a...
Mr. Dill: More or less.
Ms. Nakamura: Once the funds are approved by this Council?
Mr. Dill: Yes.
Ms. Nakamura: So my question has to do with this, I guess
your response to question number six (6) which is that we're in the process of
closing out islandwide resurfacing contracts for FY2007 -2008, if it takes a little over
a year to complete the work, why is it three (3) years later and those projects...
contracts are not closed out?
Mr. Dill: I believe the... and I have to get back to you
on this one... but I believe the scope of work, the work has actually been
accomplished but there's some contract closure details, paper work, etc..., stuff that
was never accomplished for some reason so I can get back to you on that one.
Ms. Nakamura: Okay. Then for the 2010 -2011 work, we have
yet to approve that list of projects, is that correct?
Mr. Dill: Correct.
Ms. Nakamura: Okay. And when do you anticipate getting
that list to us?
Mr. Dill: Well being on the schedule that we're on, as
you know we're addressing the 2009 -2010 and we rolled over the 08 -09, the fiscal
year 2009 funds into that contract. Since we are at this stage with the 2009 -2010,
we are looking at rolling over the 2010 appropriation I'm sorry 2011 appropriation
into 2012. Because we haven't even left this contract yet.
15
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
Ms. Nakamura: Got it. Okay.
Mr. Dill: So I just think it just makes more sense at
this stage of the game, seeing where we're at and move in that direction.
Ms. Nakamura: Okay, thank you.
Ms. Yukimura: Further questions? Councilmember Bynum.
Mr. Bynum: Just one follow up question to what
Councilmember Nakamura was saying, so the 07 -08 there was resurfacing
happening during 2010 that came from the 07 -08 contract?
Mr. Dill:
I believe so, yes.
Mr. Bynum: Okay. Yeah because I said earlier that I'm
embarrassed that I didn't know we missed a whole cycle. Maybe that's because I
saw resurfacing happening and I wasn't, you know... but we generally have a pretty
significant budget item CIP each year for road resurfacing. Are we going to see
because we're rolling over five and a half (5 %) million or whatever it is, are we
going to see the standard amount, are we going to get caught up? Or are we going
to be behind?
Mr. Dill: We plan to utilize as much of those funds as
much as possible. As I mentioned right now our appropriation balance including
rollovers is about five point two (5.2) million. Fiscal year 2010 list which we
provided, we are estimating at five point four (5.4) million; however, we are hoping
and optimistic about bids coming in less than that. We plan to use all the funds
that have been budgeted and approved by Council to get that work done.
Mr. Bynum: For 2010? But you have the money already
is what you're saying, so in the budget that's coming to us soon, are we going to see
new road resurfacing funds?
Mr. Dill: Yes, yes. When we come back to you
shortly in the end of first quarter or beginning of second quarter of this coming
fiscal year with a new road resurfacing list to use all of those funds.
Mr. Bynum: Okay, thank you.
Ms. Yukimura: Mr. Chair, I'll hand the gavel back to you
and I haven't had chance to ask my questions so I'd like the floor.
Council Vice Chair Yukimura gave the Chairmanship back to Council
Chair Furfaro.
Chair Furfaro:
Ms. Yukimura:
Chair Furfaro:
Ms. Yukimura:
I'll give you the floor.
Thank you.
You give me the gavel I'll give you the floor.
Thank you.
16
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
Chair Furfaro: Councilwoman Yukimura has the floor now
Mr. Dill.
Mr. Dill: I'm sorry, go ahead.
Ms. Yukimura: I just want to make sure I heard correctly
your answer for... to Councilmember Bynum and Councilmember Nakamura... so
this moneys that was appropriated from 2010 -2011 actually for the fiscal year we're
in right now, right?
Mr. Dill:
Right.
Ms. Yukimura: You're putting that all together in the
moneys that are going out or they're separate and they're unexpended, so you're just
going to incorporate them into next year's budget?
Mr. Dill:
Yeah I'm sorry.
Ms. Yukimura: So the amount that you want for next year as
well as the leftover from this year and then we put that into the CIP for road
resurfacing, is that? What is it?
Mr. Dill: The five point two (5.2) million it's in the
appropriation balance right now is fiscal year 2010, up to an inclusive of
Ms. Yukimura:
Chair Furfaro:
of me.
Mr. Dill:
Chair Furfaro:
Mr. Dill:
Chair Furfaro:
in the carry over balance.
Mr. Dill:
Chair Furfaro:
Mr. Dill:
Chair Furfaro:
five in the current year.
Mr. Dill:
Chair Furfaro:
of those together.
Mr. Dill:
Okay.
Mr. Dill since I have the numbers in front
Yes.
Can I summarize it for you?
Please.
Okay. You have five point two (5.2) million
Right.
From years previous from 2010.
Right.
You have one, seven, one, four, one, seven,
Right.
And when I said earlier when you put two (2)
Okay.
17
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
Chair Furfaro: You're going to be about three hundred
thousand dollars ($300,000.00) short from what you wanted to accomplish.
Mr. Dill:
includes fiscal year 2011.
Okay, so the one point seven (1.7) million
Ms. Yukimura: So we're planning to spend the 2011 moneys
from what you have put before us?
Mr. Dill: Correct.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay.
Mr. Dill: Yes, I'm sorry.
Ms. Yukimura: Very good. No that's okay because I think
we're all trying to figure out the outer problems that have come from the past years.
Chair Furfaro: I just want to say if you put those together, I
think you're still short about three hundred thousand ($300,000.00) from what he
wants to do.
Ms. Yukimura: Hopefully the bids will be...
Chair Furfaro: Correct, that's correct.
Ms. Yukimura: Alright, thank you. I want to proceed with
my other questions?
Mr. Dill:
Sure.
Ms. Yukimura: The last time you appeared before us, I was
also shocked at the lack of performance in the past years and it was abysmal and
embarrassing but I... and for those I think we need to ask questions to the Mayor
and the Administrative Assistant because you guys weren't in your positions. I am
really delighted with the progress since the last time you showed up because in
county government what you're doing is lightning speed. And you are looking at
making very substantial changes in a positive direction, that inclusion of that
thermoplastic pavement markings, the repair of failed pavement areas prior to
resurfacing, and the preparation and dressing of edge pavements as Councilmember
Rapozo said that these are issues that have plagued us for years and to see it being
addressed in a very thoughtful way, you know in the system change of how you put
out our contracts is very, very good and very exciting that it's happening. I want to
thank you for that.
My questions are... I actually have some questions on glassphalt.
Mr. Dill: Okay.
Ms. Yukimura: You say that Maui County reports using
glass in their ATB... what is ATB?
Mr. Dill: Asphalt Treated Base.
18
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
Ms. Yukimura: Asphalt treated base, a few years ago... do
we know whether they're still doing it and if so are they, have they solved these
problems that you mentioned above?
Mr. Dill: Apparently they are still using it but it's not
a significant amount because I think they faced some of the same problems here,
they have a limited supply. And they are using it... you understand, it's not in the
pavement, it's not in the surface course, it's in the base. The asphalt treated base, it
supports the surface course.
Ms. Yukimura: But that is part of repaving.
Mr. Dill: That's part o£.. when you do resurfacing
you're not necessarily talking about rebuilding the base.
Ms. Yukimura: Yes, okay. That's like reconstructing an
engine for a car, right?
Mr. Dill: Right, okay.
Ms. Yukimura: That's what we're trying to avoid by timely
resurfacing.
Mr. Dill: Correct.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay. So actually glassphalt is more
relevant to base reconstruction than it is to repaving? Is that correct?
Mr. Dill: We found it to be an option. For the reasons
I listed in the letter the other three (3) items, it hasn't been successful as trying to
use it in the ac mix itself.
Ms. Yukimura: Even in base work it's not been effective?
Mr. Dill: It's not been significant because of the
volume of glass...
Ms. Yukimura: Okay the lack of volume, the contamination.
Mr. Dill: Oh the contamination is more of an issue in
the asphalt because when you have contamination in the actual, that's the surface
course, the asphalt itself not the base.
Ms. Yukimura: Oh okay.
Mr. Dill: Because then you get the problems I talked
about in the first question.
Ms. Yukimura: Which is why it's not good for resurfacing?
Mr. Dill: Correct.
19
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
Ms. Yukimura: Okay. So if glassphalt is to be useful, the
most useful area would be in the base course?
Mr. Dill: Correct.
Ms. Yukimura: Alright, I understand. And you know that
the problem of supply could be fully addressed if City and County of Oahu would go
into recycling on an extensive basis because that is one of the blind spots of all of us
especially the City and County that they don't see what could happen in terms of a
recycling modality, reuse /recycling modality if they started doing it because of the
scale that they're working on. But be that as it may, okay, I understand the
glassphalt issues. On the HAPI standards, what does HAPI stand for, H.A.P.I?
Mr. Dill: Hawaii Asphalt Paving Industry.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay. And as you pointed out those are not
standards set by government agency, they're standards set by an industry that
wants to sell their asphalt.
Mr. Dill: No I would say... HAPI is a professional
organization.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay.
Mr. Dill: That supports the industry and provides
education and makes recommendations about things but they are not an official
designated standards producing entity.
Ms. Yukimura: Probably what they're advocating or
proposing actually overlaps with some of our standards?
Mr. Dill: Absolutely.
Ms. Yukimura: Yeah.
Mr. Dill: And I'm not belittling them at all by any way
shape or form because they do a lot of good work and they support the standards
that are out there and promote proper pavement maintenance.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay, excellent. So then as you answered
here the impact of incorporating their standards or the Federal Highway standards
means that the upfront costs would increase, but the lifecycle cost that is how often
we'd have to then repair, that work will decrease. And so in the long run we're
spending less money with those standards because we don't have to repair and
repave as often?
Mr. Dill: Correct.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay. So it's really good that we're going in
this direction and I commend and thank you for that.
Mr. Dill: Okay, thank you.
20
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
Ms. Yukimura: How we treat potholes related to how often
we have to do resurfacing?
Mr. Dill: Obviously a pothole is a failed pavement
section in the road, so that would speak to, if we do a quick fix on a pothole, it's a
cold patch which is a temporary fix. So we have to establish a program which is...
I'm not sure if it's in place now but we're doing hot mix repairs.
So the fixes that we have been able to do so far and we have been doing our
temporary repairs and they don't last as long, they're not as strong. Number one
(1) prior to resurfacing we would do a proper repair where we would repair the base
course underneath and then build up from there. If it's a road now that's not
scheduled for repaving or resurfacing for some time, we have been talking in house
about how we can do a what we call a hot mix repair where we actually repair the
base underneath and then do a hot asphalt, it's like a miniature paving job in the
area where we conduct the repair. That will help lengthen the life spans of
those routes.
Ms. Yukimura: So after you finish putting our road
resurfacing system in order you can put attention to how we prepare potholes and
that will really make our road system work well.
Mr. Dill: That's the goal, yes.
Ms. Yukimura: I do acknowledge that you're having to deal
with this all at once and you have to take it step by step but I... okay. So I'm glad
that you folks are aware of the relationship of how we fix potholes and how Jong our
resurfacing jobs last and that you at some point plan to address that, so thank you.
Okay. The questions about... the second set of questions that you received and I
apologize for myself because there were actually my questions and I'm sorry they
were late but you'll be back to us because they refer to how we're going to catch up
and how we're going to eventually get to a resurfacing program that's done in a
timely basis, so I'll wait for your answers to that.
Mr. Dill: Okay.
Ms. Yukimura: Thank you very much.
Chair Furfaro: Are there any further questions from
members? Go right ahead. Councilmember Nakamura.
Ms. Nakamura: Thank you again. I just wanted to clarify
that from the time this Council budgeted the funds for the 2009 resurfacing that
that would have been May of 2009 that... by the time that work gets done it will be
May 2012 based on the scenario that we worked out that we talked about...
Mr. Dill: Yes, that's correct.
Ms. Nakamura: I really agree with Councilmember Rapozo
that this being a core function of County government that we really should be doing
a better job and I know you're taking steps to move us in that direction. I would
also request your recommendations on how our system for doing this can
be improved.
21
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
Mr. Dill: Okay.
Ms. Nakamura: Because I think that's the long term fix.
Something's broken in our system here for 2009 funds for that work not to be done
until 2012. I think we really need to look at what are the core obstacles preventing
this from happening sooner and maybe I just need to be educated on what those
barriers are.
ED RENAUD, CHIEF OF FIELD OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE: Ed
Renaud, Public Works. The thing is I can go out there right now and pick any road;
I don't want to do that. I have rode the areas on this island and to prepare for this
next project for resurfacing, I want to be sure that we get all the roads that need to
be repaired. I have seen collector roads that we have not finished; I need to put
them on there. You know get all this roads on the list, see what the quantities are
and everything, what we're going to do with it and then look at our moneys instead
of just going out there picking any road; I don't want to do that. What I see in the
past, I won't go there. If I'm there sitting down in that seat now, I'm going to make
sure that we do everything the proper way. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Larry, I do want to share something with you
and I think you and I, our professional paths have crossed before and I just want to
say I think you agree with me this performance is not acceptable that we've been
doing. And I also want to throw a new curve in this next step, partially several
years ago I lobbied the rest of the body for additional money for resurfacing, almost
two million dollars ($2,000,000.00). I think that pushed you folks ahead a little bit
and that's not why we may not really be seeing the consequences of the fact that
we've fallen behind. It's because there was a period that we pushed ahead. But I
really appreciate the summary that you gave to us. The fact of the matter is that'
we're going to defer this and you'll be back in two (2) weeks. I would hope in that
two (2) weeks a following item on the agenda is the actual move to approve this
money... with your road plan. But now we are seeing the consequences of not doing
the 2010 -2011 pavings. To me that's really the period we failed behind. You and I
are clear I'm seeing that we have appropriation balance of about five point two (5.2)
million, we have the 2011 one point seven (1.7) million and when you add those
together I do want to share with you, you're still about three hundred thousand
dollars ($300,000.00) short and I heard what you said you're working for a better
price with the volume you're going to get approved and so forth but at the same
time, I want to make sure you understand, oil prices are what drive the cost of the
paving and we're not in a good spot today. I look forward to your summary and that
we have this understanding of where we need to go to really take care of this work.
Anything like this happens to us in the future it's just not acceptable. The Council
has approved the money and to go forward the Council has to approve the new
money, you know we're the last stop. Anything I can help you with, you can count
on me but we need to get this resolved pretty quick before we go into the next dry
session. Now I'm going to ask members of the audience if they'd like to come up and
I assume that you both be staying?
Mr. Dill: Yes.
Chair Furfaro: Okay. Mr. Mickens.
GLENN MICKENS: Thank you Jay, for the record Glenn
Mickens. As some of you long time Councilmembers know I've been here fifteen (15)
years going over this thing. It's really a breath of fresh air to see it finally being
22
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
addressed, I don't know why it was never addressed in the past, but you know you
heard me testified, you've seen me show PowerPoints, and on and on. I'm tickled to
death to hear possible resolutions coming from our two (2) engineers. There's so
many questions I would have but you have a copy of my testimony and let me read
it and maybe you can answer a few of these.
With all due respect to Ed and Larry, I do not believe that we need this
MicroPaver system to properly pave out three hundred (300) miles of county roads.
Our only two (2) paving contractors on Kauai, Glover and Grace Pacific are
members of HAPI, Hawaii Asphalt Pavement Industry and heard what Larry said,
HAPI is used across the United States by all pavers and their standards are pretty
stringent and I don't think we need, maybe this data base that Larry is talking
about may help, I don't know... to put this stuff in the data base. But even in that,
if you're going to find a road out there that needs repaving you can physically go out
and look at the road, if it needs repaving, it does. It doesn't matter what a computer
is going to say. Anyway, their paving standards are stringent enough to give us all
the longevity in our roads that we need without considering spending a thousand
dollars or more on some new program. In other words, our Public Works
Department shouldn't have to invest in this MicroPaver system, they simply must
let our two (2) local contractors pave our roads by the HAPI standards that they are
members of and stop eliminating these regulations from the RFP's that are given to
them at bidding time. That's where the problem came in, our County issues a
contract and when they issue the contract it doesn't say you have to rip up the bad
paved roads, just pave over the top of it and that's where the problem came in.
Let me read you a quote from the HAPI Directory that Greg Schleper, a pave
contractor for thirty -seven (37) and Mel had a chance to meet him before he left:
"Formed in 1989, the Hawaii Asphalt Pavement Industry (HAPI) represents
all hot mix asphalt producers in the State as well as other related industries. The
purpose of this association is to provide engineering promotion and education to
advance the continuing use of asphalt pavement throughout the State of Hawaii.
HAPI collects and disseminates technical data and guidelines, sponsors educational
and technical seminars, and is available to assist architects, engineers and
contractors responsible for the design and construction of asphalt pavements. HAPI
and its member firms, who are responsible for the publication of this asphalt
pavement guide, are striving to improve and produce quality hot mix asphalt for
their users. And I'm sure that's why... that's three (3) minutes, may I continue?
Chair Furfaro: You can continue Mr. Mickens.
Mr. Mickens: Thank you. And I'm sure that's why all our
contractors in Hawaii are members of HAPI. Thus, since I have no dog in this fight
as far as what system is used, HAPI or MicroPaver, I would only suggest that as
long as Public Works abide by this system when they use contracts or do the in
house work. I only know that our roads have not been paved to code and fall apart
way too soon as you know you members have pointed out.
I have stacks of data to back up these words but will not go into this for
shortness of time. I've passed along all my research to our new auditor and have
given copies to Chair Furfaro and hopefully we can get resolution to these problems.
23
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
I'm not interested in finger pointing but going forward just want to see that
we are getting the most bang for our tax bucks which we have not been getting in
the past.
Without getting into a new system it would seem that physical inspection,
vehicle road usage, and elapsed time of paving all kept in a data bank would tell us
all we need to know about resurfacing. This and an inspector at every site being
paved and repaved to make sure HAPI code is adhered to.
And as to this 09 -10 islandwide resurfacing program, I believe that Jay said
the missing years of a resurfacing list 08 -09, 09 -10 which we just got, and 10 -11 as
well as 11 -12 were budgeted for and yet it appears that we are using three (3)
budgeted years. Over the years we have used about, I think Jay has pointed out
one point eight (1.8) million dollars roughly, except for the years that Jay was
saying and I think he got another two million dollars he added to the program.
Which I think it went into the following years, so we didn't gain anything by that to
repair this year 09 -10 which we just got.
The question is who made that decision to do it this way and why? And how
are these roads chosen? With a mile of road costing about three hundred thousand
dollars ($300,000.00) to repave and as you pointed out Jay with oil going up, it's
going to cost undoubtedly more than that, cost more if done right, and with the
yearly budget of one point eight million, we can only repave about six miles of roads,
meaning that their condition will only be worsened. Our road users deserve a lot
better than this. And you know, you were talking about potholes, JoAnn, if you go
up to upper Waipouli Road that I walk on every day, a road that's supposed to be 16
feet wide, but it's 13 feet wide, it was never properly made in the first place, you'll
see that they're still using, as of two days ago, dumping coal mix in potholes, not
code, that washes out in a few rains. And I ask this question routinely, why are we
wasting our time, manpower, and resources in this wrong type of operation.
Obviously we must pave according to code to get far more life, as you've been
pointing out, as Larry pointed out also. And we have to increase our yearly budget
to be able to do more roads. I'm optimistic that Larry and Ed can turn this long
ongoing program around. You know, you passed out a lot of stuff here, questions,
you know, all really good questions; I haven't had a chance to go over these
questions, because we just got copies of them. But you know, these questions are all
highly relevant questions and it appears to me that budget is going to be the biggest
thing. You're going to have to ... I don't know where the money's going to come from.
But you know, as Jimmy Tokioka sat there and kept on saying, Glenn, if we did this
the way you said — according to HAPI standards, it's going to cost twice or three
times as much. But as Larry pointed out...
Chair Furfaro: Excuse me, Glenn, I need to... Your time did
run out just as you read the end of the script, and I gave you another few minutes.
Mr. Mickens: Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Hold on, let's see if there are any questions.
And a reminder, we are going to be back in two weeks. I'm going to ask that this
gets deferred.
Mr. Mickens: Thank you.
24
COUNCIL MEETING
March 9, 2011
Chair Furfaro: So are there any questions for Mr. Mickens?
Councilwoman Yukimura.
Ms. Yukimura: Glenn, thank you for your testimony.
Aren't you mixing up apples and oranges, though, in comparing the micro - paving
program and HAPI, because HAPI is standards, and the program is a database
that will allow us - to objectively assess the condition of roads — that's really two
different things.
Mr. Mickens: Well, if the roads were done according to
HAPI standards, you wouldn't have to worry, would you?
Ms. Yukimura: Right, but we're still trying to figure out how
to assess roads and to repave the worst ones by objective measurements, so...
Mr. Mickens: Sure, but if you're using HAPI standards,
you don't have to assess roads, because they're going to last longer, and by physical
looking at the road, you know whether the road's going to need repaving. If that
computer happens to say, well it was paved 8 years ago, and it's going to need
repaving, you might go out and look at the road, it maybe not need repaving, maybe
it hasn't been used that much. But by physical inspection, you're going to know if
that road has to be paved or not.
Ms. Yukimura: I'm sure they'll do both, but it's a first cut
way of doing some objective assessment, and I do agree with you that building the
roads correctly in the first place is very key, but that goes to a whole other arena of
our subdivision ordinance and how we inspect the new roads that are built and
approved and/or disapproved.
Mr. Mickens: No, no. I disagree there, because the
subdivision ordinance, when somebody was... In my subdivision, when they paved
that, they had to do it according to code at that time. It's lasted 20 years. It's been
fine. My road up there, Kini Place, is excellent, but it was done according to code.
When the county comes in to do a job, they can do it unilaterally any way they feel
like, and they don't have to abide by code, and that's your problem.
Ms. Yukimura: Well, I think that's changing now with the
new proposal. Thank you very much.
Mr. Mickens: Well, that's what I'm hearing, and I certainly
hope so.
Chair Furfaro: And hopefully we do give Mr. Dill some of
the tools he wants to do these jobs, so that we don't have the fox watching the
henhouse as we're trying to get to the standard that you, over the last 15 years,
have promoted. So we're going to try to get him the tools that he requests.
Mr. Mickens: And again, as you pointed out, it's going to
come down to budget, right, Jay? It's going to come out... If they don't have the
equipment, I don't know whether the contractors have the proper equipment to coal -
plane the thing, which means breaking up the old thing or not. I don't know that
they do. So you know, again they're going to have to appropriate more money to be
able to do these things properly, or we're going to go on the same situation.
25
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
Chair Furfaro: Well maybe Mr. Dill can expand on that in
two weeks when we come back.
Mr. Mickens: Good.
Chair Furfaro: Are there any more questions for
Mr. Mickens? Glenn, thank you very much, and I'm glad to hear you don't have a
dog in this fight.
Mr. Mickens: No, just driving my car over the roads, you
know, that's the only dog I have. I hate to hit potholes...
Chair Furfaro: We do want to get to a good conclusion that's
amicable to all, and I think Mr. Dill has, with his staff..
Mr. Mickens: Well Jay, I certainly appreciate your, in
particular, picking up on this thing and pushing it to get it on the agenda and get
answers that I've never had before, okay.
Chair Furfaro: We're going to try and get to a good place
on that.
Mr. Mickens: Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Okay, thank you. Ken, did you want to
speak? Why don't you come right on up?
KEN TAYLOR: Chair, council, my name is Ken Taylor. As 'I
said at the last meeting, it's not possible to go back and change what has happened
in the past, but I'm really quite thrilled to see the activity that's come forth from
both Larry and Ed in reference to the road activity work, and I do believe that the
request for this computer program to look at scheduling the roadwork and so on will
be a very good tool in the future. So I really just want to thank both of them for
stepping up to the plate and getting what should have happened many years ago at
the county level and maintenance of road activities, as well as any other activities.
But at this point, it's just a breath of fresh air to see this kind of relationship with
what you... questions you folks are asking and the response to them. I don't feel
that in the past few years that I've monitored what's going on here at the council
that has always happened, and so I thank Larry and Ed and you, all of you for your
questions, and their answers, and look forward to seeing this move forward.
Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Thank you Ken. Are there any questions for
Ken? If not, thank you very much. Is there anyone else in the audience that wants
to speak? Mr. Rosa.
JOE ROSA: Good morning members of the council. For
the record, Joe Rosa. I'm speaking with what I know for the 15 years I've worked
with DOT in doing pavement along the State highways, Kaumuali`i and Kuhi`o. I've
heard a lot of things about pavement, but you know the thing is when it comes to
paving a highway; it's not quantity, it's quality that you want. Here on Kaua`i ... I'll
have to just bring this up as a sample. On Kauai here, that's why I always used to
fight for my rights when I do a job. I take pride in my work. DOT sent us to
seminars on inspection with the paving companies in Honolulu. The inspectors all
26
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
get to go to the seminars to acquire knowledge as to how pavement is supposed to be
done. They tell you if you want at least 10 years of life on a highway, like here on
Kauai, Kuhi`6 or Kaumuali`i Highway, two inches would give you at least 10 years.
But here on Kauai we're always getting inch and a half or inch and a quarter. So I
questioned the directors in Honolulu —how come here on Kauai we always get inch
and a half? You allot inch and a half pavement and funding for inch and a half or
inch and a quarter. Oh, we need quantity, we want to give the people of Kauai
more mileage as far as the highways. But it didn't serve the purpose. In less than 7
years they start deteriorating with all these big trucks we have, because we have
just one major highway in and out. So getting back to this here, what the county
need to be done here is quality. On Moloka`i ... I know inspectors that went to
Molokai, say that the roads were so bad in the 70s that they were paving 4 -inch
thickness of asphalt on two inch lips so they could get the quality of the roads back
in condition. So a lot of your county roads, the base course is the failure part of it.
Like when Glenn (inaudible) when he was complaining about it, I went and took a
tip of it, that Wailua Homestead area. And a lot of it was failure due to the sense
that there wasn't no base course. When you pave asphalt on just plain dirt with no
base, you get nothing. You can pave two inches and you're going to get two inches
of nothing. You have to get an established base course, with a good tack coat, and
rolled properly. And a lot of the things that I've seen up there was that they had
regular runs on the edge of the pavement. So that deteriorates your shoulder. And
a lot of places they got trees —the drainage that don't run off the water, that
deteriorates pavement again. That's the whole trouble we have with the State
highways nowadays out at the northshore —all those big albezia trees. But you
cannot cut them, the outdoor circle say you're going to destroy the beauty but the
thing is it's destroying our highways. Like they say you have to fix the shoulders
when the State do their job, we pave them the shoulders was also in the contract to
bring back the dirt on the edge of the shoulders for the height of the thickness that
was paved. I know my bell's been ringing.
Chair Furfaro: Okay.
Mr. Rosa: But one of the things that need to be updated
here as far as pavement, I can talk pavement because like I said Jay, I went to the
seminars, I've worked with the State and that's why people are saying, you need
your back to get the State Highways back in condition. I've seen County paving
been done wrongly, you never pave uphill with a pave because you're going to get a
washboard effect because the paver has to go this way... so those are the things that
we learned at our seminars. I think the County in term should get those paving or
inspectors that do paving to go to those seminars and I think they'll benefit from it.
They can come back and talk with their engineers here because the engineers have
never seen from here when I worked my thirty -six (36) years with the State, go to
any of those seminars. So we are the people that go and get the information and get
back here and do the work and present it to our superiors. They talk about HEB
that's (inaudible) base is usually done when you go stabilize your shoulders because
you don't want to use... they open trenches and danger accidents. So to do it fast
instead of putting the regular (inaudible) base course or a rut base course, you use
HEB and bring it up to the almost finish level, off the paving that's going to extend
the highway, the paving. Those are the kinds of things I can tell you again and
again about paving. Nothing against you Mel but what you mentioned about the
Kokee, the Waimea Canyon drive, that's a State Highway from Kaumuali`i Highway
to Waimea Canyon drive up there. I know that road is always bad because I had to
pave it twice in my thirty -six (36) years. They have what you call alligator cracks
and those alligator cracks I told them to my experience when I did even the Mana
27
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
stretch, it's that they need heat expansion joints, because what happens is where
the tack coatis not really spread out really good, those heat will expand the asphalt,
it will come up to a peak. As it cools off it will break off on the ridge there, like
Mana stretch you see all the sand gets blown underneath there and you cannot go
back. When we had a cold (inaudible) there to resurface it, that's what I said, I
came back and I told my boss we resurface the road there we are going to get the
same problem and sure enough if you go back there, you are going to see the same
thing.
I'm not an engineer but to my experience of seeing the paving the way it
deteriorates, I say that you have to cut expansion joints like they do on the bridges.
Chair Furfaro: Mr. Rosa.
Mr. Rosa: Yes.
Chair Furfaro: That is your six (6) minutes.
Mr. Rosa: Yeah.
Chair Furfaro: None of us here can really respond on issues
dealing with State roads.
Mr. Rosa: Yeah.
Chair Furfaro: But your six (6) minutes is up.
Mr. Rosa: But this is just something that... I was alone
on County to do projects here because the County inspectors didn't pass to do
federal inspection on federal roads I mean the county roads because they didn't do
what we do with federal projects.
Chair Furfaro: Well we appreciate your testimony but your
entire six (6) minutes is now up.
Mr. Rosa: I understand that Jay.
Chair Furfaro: Are there any questions for Mr. Rosa? No,
and thank you for your many years of service but we're going to have this as a
deferred item.
Mr. Rosa: I know we had a meeting before with Ed
Renaud and Donald Fujimoto to start to see what can be implemented into the
County paving system, so that's why I'm trying to see that, if you're going to do it
Jay, do it right and give us quality.
Chair Furfaro: I think that is the intent, we just want to
know the process. Mr. Rosa, we have no questions for you, we will be back in two
(2) weeks.
Mr. Rosa: Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Thank you. Is there anyone else in the
audience who wishes to speak? Okay, Mr. Dill may I ask you to come up again? As
28
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
we have no motion and it is my intent to defer this for two (2) weeks I just want to
ask are you feeling confident that you can be in a position when we give you this
deferral to answer the balance of the second set of questions and also are you
prepared if I put an agenda item after this follow up to move on approval of your
plan to have the Council's authority to start on this work?
Mr. Dill: It's a yes to both but we do as you mentioned
earlier have to get the Administration to sign off on the list. Assuming we can do
that then yes to both.
Chair Furfaro: Well you can share with the Administration,
this deferral was a courtesy and we've been very patient and not getting caught up
on the roads so we would like to... we appreciate their request for a deferral but at
the same time we want to move forward on getting some work done with some
urgency according to your plan. Councilwoman did you have a question? Okay
Mr. Dill, we'll see you in two (2) weeks then.
Mr. Dill: Alright, thank you.
Chair Furfaro: I'm going to call the meeting back to order.
There being no one else to speak on this matter, the meeting was called back to
order, and proceeded as follows:
Chair Furfaro: I want to make sure that everybody
understands we do not have a motion to defer and when we defer there is no further
discussion. Does anyone have anything to share right now?
Ms. Yukimura: I do.
Chair Furfaro: Councilwoman Yukimura.
Ms. Yukimura: Short comment. I just want to really thank
our County Engineer Larry Dill and our Roads Division Head Ed Renaud. And I
want to thank the Mayor for putting them in this positions because I think it's a
very significant turn of events we're seeing here in terms of some commitment to do
well designed, well thought out road resurfacing and to develop a program that's
going to eventually get us to timely resurfacing of our county roads as both
Councilmembers Rapozo and Nakamura said and I agree with them, roads are like
a core function for the County and we have to find a way to serve our constituents
on this... in this arena well. We've really been negligent in my opinion and as
Mr. Rosa pointed out it's crazy to pave over dirt and expect it to last for any level,
it's such a waste of money and effort. So to take care of those problems and get a
good system in place is so important and I think we are beginning and I'm very
grateful for that.
Chair Furfaro: Any further comments? Mr. Rapozo.
Mr. Rapozo: Thanks again. I did want to say that... you
know I'll never forget, I know Mr. Rosa talked about the two (2) inches, I will never
forget the explanation that was given to us years ago and obviously it wasn't from
anyone here but where the two (2) inch even though it's a standard was an average.
So if you had the roadway and obviously there's a crown, so you have the top and
then the crown, that the average is two (2) inches so you can have an inch on the
29
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
top, the traveled areas and the thicker pavements on the side which are less
traveled and I think that was a lot of the problem. When the inspectors went out
and did their core samplings as long as they came up with an average of two (2)
inches, it met the standard. I'm hoping that as we move forward and I think you hit
it right on the head when you said a lot of the problems is doing the prep work
prior, fixing the base course before we just pave good paving over bad road. That if
in fact we can maintain two (2) inch consistency then I think the roads will last a lot
longer and the end result is a huge savings to the county. We'll leave that stuff up
to you guys, you guys are the experts but it just came to me when Mr. Rosa was
talking that I didn't think that was a reasonable explanation that an average of two
(2) inches because the top area could be very thin and the sides would be thick... it
didn't make any sense. Anyway looking forward to getting this thing back on track.
Thank you very much.
Chair Furfaro: Thank you Mr. Rapozo. Mr. Bynum.
Mr. Bynum: I appreciate the presentation today and a lot
of this has to do with leadership and I'm very optimistic about the leadership at
Public Works and I'm kind of reluctant to say this but over the last couple of years
Public Works has been divided in my opinion. It's part of the public record that two
(2) years ago Donald Fujimoto was initially not being considered for County
Engineer and then end up being the County Engineer. The Administration had this
idea that they were going to divide responsibilities from some of the senior staff.
That created in my opinion a lack of clear leadership and that the leadership roles
that any of those individuals play were undermined by trying to spread it out rather
than having one (1) person in charge. I had deep concerns about that the last
couple of ,years, particularly when this Council focused on CIP as a need and the
Administration acknowledged that there wasn't a systematic way of seeing that our
CIP resources were allocated properly, it got out through the bureaucratic process
into and on the street work. I think we lost some time during this last two (2) years
because of those leadership issues. I trust now that we have a County Engineer and
a Deputy Engineer that are in charge of the Department and that... that leadership
issue has been corrected with the changes that have happened this year because the
consequences are difficult. I said earlier I was embarrassed because I was trying to
lead this focus on CIP, I still think we have big problems about getting County
funds through the bureaucratic process and out unto work on the street that puts
people to work. We're focusing on a lot of projects and there's a saying about what
happens when you assume. But I assumed that the road resurfacing was
happening, that it was a routine, that we went out every year and I'm kind of
concerned that that wasn't the case. I didn't fully realize that until this round of
discussions. Soon in the Public Works Committee will be another look at all of the
CIP projects comparing the commitments that were made to us last year about time
frames for specific projects and seeing... and getting a status update and status
report on CIP projects both in Public Works and other departments. This year we
created a new position and hired a person to focus on CIP so it's an appropriate time
for the Council to have an update from the Administration. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: I just want to say to the group here, I made
my message very clear I'm looking forward to getting a schedule. There will be a
second posting in two (2) weeks and we'll come back to this particular item with the
second set of questions and then hopefully we'll look at the list for approving capital
funds in the same session in two (2) weeks. On that note may I have a motion to
defer this item for two (2) weeks?
30
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
Mr. Bynum moved to defer C 2011 -76, seconded by Ms. Yukimura, and unanimously
carried.
Chair Furfaro: Now that I see five (5) members of the
Engineering Department here and I want to get them back to their desk, I'm going
to ask the Clerk if he can read second reading bills, in particular Bill 2397 relating
to appropriations in the general fund for solid waste.
Mr. Nakamura: Council Chair we're on page five (5) of the
Council's agenda on a bill for second reading. This would be Bill No. 2397.
BILLS FOR SECOND READING:
Bill No. 2397 - A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE
NO. B- 2010 -705, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE OPERATING BUDGET OF
THE COUNTY OF KAUA'I, STATE OF HAWAII, FOR THE FISCAL YEAR JULY
1, 2010 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2011, BY REVISING THE SURPLUS AND
APPROPRIATIONS ESTIMATED IN THE GENERAL FUND ($417,238 - Solid
Waste Fund). Mr. Bynum moved to approve Bill No. 2397 on second and final
reading, and that it be transmitted to the Mayor for his approval, seconded by Ms.
Yukimura.
Chair Furfaro: Thank you. We have a motion to approve
and a seconded, I'm going to ask that we suspend the rules.
Mr. Rapozo:
Chair Furfaro:
Mr. Rapozo:
Chair Furfaro:
Mr. Rapozo:
have questions for Solid Waste.
Chair Furfaro:
minute caption break.
Mr. Chair?
Yes.
It's 11:00.
Oh it is.
I think we need a caption break and I do
Okay, well why don't we take a ten (10)
There being no objections, the Council recessed at 11:05 a.m.
The Council reconvened at 11:21 a.m., and proceeded as follows:
Chair Furfaro: We took a recess before we got to the Bill for
Second Reading which is Bill No. 2397. I think we should read the item Mr. Clerk.
Mr. Nakamura: Council Chair, we're on page five (5) of the
Council's agenda on a Bill for Second reading Bill No. 2397.
Bill No. 2397 - A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE
NO. B- 2010 -705, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE OPERATING BUDGET OF
THE COUNTY OF KAUA'I, STATE OF HAWAII, FOR THE FISCAL YEAR
JULY 1, 2010 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2011, BY REVISING THE SURPLUS AND
31
COUNCIL MEETING
March 9, 2011
APPROPRIATIONS ESTIMATED IN THE GENERAL FUND ($417,238 — Solid
Waste Fund)
Chair Furfaro: I would like to have some discussion with the
Solid Waste Department, I'm not sure who's coming up but the rules are suspended.
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Mr. Dill: Good morning again, Larry Dill County
Engineer. I hope you have before you my response letter... okay good, that's a good
start.
Chair Furfaro: Yes we do.
Mr. Dill: Do you want me to just review the answers
to those questions that came through?
Chair Furfaro: I would appreciate that, yes.
Mr. Dill: Okay. First question was requesting the
reasons for incurred overtime, i.e., transfer station, maintenance, workers on sick
leave, etc., by percentage. I'll say first off I do not have a response for you by
percentage, I went back to our fiscal guys and requested what will it take. To get
that information involved actually manually pulling timesheets for that period of
time and getting data compiled from that basis which he simply didn't have time to
do in his timeframe, so I apologize for that. However, general response is before you
about the reasons for incurred overtime which is basically, on the second page we
list the primary reasons for scheduled employees are not available are sick leave,
vacation or leave of absence without pay, long term IA, convalescence, or personnel
issues. Whenever we have someone that's out due to those reasons we incur
overtime. What happens because we have a four (4), ten (10) schedule, we basically
have two (2) shifts for the transfer stations or two (2) schedules I should say, one is
I believe Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday... the other is Saturday, Sunday,
Monday, Tuesday... so Tuesday is the quote unquote overlap day where we have an
ability to have greater than the minimum staffing requirements which is the days
we schedule because we touched on a little last time the additional work duties for
those guys. But when we do have minimum staffing at the location, somebody calls
in sick, we incur overtime.
The next few responses are simply numbers. There was a request made to us
to provide average overtime per person and the average annual overtime per person
was twelve thousand two hundred thirty -seven dollars ($12,237.00). Average sick
leave taken per person, 138.4 hours. Number four (4) we were requested to provide
a breakdown of overtime by employee number and that's on the attached sheet to
the letter that you have in front of you. Number five (5) was a request for the
number of workers called back due to furloughs and we broke that down between
events that happen at the landfill and refuse transfer stations. So these were the
number instances that we had to call an employee back who would have otherwise
been on furlough that day to come into work, to fill in for the reasons I stated before
about sick leave, vacation, etc... Item number six (6), possibility of hauling green
waste on weekdays, days when there is an overlap of workers instead of using
overtime hours on weekends. Hauling green waste definitely on the weekday when
we do have that overlap and more workers available that we can... gives us more
flexibility definitely is a preferred option. We have been less than successful in
32
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
getting it done in the past for the reasons we state here. Part of it is because in
order to haul the green waste, to load it we need to get the excavator from the Roads
Division. All I can say to that is I can (inaudible) myself and the new Roads Chief is
that we're going to do a better job of scheduling that excavator to do what we can to
get that work schedule during the week when we have that staff available to make
that more efficient and less impactful of overtime cost.
Also it occurs our records show that on days when hauling was scheduled on
those days, we have experienced significantly higher number of callouts due to sick
leave on those days and so we haven't had the staff available to get it done. Also on
occasion we have inclement weather that prohibits that happening on those days, so
those were occasions as well to stop that from happening.
Real quickly that's our review of the answers to the questions in the request
Chair Furfaro: Mr. Dill thank you for responding to those
questions. I'm going to Mr. Rapozo first and then Councilwoman Yukimura.
Mr. Rapozo the floor is yours.
Mr. Rapozo: Larry thanks for the response, I know it was
short notice and I appreciate the response. I guess my question regarding the
average overtime and the sick leave and the breakdown of overtime, this was for
fiscal year 2010?
Mr. Dill: Correct.
Mr. Rapozo: So it does not include the furlough... the
periods of the furlough`'
Mr. Dill:
Correct.
Mr. Rapozo: I guess that was one of my concerns were the
furlough period and not so much... because this... the money that is being requested
really for that period right?
Mr. Dill: It's for this fiscal year, that's right.
Mr. Rapozo: But the numbers you provided is for last
fiscal year.
Mr. Dill: Correct.
Mr. Rapozo: How difficult would it be to get us the
number for this fiscal year?
Mr. Dill: I can provide the same data year to date...
that wouldn't be too much of a problem.
Mr. Rapozo: Okay.
Mr. Dill: I can do that.
33
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
Mr. Rapozo: The other concern... you did breakdown the
furloughs and you were showing that seventy -two (72), I'm assuming that's
employee work days right?
Mr. Dill:
Correct.
Mr. Rapozo: Seventy -two (72) work days in the landfill
and forty -nine (49), so a hundred and twenty -one (21) days were called back due to
the furlough?
Mr. Dill: Well it's hard to say due to the furlough, I
would say those were workers that were on furloughs that needed to be called back.
As a result we paid them overtime on those days because they should have been on
furlough.
Mr. Rapozo: Right and that's what it says.
Mr. Dill: Right.
Mr. Rapozo: Workers called back due to furloughs you
had seventy -two (72) down at the landfill and forty -nine (49), so you had a hundred
twenty -one (121) days were, we paid overtime for to people that were supposed to be
on furloughs.
Mr. Dill: Correct.
Mr. Rapozo: Okay. And then the sick leave, the average
sick leave this is for fiscal year 2010 though so we're not counting this fiscal year.
Mr. Dill: Correct.
Mr. Rapozo: But you're showing one, thirty -eight (138)
our employees are granted one hundred and sixty -eight (168) a year hours of sick
leave so currently we're in Solid Waste we're utilizing about eighty -two percent
(82 %) of our sick leave days.
Mr. Dill: That's correct.
Mr. Rapozo: Does that trouble you at all, is it concerning?
Mr. Dill: Does it trouble me at all? I wish our
employees were healthier and would come to work more often but that's the union
contract and that's what they're entitled to do.
Mr. Rapozo:
percent (82 %) is quite a lot.
Mr. Dill:
Mr. Rapozo:
Mr. Dill:
Mr. Rapozo:
I understand that, I know but eighty -two
I would agree with you.
Do we look for trends? Sick leave abuse...
Oh yes.
We do look at that?
34
COUNCIL MEETING
Mr. Dill: Yes.
March 9, 2011
Mr. Rapozo: Because that's quite high. The final question
for right now is the breakdown of the overtime pay and I'm sure you saw it, it's
quite substantial, we have couple of employees that are getting paid almost forty
thousand dollars a year in overtime. We got a few employees making almost thirty
thousand... you know we break it down and it's pretty substantial the amount of
overtime that individuals are making and I guess the question is, is it because we're
shorthanded, is it because we don't have enough workers, is it because of the sick
leave?
Mr. Dill: That's a good question. I can tell you that a
lot of the overtime... obviously as you mentioned that jumped out at me as well and
in researching those a little further a lot of those folks nearly all of those with the
higher numbers are in the collection site and the way the rules are is they are
specified as to the number of units they're to pick up in one (1) day. The way that
the routes are currently, the routes go beyond that number so regardless of hours
work once they pick up more than that number of units even though we have
balanced all the routes to make it even across the board as best we can, they start
incurring overtime based on each unit they pick up beyond that amount. Right now
according to the agreements that are in place that's just what we incur on a regular
basis because of the way the routes are and the way that the agreements are.
Mr. Rapozo: So you're saying that somebody... one of our
employees or couple of our employees is making almost forty thousand dollars
without being called back and that's just their standard pay? That's just the way
the union contract is that the way it falls we're paying them forty grand extra or
thirty -eight thousand extra just for coming to work?
just...
Ms. Yukimura: Yes.
Mr. Dill: That's correct. You can say that, yeah.
Mr. Rapozo: And this doesn't include the benefits? This is
Mr. Dill: This is just wages, yes.
Mr. Rapozo: Right, so now you have to add another half of
that.
Mr. Dill: Right.
Mr. Rapozo: Because we got to pay the benefits.
Mr. Dill: The fringe, yeah.
Mr. Rapozo: Okay. I guess it is what it is, it's just
staggering the amount of overtime that... I would guess that the thirty -eight
thousand... it might be pretty close to the salary.
Mr. Dill: That's probably a good guess I don't know
the details in front of me.
35
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
Mr. Rapozo: Okay well I was more interested in seeing
the figures from this fiscal year because of the furlough but... I guess we can get
that later.
Mr. Dill: Okay. I'd be happy to provide that, sure.
Chair Furfaro: Councilwoman Yukimura then Mr. Bynum.
Ms. Yukimura: Thank you Mr. Chair. The average sick
leave taken per person that's a yearly...
Mr. Dill:
taken in fiscal year 2010.
Ms. Yukimura:
Mr. Dill:
Ms. Yukimura:
Mr. Dill:
That's correct. That's the average that was
Which is 2009 -2010 basically.
Correct.
And so it wasn't a furlough year.
Correct.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay but the further numbers you have in
number five (5) are from the furlough year obviously?
Mr. Dill: Correct. And actually this is just in the
period July through December was the furlough period I believe.
Ms. Yukimura:
Mr. Dill:
Ms. Yukimura:
Mr. Dill:
Right of 2010?
Correct.
Which is the 2011 fiscal year?
Right.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay. So in terms of the landfill then if
seventy -two (72) people were called... employees were called back and we paid them
overtime instead of regular wages.
Mr. Dill: Right.
Ms. Yukimura: Then we couldn't have saved money from
furloughs?
Mr. Dill: Oh um... Okay this...
Ms. Yukimura: For those hours.
Mr. Dill: Well.
Ms. Yukimura: Performed.
36
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
Mr. Dill: Actually it came up in the last meeting.
Ms. Yukimura: Right.
Mr. Dill: As you recall and I mentioned the valid
question but much deeper than I was prepared to address and I do know... but I
would encourage you to make the request at the Finance Director if you wanted to
get into this with more detail but I did... I was told that Public Works in the
furlough period when comparing it to the previous fiscal year, we did save eighteen
percent (18 %) overall in wages and benefits as a Department. And then if you look
at Solid Waste, each of the divisions in Solid Waste did save money and probably
when you average those out, it's similar to that eighteen percent (18 %) overall
savings in the Public Works Department. So there was savings due to furloughs in
Public Works, I don't know about the rest of the County.
Ms. Yukimura: Well I'm not asking about Public Works, I'm
asking about Solid Waste and in the area of landfills and transfer stations. I mean
maybe there was some savings from the office workers.
Mr. Dill: No, in Solid Waste as a Division and they
broke it down; the numbers that I saw were broken down between solid waste
disposal which is the landfill collections which is transfer stations and collections
and administrative... each of those sections within the Solid Waste Division did
show savings due to furloughs.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay so how did those savings occur if...
Mr. Dill: The savings occurred because the folks that
were not reporting to work on those furlough days, the overall savings for that was
greater than the overtime that was incurred due to the call backs.
Ms. Yukimura: Well assuming that... okay so there wasn't a
call back every time there was a furlough day then because you had those so- called
floating workers or what was the word... I know the Council Chair felt?
Chair Furfaro:
redundancy.
Mr. Dill:
Chair Furfaro:
appropriate...
Ms. Yukimura:
Mr. Rapozo:
Chair Furfaro:
Ms. Yukimura:
Chair Furfaro:
He used a different word today but they used
Right.
But what we're now using today seems more
And what was that word?
Overlap.
Overlap.
Okay.
Scheduling of an overlap.
37
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
Ms. Yukimura: Okay so that's what would have given a
savings... oh I don't...
Mr. Dill: All I can tell you for sure is when you look at
those same periods in fiscal year 2010 when we had the furlough versus the
previous year when there was no furlough, we realized a savings overall.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay. Alright, with respect to green waste
hauling you feel that the scheduling of the excavator is... that there is room to have
better scheduling and make it work to do on overtime?
Mr. Dill: Yes.
Ms. Yukimura: I mean not overtime on weekends.
Mr. Dill: To have it done on weekday, yes, when we
have the quote unquote overlap schedule. So the Roads Division has indicated that
we can work with them to schedule an excavator to be available on those days on a
more regular basis.
Ms. Yukimura: That's excellent. So that would enable you
to do green waste hauling on weekdays?
Mr. Dill: Correct.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay. And what is this thing about high
callouts due to sick leave?
Mr. Dill: That's simply what our records show. That
we experience a lot of callouts due to sick leave on those days.
Ms. Yukimura: On weekends?
Mr. Dill: No, on the scheduled overlap days actually
which are. the Tuesdays.
Ms. Yukimura:
sick?
Mr. Dill:
work that day call in sick, yes.
Ms. Yukimura:
green waste?
Mr. Dill:
hauling on an overlap day, yes.
That means your overlap employees call in
Well the employees who are scheduled to
On the days that you're scheduled to do
Correct. When we schedule the green waste
Ms. Yukimura: It's good that you're looking actually it's
great that the question about... have been asked about this because this is
indicating some kind of problem. Is it not?
Mr. Dill: It indicates an issue that we're looking into,
yes.
38
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
Ms. Yukimura: Okay. Which is about, something about sick
leave management looks like. Alright. This high overtime is due to the uku pau
system right?
Mr. Dill: It's due to that and also to the counts that
are in the agreement. In other words the manual collections route has a maximum
count of six hundred units to be picked up per day and when they go over that then
they start incurring cost.
Ms. Yukimura: Well that's the uku pau system that they're
paid to do a certain number of pickups rather than work a certain number of hours
per day and you know I think there's some advantages to that system but we also
have to look at the cost of that system. And that's what is coming forth in these
overtime figures.
Mr. Dill: Well uku pau also is when they finish the
route that means that they're done with their work for that day.
Ms. Yukimura: Right.
Mr. Dill: But...
Ms. Yukimura: So you either have to create a whole new
crew to pick up or you have to pay overtime to the old crew.
Mr. Dill: Correct.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay. That has to show to be a win/win for
both the Administration and the union.
Mr. Dill: Certainly.
Ms. Yukimura: Or else it doesn't work.
Mr. Dill: Certainly, yes. And that's also why we're
trying to move to automated pickup because automated pickup we can pick up a
thousand units a day.
Ms. Yukimura: I see.
Mr. Dill: And so we would also help reduce our
overtime cost.
Ms. Yukimura:
and only with one (1) worker?
Mr. Dill:
Ms. Yukimura:
Well you pick up a thousand units per day
Right.
Instead of three (3).
Mr. Dill: Right.
39
COUNCIL MEETING
March 9, 2011
Ms. Yukimura: Okay. As long as you're also keeping the
other workers working.
Mr. Dill: That's an issue that we have to address, yes.
Ms. Yukimura: Because we don't want the situation on
Oahu where there were people not working but being paid.
Mr. Dill: Correct, right.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay. Alright and you know if they can be
scheduled to replace workers who are gone because of sick... absent that day
because of sick leave or vacation then it works out okay.
Mr. Dill: Yes but we don't... we're not prepared when
somebody calls in sick so we haven't been able to schedule somebody,
Ms. Yukimura: Yeah but although the green waste, the new
green waste service can take up people.
Mr. Dill: Yes so we're adding things like... well hoping
to add, planning to add green waste curb side recycling, things like that that would
hopefully be able to pick up the workers that were doing manual pick up before.
Those are our long term plan to address those issues.
Ms. Yukimura: Well I think you have to look at the cost of
curb side recycling.
Mr. Dill: Oh absolutely as part of that, yes.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay. Alright. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Mr. Bynum.
Mr. Bynum: Sticking with the collection issue because on
the previous Council we discussed that at length and you know recognize that
currently we're paying overtime because the crews do beyond what their union
contract says but it was a very calculated decision to not add new crews with old
technology when we're moving into new technology. Part of the analysis that
eventually there would be a budget savings for moving to automated because of
those efficiencies so it didn't make sense in essence is to create a new truck, a new
crew to do that overtime when we were changing technologies. So that is impacting
these large overtime figures and we knew that and we have a plan to address it,
that's my understanding.
Mr. Dill: Yes.
Mr. Bynum: I'm sure in future meetings we will be
talking about the timetable of the rollout of the Solid Waste plan because it's a very
ambitious timetable and I'll be amazed if we can keep on it. But this is an example
where keeping on it pays benefits, the sooner we move to automated collection, the
sooner we'll realize those savings. And other savings because the labor will change
for those workers I would assume, again I got in trouble assuming today... that if
we're not doing manual pick up with smaller crews, we're going to have sick time,
40
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
less injury, less on the job injury. It will be hopefully a better job for those men and
women that do it. I just wanted to say we have discussed that and we understand it
and know that it impacts overtime. You kind of answered the other questions from
the other members that you do look at sick leave patterns to see if there's abuse I
believe that's allowed in union contracts and because I was a little surprised at this
number. That's seventeen (17) days a year, you know we have generous sick leave
benefits but it would be interesting to do an analysis of the County to see that
changes by division. The last thing I wanted to say we received a memo,
Councilmembers, from Ernie Pasion our County Auditor and I'm just going to read
that memo, it's real short. By this memo I'm amending my work plan for 2010 -2011
fiscal year to change the pre -audit assessment of the furlough program into an
audit. The pre -audit assessment is changed to an audit because the results of our
assessment indicate a full audit into the implementation of this wage reduction
program is feasible and in the public interest.
I've expressed my concern regularly that I don't think furloughs were a good
idea but then when we went to furloughs you know Department Heads were not
allowed to say hey wait we may not want to furlough these employees because we're
going to have increased overtime, there was no analysis that I'm aware of that being
done. There was no kind of thoughtful implementation of furloughs.
AL CASTILLO, COUNTY ATTORNEY: Excuse me Council Chair.
Mr. Bynum: And when we attempted to discuss that last
year we weren't allowed to do that.
Mr. Castillo: Council Chair, excuse me.
Chair Furfaro: Go ahead.
Mr. Castillo: I think this is beyond the scope of the agenda
item.
Mr. Bynum: I think this is right on the scope of the
agenda item and you know one of the questions were furloughs and the impact on
budget and I'm talking about the impact on the budget on furloughs. And I want to
take this opportunity to express that this rigid kind of stick to the agenda kind of
thing is squelching at having an open dialog about issues that are important to our
county. OIP never asked us to have this kind of rigid implementation of like oh if
you talk about furloughs... and I don't even understand this one at all but I'm going
to suggest that we have a separate agenda item to discuss that and invite OIP to
discuss it with us because repeatedly at Council Meetings lately we were like oh
wait, wait we can't talk about that and I don't think that was the intention of the
Sunshine Law to reduce our discussion about my items of public interest. If
something is peripherally... you know I think we have some latitude. I'm frustrated
at being... of being... people interjecting when I have the floor whether it's County
Attorney or the Council Chair or anyone.
Chair Furfaro: Well I'm going to inject right now I just want
to let you know, I have authorized a request to the County Attorney's Office last
week to have just that discussion on an Executive Session.
Mr. Bynum: I don't think we need to have that discussion
in Executive Session, we should have it on the floor.
41
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
Chair Furfaro: Well then I withdraw my request to have
that discussion and you can take it directly to the County Attorney. That's your
privilege. I was just trying to extend to you from my previous dialog with County
Attorney about giving us parameters on what we can discuss I thought we should
have a session.
Mr. Bynum: Well maybe I should ask the County
Attorney how my question...
Ms. Yukimura: Point of inquiry.
Mr. Bynum: Or comments about furloughs are not on this
agenda.
Ms. Yukimura: Point of inquiry Mr. Chair?
Chair Furfaro: Yes go ahead.
Ms. Yukimura: With the issue of a future discussion on the
side regarding Councilmember Bynum's reading of the Auditor's letter, I think
furloughs are on the agenda as related to Public Works, Solid Waste Division and if
that... you can make that connection and make sense and I presume it's in relation
to a question?
Chair Furfaro: Well I don't know why we're assuming that I
stopped him, I didn't stop him...
Ms. Yukimura: I know you didn't.
Chair Furfaro: I'm just answering his question about what
he feels and this is not the time and place but I will put it on a future agenda.
Ms. Yukimura: I think that's good.
Chair Furfaro: Now Mr. Bynum, you still have the floor.
Mr. Bynum: Thank you very much. Excuse me if my
frustration is showing. The only reason why I read this memo is to point out that
we need to do an analysis of furloughs. I have agreed with the Administration that
I would personally focus most of that attention on this audit. We have ended
furloughs, thank goodness and you know I applaud that we're going to have the
analysis that we weren't allowed to have and that's why I said last week, I don't
hold the Departments responsible because the Department Heads were not given
the latitude as far as I'm aware to adjust their work... you know... to do an analysis
of their operation and how furloughs would impact overtime cost or how they would
impact delivery of services. How they would impact getting CIP projects out on the
street because the people who have to do that work weren't at their job, that weren't
at their desk. I'm glad that the Auditor is doing this audit and I think we need to
learn a lot from that to avoid... because we... well yeah, so anyway. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Anyone else? Councilwoman Nakamura.
42
COUNCIL MEETING
March 9, 2011
Ms. Nakamura: I think a lot of the issues I had were covered
earlier so I won't repeat them but I did want to ask one (1) question Larry about
this shared use of the excavator and do you think at some point this Solid Waste
Division needs its own?
Mr. Dill: I believe so, yes. And that's consistent with
our theme of continuing to separate Solid Waste to be a Division that stands on its
own two (2) feet. As we all know Solid Waste originally grew out of the Roads
Division and we've been slowly weaning ourselves off the Roads Division as we go.
Getting our own heavy equipment to support our own uses is one of those things we
need to do.
Ms. Nakamura: Okay. I don't know what the capital outlay
is but if it helps to... you know help with the scheduling or reduce overtime then
that's maybe something to be looked at.
Mr. Dill: Alright, thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Yes, I think that was an excellent question
providing our employees the right equipment to the right job. Now Mr. Rapozo has
the floor. Mr. Rapozo.
Mr. Rapozo: Thank you and it's more of a heads up as far
as when we get into the budget discussion that one of the things I think the whole
green waste program, we've had discussions in the past about you know is it
cheaper for the County to do our own green waste, I mean that's something I guess
I'll be asking in the budget.
Mr. Dill: Okay.
Mr. Rapozo: When you do your analysis of your budget
and looking at what it cost now to process green waste versus what it would be to
process the green waste because I know we pay a lot of money.
Mr. Dill: Yes.
Mr. Rapozo: To process green waste and we're hauling the
green waste away to the contractor and paying the contractor. I haven't seen at the
transfer stations, I haven't seen any mulch. I don't think we get any mulch for our
residents and we pay a lot of money but is there an opportunity for this county to
process our own green waste, provide free mulch to the public, have a nice little
mulch pile where we can come up and grab mulch. We don't get any of that right
now, we pay a lot of money and if in fact I don't know what those... the kinds of
equipment costs if we get a shredder... or... but anyway that's the questions I'll be
asking...
Mr. Dill: Okay. And we're actually looking at that
issues ourselves right now in house and trying to do an analysis of what is the most
efficient way and can we do it more efficiently.
Mr. Rapozo: Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Mr. Dill, I want to tell you... well I think you
know me well enough I do a lot of my own financial evaluations here and when we...
43
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
what we get for information is we actually get a... what is kind of the financial
report each month from the Finance Department. A couple of things and if you
could write them down I would really appreciate it because I think some of it will
make for good dialog at budget time. Currently and this is my little summary here
I'll just give you some round numbers, we have exceeded forecasted revenues for six
(6) months by two hundred and fifty -one thousand dollars in Solid Waste. We have
budgeted a million five for six (6) months and we are actually at a million seven,
seven, four. Two hundred and fifty thousand of additional unprojected revenues
means there had to be some level of work associated with completing those task. So
for six (6) months it be nice to know how did we incur this extra revenue and I
would also like to point out that from the expense cycle we have spent sixty -eight
percent of your budget already for six (6) months. I hope somebody in your shop is
watching that closely, because that trend, it is my expectation that you could come
back and be asking us for more money by the end of the year. One of the other
things I wanted to point out and Mr. Bynum touched on it a bit, I concur that when
we did the budget we knew that there was going to be a startups, a process on the
mechanical and a new pickup techniques as equipment came onboard. I was also of
the impression that there was going to be dialog with Public Works and with the
employees union about a ten (10) hour work shift, at least that's how I remembered
because we approved in this budget about twenty percent of your payroll was going
to be on overtime to get you folks to the point that automation was going to occur
and we were actually going to begin using the standard straight time payroll
because we were going to look at ten (10) shifts and adding collection teams as we
add equipment. For that reason alone we ended up indentifying almost twenty
cents on every straight time hour in the way of premium pay. I want to make sure
you are clear that when I say premium pay, if we had the work which the revenues
indicated we had the work, you had to schedule people at straight time. If you
didn't have the manpower and I have to tell you a hundred and thirty -eight hours
average sick leave, I mean that would put up a red flag for me, that's three (3)
weeks a year for each employee. But the idea was the fact of the matter is, we had
this plan that was going to be negotiated with the union to either add collection
teams as we you know added new equipment to do this with the idea of the
expanded technologies and automated pick up would not find us in a position that
any employees would find themselves being reduced from the schedule but rather
retrained and re- automated to hit these other collections areas. It certainly looks to
me that you know we haven't gotten there which was projected to us so I hope
there's some ongoing dialog with that idea as it was portrayed to us. Because that's
how we approved the twenty percent in the budget but at the same time I don't
want to discount the fact that landfill disposal charges are up a hundred thirty -six
thousand dollars, commercial accounts are up ninety -six thousand six hundred and
seventy -eight dollars, so you know... we are doing a little more volume according to
this than what we projected. I think there's a lot of this analysis that needs to
happen in preparation of going into the next budget but I appreciate your
commentary that at a hundred and thirty -eight hours of sick leave average a year
and at people consuming eighty percent of their entitlement, those are pretty
significant and you might want to go back, in all fairness to, you might want to go
back and make sure that there weren't people in the workforce that might have had
a catastrophic illness or long term and actually ended up consuming all their sick
leave and then went to some TTI program and so forth but we owe that as well. I'm
just saying it's worth looking at it might have skewed your averages.
Mr. Dill: It's just been pointed out to me; we do have
at least one (1) employee that's out on a long term basis for that reason right now.
You're right.
44
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
Chair Furfaro: Well I'm just saying it's good that you look at
some of those things to understand the whole piece. Revenues are up so then I
interpret that as saying okay requirements were up to handle that opala. We had a
plan that we set up for this year about getting us to automation as we modernize
crews that would have reduced the overtime, maybe we're behind on that and then
of course these average sick leave hours you probably need to remove the hours
calculated for anyone who might have a long term serious medical problem and not
make them part of the averages. That's all I'm suggesting. I don't think we want to
get to a point in the next budget session that for every five dollars we're providing
in straight time pay, we're providing another dollar for average overtime. We want
to get to a point that the automation pays off for us in collections. Those would be
my comments.
Mr. Dill: Right, thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Any other dialog? No? Mr. Dill, I'm going to
open the floor to the public. Thank you again Larry.
KEN TAYLOR: Chair, members of the Council my name is
Ken Taylor. As you recalled at the last meeting I had indicated a deferral on this
matter until some of these issues were resolved and it was pointed out by one of you
that... it was important to move forward with the compactor and I certainly don't
disagree with that. I do have a problem still with the fence because of a number of
issues but again we were given copies of three (3) meetings, closed session took
place of discussion of apparently the two hundred and fifty thousand dollars that
given to the... or possibly given to the shrimp farm. But in reading that closed
session announcement it says the Office of the County Attorney requested
Executive Session with the County to provide Council a briefing, update, and a
request authorizing relating to authority relating to the expansion of the landfill
adjoining areas and related matters. Now, yes you can stretch that into being part
of the shrimp farm activity but my concern is that it's not clear that there's no claim
brought forth in any of these three (3) meetings that this issue was heard. I just
like to go back and remind each of you that when you pull up the Constitution of the
United States the first thing that's on the website at the State is the Bill of Rights.
In the preamble it says we the people of the State of Hawaii grateful for the divine
guidance and mindful of our Hawaiian heritage reaffirm our belief in government of
the people, by the people and for the people. In section one (1) of the Bill of Rights
says all political powers of this State is inherent in the people and responsibility for
the exercise thereof rest with the people. All government is founded on this
authority. Now the reason I read that is that when you tell us that this issue came
forth as a claim, there's nothing in this three (3) meetings that took place in closed
session that come in anywhere near as being a claim.
Mr. Nakamura: Three (3) minutes Mr. Chair.
Chair Furfaro: Thank you. Ken that was your three (3)
minutes but go right ahead.
Mr. Taylor: Thank you. The concern I have is that when
we elect you folks to do and carry out County business, we don't relinquish our
interest as part of the government and being open... I mean there's... I see no
reason at all to hide the fact that some business has challenged the County on a
particular issue. When you read the document the backup material for this item,
45
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
this is really gets concerning is that the cost of mitigation beyond settlement is
questionable as well as the negative publicity that could have a direct impact on
future landfills citing efforts. Now I haven't seen the letter from the shrimp farm, I
certainly like to see it because I just can't believe from what we are seeing that
there was any reason and whatsoever to hide what's going on here and I mean if a
business challenges the County, it's the people's business to know and understand
what's going on. Why are we hiding it, why are we making such a big deal out of
this situation when reality is it should be out front? When you look at this whole
thing and is this OIP opinion I don't really think applies to this activity at all and
that's just my opinion but it's... there's something terribly wrong and I think you
should move forward with approving the moneys for request... except for the fence
until this is clarified because the other part of this... we know that the winds first
off all will blow plastic bags over a ten (10) foot fence. Second of all when... in their
justification that said the operating cost of the environmental cleanup of debris that
litters the adjacent military facility and shrimp farm could easily be as high as fifty
thousand dollars or more during annual high wind months but it doesn't say
anything about what happens... who's going to... where's the cleanup money going
to take place when all this stuff collects in the fence, that's going to have to be taken
out of there on a regular basis too and you're talking about a thousand foot of fence
that's going to have to be cleaned on a regular basis. That is not even considered in
this part, in this justification activity. I think they somewhat clarified the problem
with the overtime and furloughs. I think there's good reason to approve equipment
needed to make compaction better but there's no reason in the world at this moment
to rush right in for spending another twenty thousand dollars that probably isn't
going to solve any of the problems listed here and...
Chair Furfaro: Ken, your second three (3) minutes went off
a few minutes ago.
Mr. Taylor: Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Ken, I want to share with you that you know
we want you to be active in the government and we recognize that. Last week I had
my office contact Mr. Mickens and we attempted to reach you too but we didn't have
a number for you. If you would like to get some assistance on filling out the
appropriate forms to get this uniform information act released to you, Peter
Morimoto from my office is willing to help you do that. Sorry that we couldn't get to
you earlier but that's just something that I wanted to tell you now. We certainly
recognize our responsibilities and we were going to try to get that information for
you if you can see Peter afterwards. On the other items you testified about today,
thank you for acknowledging that you think we should move ahead and approve
those items and you know that portion of the testimony we can act on today. But
please feel free to see Peter Morimoto, we'll help move that stuff along.
Mr. Taylor: Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Any questions? Go ahead Mr. Bynum.
Mr. Bynum: You're really bringing up two (2) issues Ken;
one (1) is the information about the shrimp farm that was disclosed in that
narrative and your concerns about secrecy. I agree with those concerns and I put
that in writing previously and I'm trying to attempt to get permission to share with
you what I put in writing. The other issues are about the fence which is part of
this... I think we need to have more dialog about that and how it fits with the
46
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
current operations. I'm going to vote for this today because we're not going to
expend those funds right away but I think you're right we should have some follow
up dialog about the need for the fence and how it coincides with the operations that
currently occur at the landfills. I'm going to follow up on those.
Mr. Taylor: Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Anybody else, any questions? Thank you
Ken.
GLENN MICKENS: Thank you Jay. Again for the record Glenn
Mickens. I have a short testimony and you have a copy of it. This is my evaluation
of this Bill 2397. If I'm wrong, I'm sure you'll correct me. Before Bill 2397 is finally
passed, I hope that you Councilmembers will take a harder look at it as some of us
members including Ken have done.
We are talking about a potential payout to this shrimp farm of tax money for,
as Chair Furfaro said, possibly two hundred fifty thousand dollars or more or
possibly less but it will probably be considerable, nonetheless, if approved.
Jay gave us some relevant material on this issue at our last session and
apparently with further question in his mind he asked for ten (10) more days to
finalize this issue. So presumable in another three (3) days we should have the
information that Jay will pass along to us.
The twelve (12) page OIP opinion that was given to us dated May 28, 2003
has in it a questionable statement that, for me, did not make it comparable to what
is happening in Bill 2397.
It said, "The Commission's July 31, 2002 hearing was a contested case
hearing (emphasis added) under HAPA. Thus, the decision of members of the
Commission to delay disclosing how they voted on whether to use public funds for
the defense of an indicted police officer was not subject to the Sunshine Law."
To the best of my knowledge this potential exacted or settlement amount is
not a contested case hearing so whatever decision is made should be made before
the public and not in Executive Session.
I thank Jay for delving into this issue and will be awaiting whatever further
information he gets in three (3) days. I do approve of the $417,000 being asked for
in this Bill but since the $20,000 fence and the settlement amount is part of the bill
I believe that it should be eliminated and handled separately. Anyway, that's my
evaluation of it. Any questions?
Chair Furfaro: I just want to share two (2) things with you, I
don't want to get into more dialog, I've made certain request, if I don't fulfill the
three (3) days then you know... I don't fulfill the three (3) days, that's...
Mr. Mickens: Okay.
Chair Furfaro: It's my attempt to get you some information.
The same message I gave to Ken, I gave to you last week. You have not moved on
the request even though I've asked staff and the request still stands there, will help
you with that. I also want to say that what comes over to the Council in a
47
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
statement is not written by the Council staff, the verbiage we get comes from the
County Attorney. That's all I have to say on that matter but you can also see Peter
if you like.
Mr. Mickens: Thank you Jay.
Chair Furfaro: Thank you. Anyone else want to testify on
this item?
LEILANI MINDORO: Good afternoon. My name is Leilani
Mindoro, I'm with UPW. I just had a question, I did not attend the last Council
Meeting when the equipment, the request for equipment was made and this is
actually the first that I'm aware of this and so I had a couple of questions. One (1)
regarding the compactor, I believe anything that makes the employees work more
efficient and less taxing on their own person is appropriate; however, the question
that I have is, is this equipment that is being purchased being purchased to
maintain equipment that belongs to Waste Management or the County of Kauai
because there is a court decision and order for equipment management and
operations management of the employees. So I just want to make sure that the
funds are being appropriated in the proper way. Like I said anything for our
membership as long that it's appropriate, that's something that I want to ensure is
done. But I want to make sure that the equipment based on the court order is cost
effective and appropriate for in accordance with the Court Order, so that was the
only thing.
Chair Furfaro: Your point is well taken and we shall so note
with Mr. Dill with your concern... Mr. Dill the County Engineer. Councilwoman
Yukimura.
Ms. Yukimura: Yes, good morning Leilani.
Ms. Mindoro: Good afternoon.
Ms. Yukimura: Oh good afternoon, thank you. Now just for
the record you're representing an organization right?
Ms. Mindoro:
also a... you know...
Ms. Yukimura:
Ms. Mindoro:
Ms. Yukimura:
who's going to own the machines?
I am the Division Director of UPW but I'm
A citizen.
A citizen of this County.
Right, okay. And then your question was
Ms. Mindoro: Because there is a Court Order and the way
the operations at the Kekaha Landfill are... that needs to be followed. And the
equipment from my understanding unless Public Works /Solid Waste Division has
more information that I'm not aware of, the equipment is to be provided by Waste
Management and the (inaudible) equipment and the repair and maintenance.
Based on what is asked for I want to ensure that you know if we're asking money
for operations for the manpower operations, I have no problem with that because I
48
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
know the extent of what happens there. But I want to make sure that the moneys
that are appropriated for the equipment, the right entities are paying for that.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay. I think I understand what you're
trying to ask because I had that same concern last... at the last meeting. I don't
know about a Court Order but there is a contract that governs how the relationship
of waste management to the County at the landfill. My understanding was that
contract has been or is being amended and the scope is being widened and so
therefore there's an agreement that the County will pay for this equipment because
it's for the widened scope of work which is... not just compliance with rules and regs
but I think waste management has services has been now retained to increase the
efficiency of the landfill so that it won't fill up as quickly. Their job under the
original contract was just to help us be compliant with Federal rules and regs and
other rules. But now there's a new role for waste management and because of that
new rule and part of that new role and new agreement is that we're going to pay for
the equipment. But I'm presuming we're owning the equipment as well... we are
not? Well then that's a really good question.
Ms. Mindoro: Okay so that's just my...
Chair Furfaro: We'll direct that question to Mr. Dill. One
moment please... Mr. Rapozo.
Mr. Rapozo: Do you have that Court Order? Or can you
get us a copy...
Ms. Mindoro: It is public record, I can get the information.
Mr. Rapozo: Or the cite from the case, that will work
too... I'm not aware of any Court Order. All I was told was that this was a piece of
equipment that would go on the waste management equipment to increase the
compaction rate and because of that due to...
Ms. Yukimura: Oh I see.
Mr. Rapozo: To prolong the life of the landfill, you know
to expand the life. That in fact this was going to give us more compaction, more air
space but I was also told that the contract had to be modified but that it was not
going to cost us any more money. I guess we can bring up Mr. Dill afterwards. I
was told that in fact the contract had no fiscal impact, only that the modification to
their equipment which is the machine, we're going to put on these wheel cleaners to
clean it, I guess, and... but that it was not going to cost the County anymore and I'm
concerned that as I'm looking in the audience because it doesn't look like that's the
case. We'll have Mr. Dill come back up.
Ms. Mindoro: Again and my issue is if it's going to stay
with the County for future landfill use and it's county property and it builds for
better work for the employees, I have no problem with that.
Chair Furfaro:
Mr. Bynum has a question for you.
Mr. Bynum: I just want to thank you for your testimony
because I think it's really balance because from my understanding is that there will
be an improvement for the employees in terms of their job duties and will help them
49
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
be more efficient. Thanks for bringing up the legal question that we need to follow
up with.
Ms. Mindoro: Okay, thank you.
Mr. Bynum: Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Thank you very much. Mr. Dill the rules are
still suspended and I believe that Mr. Rapozo will have the floor.
Mr. Rapozo: Hi Larry. Last week I spoke with Donald
outside of the meeting and basically what I just said to the prior speaker was what
he had told me. Is that what you understand it to be? Was the contract
modification going to increase the cost to the county?
Mr. Dill: Yes.
Mr. Rapozo: Because that's not what I was told.
Mr. Dill: Let me back up if I may just a little bit...
when the contract was initially put in place the stipulation was that the contractor
had to meet certain conditions those were based on acceptable National standards
at the time. He was required to provide the equipment in order to do that. So what
we've done recently is we've gone back to him and say we want to increase the
efficiency of your work, like we talked about getting higher compaction rates,
ultimate goal being to extend the life of the landfill, come back to us with a proposal
to do that. So they have come back with a proposal to do that which includes these
self cleaning devices on the rollers, on the heavy equipment which they already own
under that contract. Since we are now effectively changing their scope of work out
there, is there going to be change order for that original contract which would allow
them to purchase and install and own this new piece of equipment which would be
attached to the equipment they already own. It hasn't been stated it will also... it
will serve to increase the life of the landfill by increasing the compaction rate but
also be a benefit to the employees as it has been mentioned. Every time they have
to get up and down of that machine to clean manually some equipment, it's a safety
and health issue and so it will benefit all around.
Mr. Rapozo: We are funding... the money bill in front of
us is for the County to purchase the equipment or is it to...
Mr. Dill: No it's a contract change order and so they're
proposing a contract change order to us which would allow them to purchase the
equipment. So we will pay them, they will purchase the equipment.
Mr.Rapozo: They purchase the equipment and...
Mr. Dill: Correct.
Mr. Rapozo: How much is the equipment, I guess?
Mr. Dill: I don't have the bill in front of me.
Mr. Rapozo: Those changes I guess for me because I
thought we were buying the equipment...
50
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
Mr. Bynum: I did too.
Mr. Rapozo: We were buying the equipment and giving it
to them, that's what I was told and in fact outside of the cost of the equipment there
would be no, the contract was not going to be the value of the contract.
Mr. Dill: There is the cost of the equipment and that
is the sole amount of the change order, I'm sorry if I didn't make that clear.
Ms. Yukimura: Yeah.
Mr. Rapozo: Okay but the question I guess is... how much
is this equipment because I thought we went out through our process and bought
the equipment which would require the bid and blah, blah, blah... but you're
basically saying right now that we did a change order, the contractor is going to tell
us what they want to purchase this equipment for.
Mr. Dill: Correct.
Mr. Rapozo: And do we know if that's even accurate, I
don't know and I hate to be nitpicking but...
now.
Mr. Dill: (inaudible).
Mr. Rapozo: That's why I'm concerned about that right
Mr. Dill: Sure.
Chair Furfaro: Troy why don't you come up.
Mr. Rapozo: Because I don't know what a wheel cleaner
does but it's a hundred plus thousand dollars and I'm assuming I just had assumed
that it was something that the County was going to purchase.
TROY TANIGAWA, ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES MGT. ENGINEER:
Troy Tanigawa for the record. Excuse me just let me find it in the paper work here.
Chair Furfaro: Troy are you turning to the page of the
justification section?
Mr. Tanigawa: Yes I am.
Chair Furfaro: Okay. Just for the Councilmembers.
Mr. Tanigawa: I'm looking here and the self cleaning device
for the cat compactor has a value of twenty -two thousand dollars and the stationary
mounted GPS system has a value of a hundred and six thousand dollars. To me
that's within the ballpark that we're looking at if we were looking at purchasing
that same type of equipment at the market.
Mr. Rapozo: So we don't get to keep this equipment right?
COUNCIL MEETING
Mr. Tanigawa:
Mr. Rapozo:
Mr. Tanigawa:
Mr. Rapozo:
that?
51
March 9, 2011
Correct.
They get to keep the equipment.
Correct.
And I just don't understand why we would do
Mr. Tanigawa: We asked ourselves the same question when
we looked at the proposal and considered the expense and it looks like for the life...
the remaining life of the landfill you know what we would expect the employer or
the contractor... the period that we expect them to operate the equipment and
maintain this equipment in good order, at the end of that term there would be little
to no residual value to that equipment. With that in mind and it seemed like the
benefits of that equipment which we are paying for just to purchase the equipment
and Waste Management assuming all the responsibilities to maintain and keep that
equipment in good working order for the remaining term of the contract seemed like
a good expense for the County.
Mr. Rapozo: Who runs that equipment... I know they own
it but who operates it? Who operates the compaction equipment out at the site, is it
county employees?
Mr. Tanigawa: County workers.
Mr. Rapozo: We do right?
Mr. Tanigawa: Correct.
Mr. Rapozo: And who maintains that equipment?
Mr. Tanigawa:
keep that equipment running.
Mr. Rapozo:
County?
Mr. Tanigawa:
by Waste Management.
Mr. Rapozo:
Mr. Tanigawa:
Mr. Rapozo:
Waste Management pays for all the cost to
But it's still run and maintained by the
It's operated by the County but maintained
They pay us to maintain the equipment...
LM
Or do they have their own maintenance?
Mr. Tanigawa: They hire a private contractor to maintain
equipment on site.
Mr. Rapozo: Okay, thank you.
Chair Furfaro: We have about six (6) minutes before we
have to break for lunch and before I recognize Councilwoman Yukimura, I want to
52
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
make sure you understand, Larry, we're looking for the depreciation schedule for
that piece of equipment that would have been calculated over a seven (7) year
period of time, okay, and what depreciation schedule was used. Councilwoman
Yukimura.
Ms. Yukimura: My question relates to that actually.
wanted to know what the term of our contract with Waste Management is.
Mr. Tanigawa:
Ms. Yukimura:
responsible for closing at ultimately
(inaudible) and all of that that needs
there's a long period of responsibility,
done to close it properly and then to
contract?
The term extends for the life of the landfill.
Which means that they are going to be
and taking care of the thirty (30) years of
to be done right? After the landfill is closed
I mean I don't know exactly all that has to be
maintain it but is that the duration of the
Mr. Tanigawa: The contracts allows the County to either use
waste management to close the landfill or to elect to decline waste management's
offer and go out to bid to a third party to do the closure.
Ms. Yukimura: So that period of time is not included in the
present contract? The closure of the landfill and the maintenance of it for the next
thirty (30) years after closure, that is not in the contract and it's not part of it?
Mr. Tanigawa: Currently it is part of the contract to either
have waste management, should the county elect to do so... to do the closure,
closure construction.
Ms. Yukimura:
And...
Mr. Tanigawa: Which includes installing the final cover,
establishing final grades, constructing the landfill gas management system, you
know installing all the components necessary to allow Department of Health to
certify closure was done properly. What's not included in their contract currently in
the scope of work is to do the post closure. That is something that when the time
comes the County has to budget for and contract out to do that work.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay so the work that they're contracted for
that amount of money has already been specified that's part of the contract?
Mr. Tanigawa: Unit prices are included in the contract,
correct.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay so the equipment will be used for those
purchases as well?
Mr. Tanigawa: More than likely the compactor wheel
cleaners are only useful for operating the landfill.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay, so what is the projected... you said
that over the life they'll be no real value left when the contract is done. So what are
the years that are being projected for that, so that relates to how long we're going to
keep operating the landfill.
53
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
Mr. Tanigawa: Well with the current projected life we're
looking at least... just over six (6) years possibly a little more with some initiatives
that we've been looking at that life expectancy could move out to seven (7) to eleven
(11) more years, possibly if all these initiatives work properly.
Ms. Yukimura: Okay so that's why the seven (7) year
depreciation schedule?
Chair Furfaro: Yes I think we had some discussion
Councilwoman last year on the projected life of the landfill and the number we gave
was a minimum of seven (7) and it could be longer if we moved on the compacting
process. But that's why I used the seven (7) years, yes.
Ms. Yukimura: Alright, thank you very much.
Chair Furfaro: Do we have any more questions of these
gentlemen? If not, Mr. Dill it is 12:30 and we're going to move probably to a break.
When we come back at 1:30 Councilwoman Nakamura has a public hearing but you
need to be prepared to be back.
Ms. Yukimura: Mr. Chair is it possible we could come back
to order and vote on it and finish this subject before we go on break, lunch break?
Chair Furfaro: We could vote on it...
Mr. Bynum: You had a motion and a seconded.
Ms. Yukimura: I think we're ready, aren't we?
Mr. Rapozo: I don't know. Did we get the public
testimony on this?
Chair Furfaro: Yes. Mr. Dill, we're going to call our meeting
back to order.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as
follows:
Chair Furfaro: It is the Council's wish to... we have a
motion to approve and a second. Let's have some dialog amongst members.
Mr. Rapozo: Mr. Chair, I still have question pertaining to
the overtime for this fiscal year not last fiscal year, this money request is not to
cover last year's shortages for this year. I'm expecting that... I'm sure we can get
that... I do want to... I will vote on the measure today to get it approved so that
they can move forward but I do expect to have a item on the agenda in the near
future for the landfill as well as the green waste discussion so that we can have that
on a separate item.
Chair Furfaro: Okay.
Mr. Rapozo: Just basically a generic update. We haven't
had an update I believe on the landfill situation for quite a while so that is almost a
54
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
special meeting in itself because the moving parts and variables. I will be
supporting the money bill today; however, I will be expecting further response from
Mr. Dill. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Thank you. Any further discussion? Mr. Dill
if you follow that... we will have two (2) probably new items, one (1) addressing
green waste in general, you know terms and conditions of how we manage it and
also in particular maybe something that reflects staffing guides so that we can get
to the most current overtime pieces. Any further discussion? Mr. Bynum.
Mr. Bynum: I appreciate Councilmember Rapozo doing a
follow up on those issues and I just had said earlier that I hope we would also have
further discussion about the fence and about how it integrates with current landfill
practices. So maybe that could all be the same item Mr. Rapozo?
Ms. Yukimura: Okay.
Chair Furfaro: Okay. Let's go ahead and call for the vote.
The motion for approval on second and final reading, and that it be transmitted to
the Mayor for his approval was then put, and carried by the following vote:
FOR ADOPTION: Bynum, Nakamura, Rapozo,
Yukimura, Furfaro TOTAL — 5,
AGAINST ADOPTION: None TOTAL — 0,
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING: Chang, Kawakami TOTAL — 2,
RECUSED & NOT VOTING: None TOTAL — 0.
There being no objections, the Council recessed at 12:30.
The Council reconvened at 1:54 p.m., and proceeded as follows:
Chair Furfaro: The meeting is called back to order. Could
we read communication C 2011 -79 please?
Mr. Nakamura: We're back on page one (1) of the Council's
agenda Council Chair and we have two (2) communications for receipt on page one
(1), communication C 2011 -79 and C 2011 -80.
C 2011 -79 Communication (02/14/2011) from the Director of Housing,
requesting Council approval to authorize the filing of the 2011 Action Plan for the
County's 5 -year consolidated Plan to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development and appropriation of funds for the HOME Investment Partnership
Program, an allocation of $973,000 of HOME funds for Program Year 2011:
Ms. Yukimura moved to receive C 2011 -79 for the record, seconded by Mr. Rapozo,
and unanimously carried.
C 2011 -80 Communication (02/14/2011) from the Director of Housing,
requesting Council approval to authorize the filing of the Kauai County 2011 Action
Plan with the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development and
appropriation of funds for the Community Development Block Grant Program an
estimated allocation of $880,943 of grant funds: Ms. Yukimura moved to received
C 2011 -80 for the record, seconded by Mr. Rapozo, and unanimously carried.
55
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
Chair Furfaro: Next page.
Mr. Nakamura: We're on page two (2) of the Council's agenda
Council Chair on a communication for approval, communication C 2011 -81.
C 2011 -81 Communication (02/08/2011) from the Director of Parks and
Recreation, requesting Council approval to accept a donation of an assortment of
merchandise which includes books, games, greeting cards, clothes, key chains and
other novelties valued at $10,000.00 by Borders Books, Movies & Cafe. The
donations will specifically benefit participants of County programs done solely or in
partnership with other non - profit organizations: Mr. Bynum moved to approve
C 2011 -81 with the appropriate thank -you letter to be sent, seconded by
Ms. Yukimura.
Chair Furfaro: Any discussion? Mr. Bynum.
Mr. Bynum: I believe this is a second time that Borders
has made this contribution to the County. Last time they were here, we
discussed... they indicated that it would be ongoing and so I just really wanted to
acknowledge and thank them. This is a great supplement to our youth programs
and maybe one of the sad things about Borders leaving. We'll have a thank you
letter but I wanted to acknowledge Borders again for this and for the
Administration for taking this opportunity. Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Any further discussion? If not, all those in
favor signify by saying aye.
The motion to approve C 2011 -81 with the appropriate thank -you letter to be sent
was then put, and unanimously carried.
Chair Furfaro: Next item.
Mr. Nakamura: Next communication for approval is
communication C 2011 -82.
C 2011 -82 Communication (02/15/2011) from the Director of Parks and
Recreation, requesting Council approval to accept nine (9) pieces of stage risers
valued at $1,500.00 to be used at the Kauai War Memorial Convention Hall in
Lihu`e, donated by Halau Hula `O Leilani Booster Club under the direction of Kumu
Hula Leilani Rivera Bond and President Darryl T. Low: Ms. Yukimura moved to
approve C 2011 -82 with the appropriate thank -you letter to be sent, seconded by
Mr. Rapozo.
Chair Furfaro: Members any discussion?
Ms. Yukimura: Yes Mr. Chair. I just wanted to really
acknowledge we recently recognized Kumu Hula Rivera and her husband and this
is a really nice donation to the Convention Hall that I know-will be used well.
Chair Furfaro: I'm sure, yes, thank you.
The motion to approve C 2011 -82 with the appropriate thank -you letter to be sent
was then put, and unanimously carried.
56
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
Chair Furfaro:
Mr. Nakamura:
communication C 2011 -83.
Next item.
Next communication for
approval is
C 2011 -83 Communication (02/04/2011) from the Director of Personnel
Services, requesting Council approval of two (2) applications to dispose of
government records, pursuant to Resolution No. 49 -86 (1986) as amended by
Resolution No. 12 -91 (1991), as amended by Resolution No. 2008 -39: Ms. Yukimura
moved to approve C 2011 -83, seconded by Mr. Rapozo, and unanimously carried.
Chair Furfaro: Next item.
Mr. Nakamura: Next matter for approval is communication
C 2011 -84.
C 2011 -84 Communication (02/14/2011) from the County Engineer,
requesting Council approval to purchase an Autocad 2011 Software Upgrade and
three (3) additional 2011 Network Licenses, at the approximate cost of $30,000.00,
for the Department of Public Works — Engineering Division to improve the
efficiency of the current design capabilities and assist with the increasing demands
of the current level of budgeted capital projects: Mr. Bynum moved to approve
C 2011 -84, seconded by Ms. Yukimura, and unanimously carried.
Chair Furfaro: Next item.
Mr. Nakamura: Next matter for approval is communication
C 2011 -85.
C 2011 -85 Communication (02/15/2011) from the Director of Housing,
requesting Council approval of a fee simple sale of the property known as Hookena
at Puhi Unit No. 602 located at 2080 Manawalea Street, Uhu`e HI, 96766 for
$155,000.00,
in of the previously approved price of $199,900.00 (see C 2009-
284) based on Comparative Market Analysis, and to authorize the County Clerk
to sign all documents related to this transaction: Mr. Rapozo moved to approve
C 2011 -85, seconded by Mr. Bynum.
Chair Furfaro: Any discussion? Councilwoman Nakamura.
Ms. Nakamura: I'll be voting to approve but I do have a
follow up question for the Department of Housing. I wanted to find out what the
status of the land trust that they were going to create so that we can in the future
not sell these properties. Right now FANNI MAE isn't allowing us to do a leasehold
loan and that's why we're going to do a fee simple sale but the County was
originally going to set up a community land trust to hold these properties. So I'd
like to find out what the status is for future properties that come up for sale.
Chair Furfaro: Very good. We'll send a communication over
for an item in Housing that deals with the question of the status of creating to the
land trust for future asset management. Thank you. Any further discussion?
The motion to approve was then put, and unanimously carried.
57
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
Chair Furfaro: Next item.
Mr. Nakamura: Next two (2) communications are for receipt.
This is communication C 2011 -86 and C 2011 -87.
C 2011 -86 Communication (03/02/2011) from Councilmember Bynum,
requesting Council consideration to amend Resolution No. 2011 -04, Draft 1, relating
to the establishment of the Human Resources Sub - Committee to the Committee
of the Whole, by extending the reporting deadline by an additional 90 days:
Mr. Bynum moved to receive C 2011 -86 for the record, seconded by Mr. Rapozo, and
unanimously carried.
C 2011 -87 Communication (02/01/2011) from the Chief of Police,
transmitting for Council information, a notice of the rate increase from $30.00 per
hour to $33.00 per hour, for Special Duty Officers and Administrative costs effective
February 1, 2011: Mr. Bynum moved to receive C 2011 -87 for the record, seconded
by Mr. - Rapozo, and unanimously carried.
Mr. Nakamura: Next matter at the top of page three (3)
Council Chair is a claim filed against the County, communication C 2011 -88.
CLAIMS:
C 2011 -88 Communication (1/19/2011) from the County Clerk, transmitting
a claim filed against the County of Kauai by L. Steven Niau for damages to his
vehicle, pursuant to Section 23.06, Charter of the County of Kauai: Mr. Rapozo
moved to refer C 2011 -88 to the County Attorney's Office for disposition and/or
report back to the Council, seconded by Ms. Nakamura.
Chair Furfaro: Mr. Rapozo.
Mr. Rapozo: I just wanted to find out if we can get a... I'm
not sure if it requires a briefing but at least a report from the County Attorney's
Office of all outstanding claims. I know we keep referring it to them for disposition
and report back to the Council. We used to get a quarterly report, I'm not sure if we
still get them but if we could get a report. Could we send over a request to get a
report of all the pending or outstanding claims with the County, I'd appreciate that.
Mr. Chair if you feel a briefing is warranted we could request an Executive Session
as well.
Chair Furfaro: Okay. I would like to so note that when we
refer claims to the County Attorney's Office that if the amount is settled for less
than two thousand dollars ($2,000.00) it is disposed of, so in the future the motion
means coming back if necessary meaning the claim was greater than two thousand
dollars ($2,000.000) but I will certainly take your recommendation and send over a
communication asking for an update on those claims unsettled that exceed two
thousand dollars ($2,000.00).
Mr. Rapozo: All claims.
Chair Furfaro: I'm not sure by Charter we actually have a
say on claims of one thousand, nine, ninety -nine ($1,999.00) but certainly I'll put
that in as two (2) subject matters. One for all claims above two thousand dollars
58
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
($2,000.00) unsettled and the second of any claims below two thousand ($2,000.00)
that are still unsettled.
Mr. Rapozo: Thank you.
Chair Furfaro: Okay, understood. Any further discussion?
The motion to refer C 2011 -88 was then put, and unanimously carried.
Chair Furfaro: Next item.
Mr. Nakamura: Next matters for approval are Committee
Reports.
COMMITTEE REPORTS:
PUBLIC SAFETY & ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES COMMITTEE:
A report (No. CR -PSE 2011 -03) submitted by the Public Safety &
Environmental Services Committee, recommending that the following be approved
on second and final reading:
"Bill No. 2397 A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. B -2010 -705, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE
OPERATING BUDGET OF THE COUNTY OF KAUA'I, STATE OF
HAWAII, FOR THE FISCAL YEAR JULY 1, 2010 THROUGH JUNE 30,
2011, BY REVISING THE SURPLUS AND APPROPRIATIONS
ESTIMATED IN THE GENERAL FUND ($417,238 — Solid Waste Fund),"
Mr. Rapozo moved for approval of the report, seconded by Mr. Bynum, and
unanimously carried. (See later for Bill No. 2397.)
Mr. Nakamura: From your Committee Finance /Parks &
Recreation/Public Works Programs Committee, Committee Report CR -FPP 2011 -01.
FINANCE / PARKS & RECREATION /PUBLIC WORKS PROGRAMS
COMMITTEE
A report (No. CR -FPP 2011 -01) submitted by the Finance /Parks &
Recreation/ Public Works Programs Committee, recommending that the following
be approved on second and final reading:
"Bill No. 2398 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE NO.
B- 2010 -705, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE OPERATING BUDGET
OF THE COUNTY OF KAUAI, STATE OF HAWAII, FOR THE FISCAL
YEAR JULY 1, 2010 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2011, BY REVISING THE
SURPLUS AND APPROPRIATIONS ESTIMATED IN THE GENERAL
FUND ($300,000 — Office of the County Clerk — Council Services Division),"
Mr. Bynum moved for approval of the report, seconded by Mr. Rapozo, and
unanimously carried. (See later for Bill No. 2398.)
59
�K611H0 -41 UTWXll IM
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
March 9, 2011
A report (No. CR -COW 2011 -09) submitted by the Committee of the Whole
Committee, recommending that the following be approved on second and final
reading:
"Bill No. 2396 A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING
ORDINANCE NO. B- 2010 -705, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE
OPERATING BUDGET OF THE COUNTY OF KAUAI, STATE OF
HAWAII, FOR THE FISCAL YEAR JULY 1, 2010 THROUGH JUNE 30,
2011, BY REVISING THE SURPLUS AND APPROPRIATIONS
ESTIMATED IN THE GENERAL FUND ($525,448— Golf Fund),"
Mr. Rapozo moved for approval of the report, seconded by Mr. Bynum, and
unanimously carried. (See later for Bill No. 2396.)
Mr. Nakamura: On page four (4) of the Council's agenda the
final Committee Report from your Committee of the Whole, committee report
CR -COW 2011 -10.
A report (No. CR -COW 2011 -10) submitted by the Committee of the Whole
Committee, recommending that the following be approved on second and final
reading:
"Bill No. 2388 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE
NO. B- 2010 -705, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE OPERATING
BUDGET OF THE COUNTY OF KAUAI, STATE OF HAWAII, FOR THE
FISCAL YEAR JULY 1, 2010 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2011, BY REVISING
THE SURPLUS AND APPROPRIATIONS ESTIMATED IN THE GENERAL
FUND ($62,719. 00- Golf Fund and $2,704,8 73. 00 —Sewer Fund),"
Mr. Rapozo moved for approval of the report, seconded by Mr. Bynum, and
unanimously carried. (See later for Bill No. 2388.)
Chair Furfaro: We're going to go now to Resolutions.
Mr. Nakamura: First Resolution for approval is Resolution
No. 2011 -38.
RESOLUTIONS:
Resolution No. 2011 -38, RESOLUTION CONFIRMING MAYORAL
APPOINTMENT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION (Herman John Texeira):
Mr. Bynum moved to adopt Resolution No. 2011 -38, seconded by Ms. Yukimura.
Chair Furfaro: I believe we have an amendment coming
through. Councilwoman Nakamura.
Ms. Nakamura moved to amend Resolution No. 2011 -38 as circulated, second by
Mr. Bynum.
Ms. Nakamura: Yes this is a floor amendment to add that
Herman Texeira represents Labor and that was not included in the original Bill or
Resolution.
60
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
Chair Furfaro: Any further discussion here? If not, this is
the second Commission that came over to us from Planning that did not note what
segment of our community they represented so with two (2) notes could we make
sure we send a notice to Mr. Isobe to identify whether they're from Business, Labor,
Environmental and/or the Open Commission Appointment in the future. All those
in favor of the floor amendment say aye.
The motion to amend Resolution No. 2011 -38 as circulated was then put, and
unanimously carried.
Chair Furfaro: We're at the main Resolution, any further
discussion? If not, this will be a roll call vote.
The motion for adoption of Resolution No. 2011 -38 as amended herein was then put,
and carried by the following vote:
FOR ADOPTION:
AGAINST ADOPTION:
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING:
RECUSED & NOT VOTING:
Chair Furfaro:
Bynum, Nakamura, Rapozo
Yukimura, Furfaro
None
Chang, Kawakami
None
Next item please.
TOTAL — 5,
TOTAL — 0,
TOTAL — 2,
TOTAL — 0.
Mr. Nakamura: Next Resolution, Council Chair for
Resolution No. 2011 -41 and Resolution No. 2011 -42 it's our understanding that the
Housing Agency will be holding public hearings on these matters and have asked
that these Resolutions be deferred until the April 6 Council Meeting.
Resolution No. 2011 -41, RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF
THE KAUAI COUNTY 2011 ACTION PLAN (HOME INVESTMENT
PARTNERSHIPS PROGRAM) WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, FOR A GRANT
UNDER TITLE II OF THE CRANSTON - GONZALEZ NATIONAL AFFORDABLE
HOUSING ACT (PUBLIC LAW 101 -625), AS AMENDED: Ms. Yukimura moved
to defer Resolution No. 2011 -41 to the April 6, 2011 Council Meeting, seconded by
Mr. Bynum, and carried a 4 -0 -2 -1 vote (Ms. Nakamura was noted as recused from
this item.)
Resolution No. 2011 -42, RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE FILING OF
THE KAUAI COUNTY 2011 ACTION PLAN (COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
BLOCK GRANT) WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, FOR A GRANT UNDER
TITLE I OF THE HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1974
AND 1987 (PUBLIC LAWS 93 -383 AND 100 -242), AS AMENDED: Ms. Yukimura
moved to defer Resolution No. 2011 -42 to the April 6, 2011 Council Meeting,
seconded by Mr. Bynum, and carried a 4 -0 -2 -1 vote (Ms. Nakamura was noted as
recused from this item.)
Chair Furfaro: We have four (4) ayes on the defer. Thank
you, next item.
61
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
Mr. Nakamura: Next Resolution for approval is Resolution
No. 2011 -43.
Resolution No. 2011 -43, RESOLUTION AMENDING RESOLUTION
NO. 2011 -04, DRAFT 1, TO EXTEND THE HUMAN RESOURCES SUB-
COMMITTEE REPORTING DATE TO THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE TO
REVIEW AND PROPOSE REVISIONS TO THE PERSONNEL OF THE COUNTY
COUNCIL AND COUNCIL SERVICES DIVISION OF THE COUNTY OF KAUAI:
Ms. Yukimura moved to approve Resolution No. 2011 -43, seconded by Mr. Bynum.
Chair Furfaro: Mr. Bynum did you want to say anything?
Mr. Bynum: We've formed a Human Resource Sub -
Committee, the staff has been doing analysis of and doing a lot of work actually
which supplied us and we had one (1) meeting but we ran out of the sixty (60) days
and need more time to complete the analysis. For instance I received information
from Pete Hoffman the Vice Chair of. the Hawaii County Council about their
staffing levels and so we're still doing the analysis. We should have another
Committee Meeting soon and I don't think we'll take the entire time. We really
want to complete this prior to us doing budget deliberations.
Chair Furfaro: Any further discussion? If not, to approve
extending the time, this is a roll call vote.
The motion for adoption of Resolution No. 2011 -43 was then put, and carried by the
following vote:
FOR ADOPTION:
AGAINST ADOPTION:
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING:
RECUSED & NOT VOTING:
Chair Furfaro:
Bynum, Nakamura, Rapozo
Yukimura, Furfaro
TOTAL
— 5,
None
TOTAL —
0,
Chang, Kawakami
TOTAL —
2,
None
TOTAL —
0.
Next item please.
Mr. Nakamura: Next matters are bills for second reading.
Next Bill for second reading is Bill No. 2398.
Bill No. 2398 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE
NO. B- 2010 -705, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE OPERATING BUDGET OF
THE COUNTY OF KAUAI, STATE OF HAWAII, FOR THE FISCAL YEAR
JULY 1, 2010 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2011, BY REVISING THE SURPLUS AND
APPROPRIATIONS ESTIMATED IN THE GENERAL FUND ($300,000 — Office of
the County Clerk — Council Services Division): Mr. Bynum moved to approve Bill No.
2398 on second and final reading, and that it be transmitted to the Mayor for his
approval, seconded by Ms. Yukimura.
Chair Furfaro:
did get the FF &E book?
Mr. Rapozo:
Chair Furfaro:
those in favor say aye.
Mr. Rapozo, I just want to follow up that you
Yes I did, thank you very much.
Okay. Any further discussion? If not, all
COUNCIL MEETING
Mr. Nakamura:
62
This is a roll call vote.
March 9, 2011
The motion for adoption of Bill No. 2398 on second and final reading, and that it be
transmitted to the Mayor for his approval was then put, and carried by the
following vote:
FOR ADOPTION:
AGAINST ADOPTION:
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING:
RECUSED & NOT VOTING:
Chair Furfaro:
Mr. Nakamura:
Bynum, Nakamura, Rapozo
Yukimura, Furfaro
TOTAL
— 5,
None
TOTAL
— 0,
Chang, Kawakami
TOTAL
— 2,
None
TOTAL
— 0.
Next item.
Next bill for second reading is Bill No. 2396.
Bill No. 2396 - A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE
NO. B- 2010 -705, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE OPERATING BUDGET OF
THE COUNTY OF KAUAI, STATE OF HAWAII, FOR THE FISCAL YEAR
JULY 1, 2010 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2011, BY REVISING THE SURPLUS AND
APPROPRIATIONS ESTIMATED IN THE GENERAL FUND ($525,448 — Golf
Fund): Mr. Rapozo moved to approve Bill No. 2396 on second and final reading and
that it be transmitted to the Mayor for his approval, seconded by Mr. Bynum.
Chair Furfaro: Any discussion?
Ms. Yukimura: Yes Mr. Chair. I anticipate that we are
having another separate agenda item to talk about the Golf Course in general and I
just want to signal that my vote in this case does not mean that I support future
and larger subsidies to the Golf Fund. I'm concerned that some of the responses
that we're getting from the Administration which indicates a very unclear vision for
the Golf Course and then the move to change it from an enterprise fund to another
kind of fund is a bit worrisome because to me a county needs to follow policy and the
policy decision first has to be made before you choose the accounting system for it.
I'm not sure that a CPA firm is the one to determine what the accounting form
should be if there is no clear policy decision about what the vision is for the Golf
Course. And so, I look forward to these discussions, I urge the Administration to
think about this matter. If we go into the... what we saw is an increasing subsidy of
the Golf Course to a million plus dollars every year and that is asking basically a
real property tax payers to pay that kind of subsidy. We also saw many revenue
generating opportunities that could still be done within the context of providing
affordable services. So if we are not maximizing or optimizing our revenue
possibilities, that's not good and I would like... I did hear some real indications from
the Parks Director and Deputy that they are looking at that and are looking at ways
to increase our revenues, so that's a good sign. But anyway I just want to signal
that there's some un- clarity here about where we're heading with respect to the Golf
Course and how we're going to do our financing of it.
Chair Furfaro: Thank you. I do have a few comments but
I'll take other comments from other members first. Mr. Bynum.
Mr. Bynum: I appreciate the comments and the response
that we received from the Parks Departments to recent questions. I had initially
63
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
intended to put on the Parks Committee a wide ranging discussion about the Golf
Course and then in discussion with staff they indicated that in our budget reviews
this year... there's going to be a separate category specifically for the Golf Course
and they felt that that might be sufficient... so I'm looking for guidance from the
members about whether we should do that or have it as a separate item on the
Parks Committee.
Chair Furfaro: Councilwoman Yukimura.
Ms. Yukimura: If we are not going to televise the budget
hearings then we should have it as a separate item on the Parks Committee.
Mr. Bynum: I haven't sent a memo specifically for that
reason because I personally... my personal view is having the discussion during
budget is fine but I also want to renew the request I made for four (4) years that we
broadcast the budget hearings because I think there's interest in that and many
other issues.
Chair Furfaro: Anyone else want to speak? Okay. First of
all I'd like to suspend the rules and ask the County Attorney to come up if I can?
There being no objections, the rules were suspended.
Mr. Castillo: Good afternoon Council Chair,
Councilmembers, Al Castillo, County Attorney.
Chair Furfaro: Thank you. Al, I know you were traveling
last week but the Administration made a presentation, I made a presentation, I
think Councilwoman Yukimura highlighted a couple of points, for example, when it
comes to total revenue for the Golf Course as we measure that operation, we have a
short fall in restaurant of which now we have a new restaurant tenant, that should
help. We had questions about cart operations, the Administration is going to
evaluate... should we have a vendor operating that or is that something we need to
consider. We have other revenues that were falling short from range balls and so
forth that were paid amenities that have kind of gone unto the way side. Under
marketing strategies, one of the things we felt we were deferring people who spend
with our vendors... Mr. Rezentes has resolved getting us an ATM machine for the
purpose of having cash access and it is my understanding that and I would like to
get this clarified as looks like we're going to move to approve this piece but we need
to hear back from the other side the definition of who has the authority to set up an
enterprise fund. If you know that answer now, that's fine but if that's something
you need to research because I'm hearing from the Administration that one of the
possibilities here is that they're going to look to readdress the Golf Course as a
revenue account not an enterprise fund. I think we need to know who has the
authority to make that change. I believe it is the Administration's decision but we
need the answer to that. And then of course these other opportunities with revenue
enhancements dealing with restaurant, cart fees, other amenities and marketing
strategies on how we're going to accomplish some of these things should be another
discussion.
Mr. Castillo: Chair Furfaro, you've asked many questions
and this Golf Course questions regarding the restaurant and regarding the cart
concession and all of that... yes I would like time to answer your question but I'd
just like to say that's it's not only your question, it's also the Administration's... I
64
COUNCIL MEETING March 9, 2011
want to answer; you know I too have questions as to what's going to happen with
the entire Golf Course issue.
Chair Furfaro: Okay. Well I'll put those over in writing but
the one that's premium in my mind is who actually has the authority to reverse the
establishment of an enterprise fund.
Mr. Castillo:
now.
Chair Furfaro:
question from Mr. Bynum.
And I don't have that answer for you right
Okay and I'll get that over to you. We have a
Mr. Bynum: And I'm not expecting an answer right now
but one of the things that the Administration talked about was taking over the cart
concession which has been a vendor in the past and so the question we could add if
you don't know the answer is whether that would require Council approval or
whether they could do that laterally.
Mr. Castillo: And the answer to the question is I don't
want to speculate on how the Administration will be taking over the cart concession
because I'm sure there are a lot of alternatives that the Administration is
considering right now. I'm also questioning us the legal side in terms of how we
should handle this concerning issue.
Chair Furfaro: Any other questions for the County
Attorney? If not, thank you Mr. Castillo.
Mr. Castillo:
Thank you.
There being no objections, the meeting was called back to order, and proceeded as
follows:
Chair Furfaro: Any other discussion? This will be a roll call
vote.
The motion for adoption of Bill No. 2396 on second and final reading, and that it be
transmitted to the Mayor for his approval was then put, and carried by the
following vote:
FOR ADOPTION:
AGAINST ADOPTION:
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING:
RECUSED & NOT VOTING:
Chair Furfaro:
Mr. Nakamura:
Bynum, Nakamura, Rapozo
Yukimura, Furfaro
TOTAL
— 5,
None
TOTAL
— 0,
Chang, Kawakami
TOTAL
— 2,
None
TOTAL
— 0.
Thank you. Next item.
Last bill for second reading is Bill No. 2388.
Bill No. 2388 - AN ORDINANCE AMENDING ORDINANCE
NO. B- 2010 -705, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO THE OPERATING BUDGET
OF THE COUNTY OF KAUAI, STATE OF HAWAII, FOR THE FISCAL YEAR
JULY 1, 2010 THROUGH JUNE 30, 2011, BY REVISING THE SURPLUS AND
W
COUNCIL MEETING
March 9, 2011
APPROPRIATIONS ESTIMATED IN THE GENERAL FUND ($62,719.00- Golf
Fund and $2,704,873.00 —Sewer Fund): Ms. Yukimura moved for adoption of Bill
No. 2388 on second and final reading, and that it be transmitted to the Mayor for
his approval, seconded by Mr. Bynum, and carried by the following vote:
FOR ADOPTION:
AGAINST ADOPTION:
EXCUSED & NOT VOTING:
RECUSED & NOT VOTING:
Chair Furfaro:
ADJOURNMENT:
Bynum, Nakamura, Rapozo
Yukimura, Furfaro
None
Chang, Kawakami
None
There is no further business.
TOTAL — 5,
TOTAL — 0,
TOTAL — 2,
TOTAL — 0.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 2:20 p.m.
PEp tfully su witted,
TER A. NAKAMURA
County Clerk
/ds