Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOMM. 068 19: 4e' oGyr`oF""' /- DEPARTMENT OF WATER SUPPLY • COUNTY OF HAWAII HAWP, „"" • P. 0. BOX 1820 • HILO, HAWAII 95720 25 AUPUNI STREET June 7, 1979 Mr. Kimiaki Sakata Chairman, Charter Commission County of Hawaii 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, HI 96720 The Water Commission, at its regular monthly meeting on May 23, 1979 and a special meeting on May 29, 1979, discussed Article VIII, Department of Water Supply, of the County Charter. Enclosed are the verbatim minutes for the regular meeting and the special meeting. The minutes have not been approved by the Commission; however, because the first draft of the Charter is scheduled to be presented on June 19, 1979, we are sending the minutes to you to aid you in your consideration and deliberations of Article VIII , Department of Water Supply, of the County Charter. These minutes will be presented to the Water Commission for approval at its next regular meeting on June 20, 1979 after which time we will send you the approved minutes. Also enclosed for your information is a write-up "To Be or Not To Be," prepared by the staff, which indicates the growth and accomplishments of the Department of Water Supply,.since its creation in 1949. The following are the recommendations made by the Water Commission during the meetings: SECTION 8-1 . ORGANIZATION. Recommendation: It is recommended that Section 8-1 . Organi- zation be retained in its entirety. SECTION 8-2. WATER COMMISSION. Recommendation: It is recommended that Section 8-2. Water Commission be retained in its entirety, including subparagraphs (a) , (b) , (c) , (d) , (e) , and (f) . SECTION 8-3. MANAGER AND DEPUTY. Recommendation: Amend Section 8-3. Manager and Deputy to read as follows: COMM. NO. •.• UVater bringo proureod••• Mr. Kimiaki Sakata Chairman, Charter Commission Page 2 June 7, 1979 Section 8-3. Manager and Deputy. The manager of the department shall be appointed by the water commission and may be removed by the water commission. (a) The deputy shall be appointed by the manager with the confirmation of the water commission and may be removed with the approval of the water commission. (b) The manager shall appoint the necessary staff for which appropriations have been made by the water commission. (c) The manager shall take all personnel actions including the assignment or reassignment of duties to employees within the salary ordinance; provided that if such assignment or reassignment of duties shall affect the compensation of the employees , approval must be first obtained from the water commission. (d) The manager shall supervise the performance of the duties of all employees. (e) Except as otherwise provided by this Charter and subject to the approval of the water commission, the manager shall prescribe such. rules as are necessary for the organization and internal administration of the department. SECTION 8-4. WATER FUND. Recommendation: It is recommended that the word "County" be included in the second sentence before the phrase "State and Federal water grants" to read County, State and Federal water grants. . . SECTION 8-5. ADMINISTRATIVESUPERVISION. This section was discussed and no firm recommendations were made. However, it was felt that this is indeed a "gray" area that needs to be clarified. It was also felt that if the amendments recommended in reference to Section 8-3. Manager and Deputy, were adopted, the areas of responsibility, authority and supervision would be more clearly defined. The Water Commissioners and members of the staff would be happy to appear before your Commission prior to the drafting of the initial amendments to the Charter. It is our understanding that the first draft will be ready for discussion on June 19, 1979. Hardy 4da Vice-Chairman Water Commission County of Hawaii Encs. • • "TO BE OR NOT TO BE" • In recent weeks , much has been said about eliminating the Water Commission and returning the department under the control of the Mayor and the County Council without its semiautonomous status. Arguments used for such statements are that the Water Commission is not needed, the Water Commission is a "rubber stamp" and also, the Water Commission is not accountable for its actions. Other related arguments presented are that the Mayor should be the overall • coordinator for the agencies within the County; and if the Mayor had full control over the department, he •would then be• held accountable to the public. While some of these arguments appear sound in concept, practically, these same arguments will create political problems. We are all aware of politics. In government, politics cannot be separated and. cast aside. Politics is not all bad., but bad politics can create problems which will not be for the good of the community and the public and especially to our water customers. Bad politics arise when special interest groups look only after their own special needs. Bad politics arise when individuals, too, .look at their financial gains . Bad politics arise when political favors or obligations are "paid off" with taxpayers ' monies. • At the present time, the Charter Review Commission has been charged with the responsibility of amending the Charter. Groups such as the UPW, the Hawaii Island Chamber of Commerce, the Japanese Chamber of Commerce and Industry, • and the Hilo Contractors ' Association have expressed their desire to abolish the Water Commission. The UPW stated that the workers feel that they are not of the same status as other County .employees and that the department has . not been cooperative in sharing its computer with the County. The combined statements of the Chambers and the Contractors ' Association even went so far as to suggest that the qualifications of the Manager be dropped. i ' 4 In the coming weeks , more statements on the Water Commission and its department are forthcoming. The Water Commission itself is expected to take a stand on • whether it should exist or should its duties and responsibilities be turned over to the Mayor and the Council where politics will govern much of the affairs of the department. The Charter Commission has the more difficult task of sorting out these statements. With all, the statements made on abolishing the Water Commission, no one, individually or as a group, has been able to criticize the achievements of the Water Commission and ,the 'Water Department or .the lack thereof. No one has in his statement or presentation even considered improvements which can be made .on the Water Commission or the Water Department levels. Instead, they advocate abolishing the Water Commission, whatever their reasons may be. What are their reasons? Are they politically motivated? Are these statements • • coming from special interest groups? All of these questions should not ,be left unanswered. • • Rather than look at these statements, many of which are unsubstantiated, let us now look at the facts and the achievements of the Water Department under the direction of the Water Commission. A conclusion to the major issue on hand should also be made. Have the Water Commission and the Water Department failed to do their jobs in serving the needs of its customers? GROWTH OF THE WATER DEPARTMENT The growth of the Water Department, through its water systems, has been tremendous since the creation of the Water Board in 1949. Water systems , • since then, have. been constructed in areas where no public water systems • existed. Improvements , extensions , and new sources were added to existing systems to serve more residents of this island. This growth continues in areas of economic feasibility or where the demand for services is great. -2 • - • • • A good example of this growth is in Kona. In 1949, Kona did not 'hove a public water system. Today, there are 4,276 services with meter sizes ranging from 5/8 to 6 inches. Water consumption in Kona for fiscal year 197.7-78 was 1 . 24 billion gallons , and revenues from water sales for this same period amounted to $981 ,771 in this district alone. Several projects for expansion of • services are either in their design or construction stages. The department has even decentralized its operations to better service rural customers. Field personnel are now able. to respond to problems with much more efficiency and expediency. Base yards and .offices are now located in Honokaa, Waimea, Kapaau, Captain Cook, and Naalehu. The newest of these • is the Naalehu office which previously operated under the grandstand of the ball park and the police station where telephone messages were received. Twenty-four hour standby service is also provided islandwide. The total consumption of water for all systems during fiscal year 1977-78 was ' 4.23 billion gallons generating revenues of $3,409,000. Operating expenses, excluding depreciation, amounted to $2,347,000. The department presently operates and maintains 22 separate water systems with a. total of 21 deep wells , . 4 surface water sources, 13 springs and tunnels, 41 booster pump stations , and the many concrete and steel reservoirs ranging in capacities from 50,000 to 60,000,000 gallons. Nearly operational is the Kahaluu Shaft in Kona with the initial capability of producing 6.0 million gallons a day. The total plant investment has grown from $1,105,560 in 1949 to $45,472,294 today. _ Much of these plant investments was obtained through federal and state funds. Although criticisms have focused on the department's dependency. of federal and state funds, is it bad management to seek outside funding in order to keep water rates at a reasonable level ? • • -3- • • The following is a statistical comparison of pertinent data_ indicating the department's growth since' 1949:. Average Increase 1949 1978 Increase Per Year Number of Services 5;294 20,470 287% 9.88% , Water Sales 1 ,000 Gallons 1 ,302,434 4,229,355 225% 7.75% Utility Plant a) In Service 1 ,105,560 45,472,294 4;013% 138.38% b) In Progress : 48,237 736,163 1 ,426% 49.18% Number of Employees 48 79 65% 2.32% Services Per Employee 110 260 136% 4.70% Power and Pumping 14,659 987,769 6,638% 228. 91% . Operating Revenues . 283,662 3,409.235 1 ,102% 37.99%. As shown above, the number of employees increased by 65 percent_or only 2.32 per year. This is in spite of an increase in the utility plant in service of 4,013 percent over the same 29-year period. The Chambers of Commerce have stated that the department ". . .should be just another department under the executive branch. . .to make the operation of this department consistent with the operation of other county departments. " Unlike any other department in the County, the Water Department is operated and managed as a separate .entity. Furthermore, the Water Department does not receive operating :fund appropriations from the County or from any other source. The department operates' solely on revenues generated through water sales and investments. Major capital improvement funds are received from the federal government and the state government through legislative appro- priations. These appropriations from both the federal and the state governments cannot be used •for the operations of the department but must be used to fund designated capital improvement projects within the department's various water systems. -4- • • • • RADIO COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM • Under the Water Commission, the department has been able to be progressive in its operations . Prior to 1970, the only means of communications was by telephone. A lot of lost time occurred due to the inabilityto contact, field personnel . New work assignments could not be made until .field • personnel returned to the base yard or until they called on the telephone after completing an assignment-. In January 1970, the department obtained an F.C.'C. license and installed • a radio communications system. Improved efficiencies resulted. Field personnel can now communicate with the base yard and the central office. Many problems can now be solved over the radio. New work assignments can be given over the radio without having to .travel back and forth from job- site to the base yard or without having to hunt for a telephone. At the present time, the entire County is on this communications system initiated by the Water Department. It currently serves as the heart of the Civil Defense's communications system during disasters. Base stations are now located, in addition to the Water Department, at Public Works, Civil Defense, Parks and Recreation, Office of Aging; and even the Mayor's car is equipped with a mobile. radio. ELECTRONIC DATA PROCESSING SYSTEM Another area where the department has been able to display its progressiveness ' is in the area. of data processing. Back in 1964, the County and the department • were to obtain data processing equipment on a share basis. However, after deliberations, the County (Board of Supervisors at that time) voted down the proposal . The then Water Board decided that the department could not operate. under its old billing system any longer nor could the department wait for the County to ,be ready for electronic data processing. • • -5- .In the meantime, all of the department's employees .were given the opportunity to apply for positions which were to be created to operate and maintain the system. Workshops and training sessions were conducted with.the aid of the vendor. The people displaying the most capabilities were transferred into the newly created positions and charged with the responsibility of operating . . the data processing system. • A lot of criticism has been focused in this area. Much of these criticisms came about only because the department utilizes a computer as an essential part of its operations and when one thinks of EPD for the County, this particular computer facility comes to mind. Misconception of the capabilities of a computer is also the cause of this criticism. People tend to think that . the computer is a cure-all for problems in management information and accounting systems. • The computer cannot program itself for specific • applications. Staffing is needed to .program, test, implement, and operate each application. The department's computer is too small to handle the needs of the County. The Director of Finance's request for a "higher powered" computer was rejected by the Council . Now, the County must use the department's • computer which will be used only for its accounting and payroll applications. • .All other applications must wait until someone is able to convince the Council that the needs of the County are greater than the' capabilities of the department's equipment. When the department rejected proposals to handle the needs of the County, it was due to staff limitations , not because it did not want to "cooperate. " • The sewer billings and the improvement district applications would not be on the computer if the criticism that the department did not want to cooperate was valid. In 1964, the department had 10,100 customers on its billing system. Four employees operated the billing system. The customer count now In 1979 is 21 ,000. The -number of employees remains the same -- four. • • -6 •- • Although the equipment was initially obtained for its billing functions, • it is now used for many other applications. in. the design stage are many more applications. To list them all would take too long. Let us now look at what happened to the County since 1964. . The County remained idle in this area until 1970, when a consultant was hired to do an EDP .study. Since then, a number of other studies have been done at • a cost of many thousands of dollars to the taxpayers. Although the County has its payroll system on computer, it is being done by a contractor. ' A few years back, another contractor was hired to implement its accounting system. ' As of today, this system is still not operational. Last year, the Water Department made arrangements for the County to rent time -on the department's computer facility. This was supposed to have taken effect in November 1978. The County however is still in the process of creating its staff, and everything else is at a standstill . Although the County should be looking for equipment more suitable to its needs, no current proposals for equipment have been obtained. It is reasonable to expect, should the Council approve of a purchase, the County will not be on its own for yet a couple of years. • • SHOULD THE WATER COPMMISSION BE .ABOLISHED? If we are thoroughly convinced that the Water Department under the Water Commission has failed to do its job in operating and managing the public water systems for its customers, then, and only then, should we approach the next question. Should the Water Commission be abolished? For now, let us say that the department and the Water Commission have failed and that the department is turned over to the Mayor and the County and examine some of its implications. -7- • r M ' • It may be that politics will, never enter into the management and operation • of the Water Department. But,• realistically, how many of us can sincerely say that such will not be the case. The department is still replacing inadequate waterlines which were installed prior to .the creation of the Board. Furthermore, development may be allowed where the water sources • and transmission. lines are inadequate. CIP priorities may also be affected. • Rather than having priorities based on needs , political priorities may become 'a reality. . Progress and growth may come in a helter-skelter manner. Being a semiautonomous body; the department is now. able to hire the best applicant for any vacancy. Qualifications and ability to do the job are the criteria rather than the applicant's involvement in a political group or the amount he contributed to an elected official 's campaign chest. Furthermore, should the political involvement of an employee become the criteria for employment, inefficiencies and complacency will result along with decay in employee morale. • Accountability of water revenues can also become a problem. Although water revenues are supposed to be used for the water systems only, they may find themselves in the County's operations in the form of materials and supplies and even in labor charges especially if the department. is merged with another. Another area which. may have a costly impact is the water rates. If the Department was under the control of the Mayor and the Council , the chances for a, rate increase in an election year would' be nil no matter how much it • is justified. • The Charter Review Commission will have to decide what their recommendations will be concerning the Water Commission and the semiautonomous nature of the Water Department. Questions remain - should the department be influenced by. politics and placed directly under the Mayor and the Council? Should the water consumer rely on politicians to satisfy the most basic need, water, or should they rely on dedicated professionals? 5/16/79 -8- r • • PORTION OF MINUTES WATER COMMISSION MEETING • MANAGER'S OFFICE • May 23, 1979 • MEMBERS PRESENT: Messrs. George Fujino, Hardy .Iida, Raymond Kawamata, Clarence Keawe, Delmar Kleckner, Perfecto Quilausing, Tokuo Sugioka, Earl Tanaka, • and Akira Fujimoto • EXCUSED: Messrs. Jerry Saito, Edward •Harada, and Sidney Fuke. OTHERS PRESENT: Ms. Roxanna Garcia, Assistant Corporation Counsel Mr. Galen Kuba, representing Mr. Edward Harada, ex-officio member of the Commission Mr. Duane Kanuha, representing Mr. Sidney Fuke, ex-officio member of • the Commission Messrs. Edmund Hohu, Kazumi Okamura, William Sewake, and George Tengan. a . 4 5/23/79 Meeting • • H) COUNTY CHARTER TANAKA: Again, too, I assume that you've all read the agenda and the attached minutes of the Hawaii County Charter Commission that I testified at. I would like to have us all refer to the County Charter, County of Hawaii 1968. Everybody • got their copies? Article VIII , Department of Water" Supply, pages 18 and 19, • .18 and19., Also, I would- like to refer to our January .meeting in- which testimony to the- Charter Commission was given by the head of-our department, Mr. Fujimoto; it's attached to our agenda of the January meeting,, the testimony that he gave to the 'Charter Commission and also the information that he has supplied us dated •May 16, 1979 with regard to Charter review. What I 'd like -to do at this time- is again open the discussion by referring to Article VIII , Department of • Water Supply, on page 18 and, go through. each section in order to extract from this thing any specific questions: we may hove at this time that could possibly, that we could possibly recommendoto the to the Charter Commission for them to again consider and propose to the voters of the County of Hawaii . Okay, so • that I 'd like to take it .section by section in terms 'of discussion's sake and • .ask you know questions and clarifying matters. and- then in each section give the opportunity to all of us and also to any member of the Department of Water Supply • who wants to interject anything at this time.to do so and then after we have . completely discussed to. our satisfaction, then make specific; recommendations as • to what we would .like to propose • to' the Charter Commission. Okay, so let's start with: • Section 8-1 . Organization. There shall bea semi-autonomous • department of water supply consisting of a water commission, a . manager and the necessary staff. • • Any questions there? No questions.. • I have one. Would anybody like to from the department give us their interpre- tation or their clarification of what semiautonomous means? Akira. MANAGER: Well , semi , the way we understand, I think came about through. the legislative revised laws; it's half - semi means half autonomous; so in other words, we're not a separate organization out of the county - we're part of the county except that the reason why •it's ,semi is that we have a Commission who takes the part of, instead of being. 'either the Mayor or the Council , they are the • • • ). 5/23/79 Meeting ones that does the business of the department just like the board of directors of any corporation; but they are appointed by the governing body like the • County Council or the Mayor and approved by, confirmed by, the Council and they carry on the business with the staff, the professional staff, the manager and his staff. That's my interpretation because we've been working with that I guess since 1950, you know, when it started through the creation of the board of water supply by the legislature, the state legislature. So in other words, we don't really. . .you know, we're kind of receptive to the public because you people; the commissioners, are appointed by the Mayor and confirmed by the Council ; so you know the administration has and the Council has some kind of liaison with ,the commission. TANAKA: Okay. Thank you. Excuse me, Hardy.. IIDA: In this relationship, the mayor has , he calls a meeting of the department heads once in a while; I don't know how often, but you're in on those meetings. MANAGER: Yes, we've been in cabinet meetings or my representative is there in the cabinet meeting. TANAKA: Any other questions with regard to Section 8-1? Again, thank you; I wanted to ask you. a question before we started. ASSISTANT CORPORATION Yes, go ahead. COUNSEL: TANAKA: I wanted to give you the opportunity to finish yourdiscussion. ASSISTANT Because I was thinking over, I did read the minutes of your discussion on the CORPORATION COUNSEL: capital assessment policy and have some suggestions. . .go ahead •and aske I 'm • sorry; that's what I was talking to Ed about. TANAKA: Okay, all right, we're into' Item 8 of the County Charter and we're discussing recommendations or if any we would be making to the County Charter Commission and would you again for the record state the statements that you made, to me in our discussion when I asked you about you know the format for this evening's Charter you know discussion about how was it as an attorney or corporation counsel , whatever is given as testimony to the Charter Commission,could you clarify that? -2- a , 5/23/79 Meeting ASSISTANT Yes', Mr, Chairman. Whenever there is a question of the meaning of the interpre- CORPORATION COUNSEL: tation of any provision in the Charter for_ instance what does unusual circum- • stances mean or any other phrase you would like us to, what does semiautonomous mean, when our office gets a request for a . legal opinion, the only way we can respond to a request for a legal opinion is what. did the drafters of that document mean when they used the terminology unusual circumstances, a semiautonomous body, cruel and Unusual punishment, what did the drafters of that language mean because our interpretation unless there's a specific case law on a particular .terminology or phrase, we cannot give you a legal opinion; and in that respect, when you read cases and case laws on the interpretation of a certain meaning,you will find that the court almost always interprets that term or string of words as or with respect as to how it applies to the facts and every case, almost every case, the facts .are different. So that the same phrase as applied under facts A would have a different result than when applied to facts B. This involves semantics and interpretation. But when we have to write a legal opinion, the first thing we do when we have to write a legal opinion or something with the Charter's meaning, the first thing we do is go' orer to the legislative auditor's office and we get the minutes for the . Charter Commission of 1965, 1966, and I think it was 1964, at any rate there were three Charter Commissionsthat convened before this, before the final document was completed. And we have to read through all the testimonies and find out what the people who composed this language meant or what they • intended, it to mean so if you don't give a good free-wheeling discussion on the language and what you wanted' it .to mean, we're stuck and there's no way we can interpret' it; we don't know what you intended; say ten years from now that there is a legal opinion sent to somebody upstairs and they want to know what is meant by general supervision by the Mayor for instance; the first thing we're going to do is look at all the minutes and see what you intended it to mean, what you thought it might mean and by you I. mean collectively the members of the Commission. So I would suggest that it's up to you whether you want to expend this amount of time cause it will be a sacrifice for all of You. And And, I would suggest that you make a record, a thorough record, of everybody's -3- 5/23/79 Meeting opinion and try to think of all the ramifications or applications of the various provisions of this particular chapter; then when you testify before the Charter Commission, in addition to oral testimony you could submit as an exhibit and evidence transcribed copies of all of your discussion to the Charter Commission and ask them to incorporate those documents into their considerations if you want to do that, but that's up to you; I 'm just telling you that. You see, look at this agenda everything on there is what does the corporation counselsay, what is the opinion from the corporation counsel , you send everything upstairs to us and we have to interpret. Frequently, we have to interpret policies which is not our prerogative or jurisdiction; unless we know what the drafters meant, we are just giving you our opinion • and not what you want it to mean. TANAKA: Thank you. Again, I just want to refer back to the testimony that I did make to the County Charter Commission; and on the second page, Mr. , Commissioner Ishida . asked me and I 'd like to read that again because I think that was the most important point: Just a point of information, Mr. Tanaka. When the water commission does, in fact, arrive at a position will the party who appears before us be prepared to give the rationale as to why the position that is taken by the organization? Many times peopleappear before us and just state positions and they do not give us a rationale as to why they think their position should be honored. So I would like you to take that into consideration when your commission does, in fact, arrive at a position. Okay. So I just wanted again, too, to mention on that; I 'm sure that the Charter Commission members are very interested in you know again, too, the rationale behind any of our considerations and recommendations to them. Okay, moving on: Section 8-2. Water Commission. The water commission shall consist of nine members who shall be appointed by the mayor with the approval of the council in the manner prescribed in Section 13-4. Commission membership shall be representative • of the community and of the county geographical areas of Puna, Kau, Kona, Kohala, Hamakua, and Hilo. The Manager o1 the department of water supply, the planning director and the chief engineer of the county or their designated representatives shall serve as ex-officio members of the water commission without power to vote. The water commission shall : Up to there, again, referring back to Mr. Fujimoto's testimony to the Charter Commission. You had some suggestions over there; would you like to • clarify to us? -4- 5/23/79 Meeting e , MANAGER.: Ed, ,you have that one on the geographical areas. TANAKA: You know again, too, the rationale; that's what we're looking for. DEPUTY Section 8-2. MANAGER: • TANAKA: Correct. MANAGER: They don' t say how many to come from each district. DEPUTY Okay; the only reason we are recommedning a specific number requirement is that MANAGER: it is not set under the existing Charter. I don't know how important that is but one could appoint more than one person from a minority district that • could happen and that's the reason why we did ask for a specific number requirements. TANAKA: Did you folks suggest any number? Do you have any suggestions for a number? DEPUTY . No. MANAGER: MANAGER: Previously, the chief engineer and planning director were allowed to vote; why they took it out, I 'don't know. IIDA: So actually, presently; Toku, you're from Hamakua. TANAKA: North Hilo. IIDA: North Hilo; but there's no North Hilo. TANAKA: That's right; no more North Hilo in here. . Exactly. IIDA: • And you're Hamakua. KAWAMATA: Two from Hilo. TANAKA: ' Three would be actually. SUGIOKA: There are three from Hilo. TANAKA: If we consider North Hilo, Hilo. SUGIOKA: That would make 'nine commissioners. IIDA: • There's no Waimea either. SUGIOKA: Even here in the Charter we don't have North and South Kohala either. TANAKA: Correct. SUGIOKA: And yet we have two. IIDA: One South and North. KAWAMATA: Kona has one; that's where they're short. IIDA: So in addition to the, well you're just saying that you want a specific requirement over there. -5- �' 5/23/79 Meeting • DEPUTY No', we're not saying what we want; we're just bringing up these recommendations MANAGER: • for disucssion for the Commission for them to decide on the number. . • IIDA: Okay.. TANAKA: They have no recommendation as to how it should be prorated. KLECKNER: At this point, am I to understand that it is arbitrary? TANAKA: At the present time, that's the discretion of the Mayor and the Council . DEPUTY MANAGER:.. But they have to have. at least one from each of the districts that's listed. TANAKA: Correct. At least one from each of the five districts listed specifically. SUGIOKA: You see this has only six locations . TANAKA: Six. I 'm sorry. Correct. Six. SUGIOKA: They have to get two or three for that matter from one district . TANAKA: Again, too, this is open discussion, right, 'you know free discussion for us to express ourselves and our thoughts notto make any recommendations at this time but just to make our thoughts and take our notes if we would like to make specific recommendations and again, too, we're just making recommendations . Okay. Again, too, that's why my initial question to Ed was you know does it have any problem with regard to the operations and the functioning of the Department and the Commission. DEPUTY No because they've been appointed correctly as to the number of people from MANAGER: each district; they are well represented. TANAKA: Okay. No other discussion on that area? MANAGER: You know within that, too, .you know in, we didn't bring it .up, but like I mentioned before the- chief engineer was on the board and he had the voting power; and Honolulu they have the public works engineer and even 'the state transportation highway engineer on the board. TANAKA: And voting members of the board. • MANAGER: Yes . TANAKA: Is Duane still here. KANUHA: Yes. TANAKA: I saw him come in., Duane Kanuha is the assistant from Planning and I just wanted to ask you your personal feelings about that. You think that it would ' help in the deliberations of this Commission if your boss, Mr. Fuke, would have the power to vote on this Commission? . ' • • -6- • , ' • 5/23/79 Meeting • DEPUTY PLANNING Instead of being ex-officio, .you mean have a vote? DIRECTOR: At the top of my head, there are advantages and disadvantages. TANAKA: Go ahead. DEPUTY PLANNING Again, it depends on whether or not the Commission itself still retains DIRECTOR.: semiautonomous status . If it does, then I would suspect it would be more . beneficial ; you would have more active participation on our part perhaps and also that of the chief engineer. • TANAKA: Thank you. Mr. Kuba, you have any thoughts since you're representing Mr. Harada? KUBA: I think I would have to concur. TANAKA: WithDuane so that what you're saying is that if it's semiautonomous, if it stays semiautonomous, you would think that vote would mean having a member • from the public works voting on the Commission would be important to the • functions of the Department. • . MANAGER: Then the chief engineer has, to come. IIDA: That's right. TANAKA: Okay, all right. Anybody else have any comments to make in this particular area? Okay. Can we take--- KEAWE: Mr. Chairman. . TANAKA: Yes , Clarence. • KEAWE: It's kind of hard to explain why you mention nine members on the Commission and then just six geographical areas. Couldn't you mention the nine geographical areas? TANAKA: As .a suggestion, sure. IIDA: Well , just prior to what you know the other thing that came up, I just thought that• I think, I feel and I think that it was written this way because probably they figured it would be difficult to get people- to serve from this. certain other geographic areas and if you tie yourself up by designating nine you know you might -have; I don't know, I could be wrong; but that thought just came up. MANAGER: One thing you got to realize, too, on this Commission, the 5-year term is really short;. you know really your term is really short because there's a lot • of hard decisions you 'got to make in money financing kind, an important • thing; that by the time you learn, for anybody to learn you know what's -7- i_k x 'N A 5/23/79 Meeting really going on, it's really going to take not one year; but through our experience that- we have met with other commissioners, prior commissioners ; by the time they come about the last year, then they really, they get to know what'sgoing on and they're about ready to get out, you know; so the term is really short. TANAKA: ' He' s referring to another section of the Charter. MANAGER: That's right. TANAKA': Which has to. do with Commission. That's a valid point. Thank you. Again, going back to Section 8-2, we have items a, .b, c, d, e, and f .and I will not read it at this time, you all . can read and you're getting tired of hearing my voice; so let's just you know open it up again for any specific questions and any items that you may not be, is not clear to you or you would like to have clarified or you would like to have somebody from the Department interpret it. Let's try. MANAGER: I think most of these were taken from the revised laws but it's broken down to short form, concise. TANAKA: • I have a question which again is kind of vague to me is adopt rules and regulations which shall have the force and effect of law, item b, relating to the management, control , operation, preservation and protection of the waterworks of the county. Do you find it inconsistent when we still have to submit our table of organization, like to what you just mentioned, like to the Council or to the union or to civil service people and so that actually we still have to get somebody else to approve other than ourselves and yet it says that it says you know it says it has - the force and effect of law. MANAGER: It gets confusing. So this is one of the points that we broughtup in our recommendations to the Charter Commission that we don't have to go; we have the power to, the Commission has the power to do it so when it goes to the administration, well , maybe it should be just filed and recorded and sent to • the Lieutenant Governor's office, wherever you know, it doesn't have to be approved again. I think that was one of my recommendations; and you know I think in the Charter you know there's some exceptions in there which doesn't clearly pinpoint what the exceptions are. -8- 5/23/79 Meeting TANAKA: Again, referring back to what our Department Manager presented to the Charter Commission you know he has a whole bunch of recommendations which he did present to them. MANAGER: Not at the hearing but I had asked permission. if I could because I didn't know that because when they first asked us to go to the public hearing, we had the impression that they just wanted to know how the Department operated without making recommendations ; but after they're asking all previous commission and boards, like Police Commission, and they asked me about recommendations on certain things , and I said if I can submit what we think and we had prepared this. DEPUTY Mr. Chairman. MANAGER: TANAKA: , Yes. DEPUTY I 'd just like to make something clear about our table of organization. We MANAGER: submit it to Personnel Services as a matter of, basically as a matter of, courtesy because they are the ones that have to approve the positions that we are trying to create. They are the ones that have to submit the resolution to the County Council insofar as positions are concerned, but they don't approve our table of organization, neither does the union. In the bargaining contract with the unions , we are to consult with them whenever there are any policy or personnel changes,. So, it's not an approval that we are requesting from , these bodies. TANAKA: Oh, I see. Any other questions with regard to items a to f? How about Section 8-3? IIDA: Okay, I think I asked Roxanna at the last time about this one where this one where it says -HT manager of the department shall be appointed by the water commission and removed by the water commission and whether this really should be done annually or you know what is the situation. KAWAMATA: I think Roxanna said it was our discretion as to what we want to do. ASSISTANT It' s up to you. In other, words, are you going to keep the manager dangling CORPORATION COUNSEL: whether he will be confirmed every year or not. Do you think it' s more inducive to a stable staff to leave it this way? It's up to you. • -9- ' 5/23/79 Meeting IIDA: . Okay, the way it is .then; it doesn't say so I don't know. ASSISTANT . No. What you can say if you .are going to remove him, it would have to be CORPORATION COUNSEL: for cause. • IIDA: Right. I just wondered procedurewise, it's here you know. • ASSISTANT . But he doesn't. have any, the manager and the deputy manager are not civil CORPORATION COUNSEL: • service just like our office; we're not civil service; so we have no • protection so if you want to fire us today, then we're out; we have no mechanism for appeal . The only thing we- could .is file a' civil suit against the commission for instance if I 'm the water commission, the water department manager, and you fire me, ,there is no hearing and no information at all and • why, I could file' a suit against you but I don't have any recourse through the union. AndI thinkyyou also asked me about whether the deputy should be • appointed by the commission; again, that'synur , you to decide that I think • . what you should consider though is you have a team, whether it's better or not for the manager to -have someone he wants to Work with. IIDA: No,' that question was whether we should hire the deputy also. I just saw you know that it said Manager shall be a registered engineer; it doesn't say anything .about the deputy .so I questioned whether the deputy should also be a registered engineer should anything happen to the manager then. • ASSISTANT Oh, that's right. Your question was since the- deputy manager is not required CORPORATION • COUNSEL: to be a registered engineer and if he's not'and something happens to the manager, can the deputy manager act as acting manager' until such time as you name a new manager. All right, talk about that. • IIDA: I don't know, I feel if the Commission had felt before. that the manager should be a registered engineer then, you know, the number two position should also be the you know same kind of requirements. Like you know, let's say something happened to the President, you- know the Vice President is there and he's qualified to be the President. • ASSISTANT Or you could provide for that because you see the provisions here for the CORPORATION COUNSEL: mayor in the eventthe mayor is unable to serve, then the managing director • • • shall act as acting mayor; and in the event he also becomes unable to serve, then the director of finance shall act,as the acting mayor. That's provided • -10-. • . 2 ' 5/23/79 Meeting . for in the Charter. So it's up: to you, you're going to have to talk this over and ask Ed and Akira what they think; but if you 're worried about that, you can provide for it in the event the manager becomes unable to serve, the deputy manager shall serve as acting manager until such time that you can hire, but this is my testimony now. • I 'm going to go out here now because you folks are the ones that ought to stand up here and put it on the record because the Corporation Counsel ten • years from now maybe reading this and saying oh, that Roxanna Garcia. . . MANAGER: Well , really it' s up to the guy; really, when you come down to it, up to the individual whose in there - how well they can work, how well they can set up their organization because even right now, too, I don't depend myself on engineering,. I depend on 'qualified guys to work under me because if I were to spend my time in doing engineering per se, I would forget about my other operations, like fiscal. and operations - I got from laborer up to the engineers , I have to deal with state officials, legislators, like that and you know I don't have,time for that, but you know lot of things you know are accepted fact that when it' s engineering, I depend on the engineering division. IIDA: Okay, then in effect are you saying, so you know-- MANAGER: And Ed does that too'. IIDA: Okay, then in effect are you saying that in your position it doesn 't have to be a registered engineer. MANAGER: No, I don't want to say that because maybe because I 'm a. registered engineer that I have a lot of times when I can go and talk with other engineers, talk to legislators and I can talk to maybe consulting engineers like that because lots of things deals with projects, money. TANAKA: So you feel it's important. MANAGER: Well , it helps; put it that way. • KLECKNER: I think, I think when you talk about administrative level positions like head of an operation, head of a department, whatever, you have to take a look at the skills. You have different levels of managerial skills that come • into the picture. For your foreman level , you have a lot of what you call • -11- { t 5/23/79 Meeting vocational skills which are very important, you must know the intricacies of the job you are going to perform. As you get higher up the ladder, the degree . of vocational skills an individual needs become less and less and the so-called administrative skills then start. becoming more and more important particulary as you know head of an operation, the administrative skills often times much', much more important although I think having come up through the various managerial levels , the individual who has the extra credential such as a professional engineer's certificate or whatever, it's a definite plus , it enables the individual perhaps to see "things that a 'pure administrator would not, but I would think at that level , the emphasis has to be on the administrative skills and not the technical skills of the individual . TANAKA: I have a question to Akira. Back you know because we were all not here now, back when you first came On board as the Department Manager, you had the opportunity to hire Ed or was Ed already here. • MANAGER. He was here. TANAKA: As the--- MANAGER: In fact, he was here before me. - TANAKA: He was the assistant here already. HOHU: No, no,- he knew I was a good thing, so he hired me. MANAGER: . Okay.. Put it this way. When the Department was organized, it was organized in 1950, I graduated from the university then and I got a job at the County Public Works and Bill Thompson, my classmate, got hired at the Board of Water Supply and Ed was with the Board of Water Supply; in fact, he was with . the Burau of Waterworks in the County. And, in 1961 , when the first Manager Cappy Chun retired, Bill Thompson became manager and then I became his deputy; and, at that time, Ed became an engineer and he worked his way from draftsman, engineering aid. And you know as a deputy I was more in charge of the engineering so we started our standards because the problems we had before the County use to use substandard materials because money, not being able to have enough funds, they had galvanized iron pipes here and there; because of politics , the lines were improperly designed just to satisfy some people, -12 • - • 5/23/79 Meeting they extended lines and you know we had lots of problems; in fact, the department didn't have money. In fact, when I was in public works, the department use to borrow a simple drafting tool from us; that'.s how poor we were but they had a lot of heartand a lot of hard work and these are the people you know after I came deputy I didn't eventhink life was that • miserable you know so many problems all over the place. And in 1968 when the Manager resigned, I didn't want the job; I refused the job but they asked me to take the Manager's job, so I took the job; and at that time, we had drought in Hamakua, drought in Kohala, Puna and we had pump problems in Puna, Pahoa and Ka'u--all over .the place; boy, I wanted to quit; I didn 't want the job you know and I needed a deputy and I think the only guy that really, the most practical guy I can get, the most qualified guy who knows the problems and the work of the department was Ed. That's why I picked Ed. TANAKA: Okay. Now at that time in 1968, this Charter was in. When you got. to be the deputy this was already in force so you knew,you don't have a registered license, right? DEPUTY I have a surveyor' s license. • MANAGER: TANAKA: But not an engineer's license. MANAGER: He has a surveyor's license. TANAKA: So at that time you took the. position --- MANAGER: He didn't want to, but I begged him to take it. TANAKA: Right, you knew thatyou could never be under the Charter, the manager. 9 9 DEPUTY Right. MANAGER: TANAKA: Right and he' knew if anything happened to you, that no way could he be the manager. DEPUTY Right, under the existing Charter; it's there, can't do anything about it. MANAGER: TANAKA: Because it gets to be a concern again you know to us as commissioners and you know we don' t wish you and Akira, but if anything happens. to him, you know our problem is noway we can have the number two man who supposed to know about the Department and comes with this recommendation., right, no way he can be the Manager. • -13- • 5/23/79 Meeting DEPUTY Wait, wait, I take exception to your remark, who supposed to know about the MANAGER: Department, what do you mean by that? TANAKA: Because you're he's assistant. DEPUTY Well , I do know about the Department; that's why I take exception to your MANAGER: remark. IIDA: He's saying that--- MANAGER: I have a lot of confidence in him in running the Department and he has the same rapport that I have with, I 'm sure, the legislators , with state officials , with the other water departments and mainland officials like that. KAWAMATA: Mr. Chairman, I think we could be playing with this all night and I don't think it's that important and we should discuss all the different sections; but I think, I believe, that maybe somehow or another if we had a discussion that would give us some pros and cons as ,to whether this body shall be a semiautonomous body or be a body organized under the mayor, it it's one way or the other, then all these things we're discussing right now would probably be something that you know would not be necessary to discuss as such. TANAKA: Okay. Good point. All right I think that we pretty much covered Section, Article 8-2, in general that's all I wanted to do, give everybody an opportunity to voice different angles, different situations; and at this time, I 'm prepared at this time, to review specifically the discussion or the presentation again by Akira to the Charter and also his letter to us. Okay. MANAGER: Well , let me tell you something; the letter you know, I didn't write this; it was one of our employees that wrote it. TANAKA: So anyway relating to that, my point is and taking into consideration Raymond's point is the autonomy of the Water Department or the semiautonomy of the Water Department or the consideration of having it be, have the Department be placed under the direct supervision of the mayor. All right, I 'd like to open it up by asking specific questions to this, whoever in the Department wrote this , can I? MANAGER: Well , we can all answer that. TANAKA: Okay. I 'll just ask questions in there. When I read this you know, I get the feeling that the writerof this presentation to 'us is saying that there -14- 5/23/79 Meeting • is no politics in the Water Department and because of its semiautonomy,. is there no politics or never"was or does not exist now? TENGAN: , Mr.- Chairman, I wrote that, what you're reading now. TANAKA: Okay. TENGAN: I wouldn't say that today there's no politics that goes on in the Department; however, under the semiautonomous body having representatives from the • community, nonelected representatives from the community,. serving on the • Water Commission to ru.n .the Water Department can and probably, well in my opinion is, that's subject to local politics then if you're directly • under the mayor type or even directly under the council who are' politicians,. That was kind of the basis of my writing. MANAGER: Another thing, maybe through my experience being a Department head, one of the department heads in public works and as "the .Manager of the Department • of Water Supply, you know, you play politics. When I was in Public Works because 'I 'm an: appointee, I 'm forced you know. to take an active role in politics; intact,' at one time, under one administration, I even gave campaign speeches but even in the Department .of Water Supply, the only type of politics I would play is to support the administration because we are part of it; but not go actively be a leader of that because the philosophy • back of this semiautonomy was that to keep it out of politics. And, of course, we support' the legislators who help us; but not actively; and really, it's not for .personal thing, but for the good of the department in getting . funding like that, appropriations like that, so it's always a matter of voluntary kind of stuff; even our personnel in the department they are not asked. to support 'certain,' certain people like that, but if they want to help because of or for the department's purpose, they would. • TANAKA: Again, too, you know in the second paragraph where you're talking about; • here in the memo, that bad politics arise when individuals,' too, look at .their financial gains and bad politics arise when are. paid .off or special • interest groups are mentioned along with bad politics as a definition of bad politics. George, correct?' -15- > . 5/23/79 Meeting TENGAN: Well, that was just to cite some examples that hati happened in the past and even in today, for instance Cyrus Vance was indicted by the grand jury. MANAGER: Bert Lance. TENGAN: Oh, Bert Lance. That's the kind of examples what I was trying to get in terms of bad politics. TANAKA: Because again, too, you know my concern gets to be even in ourselves in the Department of Water Supply we get to be a.'special interest group, we're especially interested in the development of water, good water quality and good water system, right? MANAGER: What's bad about that? TANAKA: So what's bad about that you know that's what I 'm saying, what's bad about the terminology like saying people have special interest, that's what I 'm questioning. Okay. TENGAN: When I refer to special interest group, I'm talking about may be certain people getting together to really put something that would benefit them and not necessarily be good for the entire community. .This is what I refer to as special interest group. But when you're talking of the Water Commission as a special interest group who look over the development of water throughout the entire island, it's going to benefit the entire island; that's the good kind though of special interest group. TANAKA: Yes, that's why I was you know just saying, get goodkind and bad. TENGAN: Right. What I was trying to do here is point out certain things to the Water Commission that I believe you should give thoughtto; whether you believe me or not, that's your prerogative and your decision; however, I want to raise certain questions I think that you should consider in your deliberations. MANAGER: I think what should really be weighed is look at the record and then will the record of what the department has done under the Commission and weigh it against if it were to go to the Mayor would you 'have the same accomplishments? That's the big issue. TENGA.N: . Mr. Chairman, may I clarify why this thing was writtenin the first place? TANAKA: Okay. -16- • 5/23/79 Meeting • TENGAN: _Initially, we've been getting copies of the -Charter Commission minutes •• and I 've been going through each and every one 'of them relating what I see to what's going on here to the statements that are presented to the Charter Commission. And in many cases, I see .that a. lot of comments are unsubstantiated, • they are unfair charges against the department; and so in order to just please myself, I started writing down things that I felt were wrong statements made by people in the community to the Charter Commission and so in the meantime • • this thing just built up and built up and we decided well why not present it to the Water Commission. TANAKA: And again, that's why my questions to some-of these things because again, too, these are not substantiated. statements that you are making here, right? These are just assumptions from your part. TENGAN: ` Well , when you .get down to the facts about the accomplishments of the department, about the water department itself, I don't think those figures - or that presentation is to me undisputable. . TANAKA: Correct. :I 'm not questioning you on that; I 'm questioning you about, what I 'm asking you right now. TENGAN: Yes. Some of the things are my own feelings. that I 'm saying that the Water Commission if they're going to take the stand on the Charter., I think each and . everyone of the members should give thought to these ideas and come to their own conclusion and whether you' /ant to take in what I say as to be true you know that's ,up. to you; I 'm saying that you should think about these things. . TANAKA: But you're not saying this is fact. • • TENGAN: Yes. A lot ..of the points was brought up to raise questions, but when we get down to the accomplishments of the department; that's fact. TANAKA: • I also read all of the testimony given to the Charter Commission and in some of the statements here you say, abolish the Water Commission;. but not everybody has recommended abolishing of the Water Commission; am' I` correct? TENGAN: No, not everybody.' TANAKA: Okay, some of the people. • TENGAN:' Asubstantial number of people have recommended. • • -17- ' 5/23/79 Meeting TANAKA: Some of the people have not even in fact mentioned any kind of abolishment of the commission but just the direct supervision, right, the direct department management. TENGAN: I think you find in the Kona area they are more concerned about representation on the Council and getting more out of the budget but when you get into the Hilo area and this is where the groups are saying that the Water Commission should be abolished. I can name you a few groups, one is the UPW, another one is the Chamber of Commerce of Hawaii , the other one is the Japanese Chamber, and the fourth group is the Hilo Contractors ' Association. MANAGER: But those are just the legislative committees. TENGAN: Yes. And in the case of the Hawaii Island Chamber, I know for a fact that they did not poll the members-because for one thing, they mention in their minutes that they only presented their report to the Board which took action and I think a group like that if they're going to endorse candidates, poll the members to endorse these candidates, on something like this , they should also poll the members; and I 'm a member of the Hawaii Chamber and I wasn't polled and that's why I got ticked off. TANAKA: Okay. Thank you. Moving on, on the growth of the department where you're talking, this is the facts, right? TENGAN: Right. TANAKA: . Growth of the department, those items a erythingin there, that' s facts , right? Okay, again, too, under the second page where you said a good example of this growth is in Kona, are you implying then here which is fact you know Kona is growing; are you implying here that the Department of Water Supply initiated the growth and development of the water systems of Kona? DEPUTY MANAGER: That's right. TANAKA: You know I 'm just--- DEPUTY That's a fact. May I elaborate on that? MANAGER: TANAKA: Okay. , Good. Thank you. DEPUTY . Prior to a public water system going to Kona, Kona Inn owned the water system MANAGER: and it consisted of small diameter galvanized iron pipes, a couple of redwood tanks , and two half million steel tanks and the State, then under the Hawaii =18- • ' • A . 5/23/79 Meeting •Water Authority, appropriated some money and worked with the department at that time Mr. Chun was the manager, ,worked with the department to purchase the system. The sale of the-system was made back in the early 50's I think, • I don't recall exactly; from that .the growth of the water system began. Money . was appropriated by the state legislature year, after year and at time, bonds were issued by the department for improvements to the system. So yes, that's a fact, the Department of Water Supply, then called the Board of Water Supply, did initiate the growth of the water system. . MANAGER: And .from then .on, we've been working with the state in. the development.of the . water systemsthroughout the island, especially Kona. TANAKA: Because you know I get different remarks when I .talk to people who worked for • the state or who are legislators and senators saying that it was them because • they say they're the people that initiated the development of the 'water system. DEPUTY I 'm glad you asked. ' It was Mr. Chun and the Hawaii Water Authority that worked MANAGER: . together to purchase the Intersland water system.with Dudley Child. TANAKA: . And subsequent to that like the Kahaluu Shaft. well and everything like that • is the initiation. of the department, but not and. not the state people. MANAGE • You can't say that. MANAGER: • MANAGER:. ' We work together; we consult each other. DEPUTY It's a b effort ti coo erave etween. the state and count MANAGER: py government to improve the water system. MANAGER: . That's why lots of times., we ask for delegation of funds and we get them, and it• happened in Kona right through. TANAKA: Under the, George, under your figures, .the statistics, that you give relative to the growth from. 1949 to 1978,' I don't see a couple of figures like the cost of you know you have operating revenue but.you don't show the expenses and also • you show the number .of employees, you don't show 'the cost of the employees. • • Is there. a special reason for leaving those put? . • .TENGAN: This portion here was taken out of, our presentation that the department • initially made to. the Charter Review Commission so what I did I just took • it out and stuck it in. , This, the data presented here, indicates the growth in the department which is the subject of the particular section here, which 719- 5/23/79 Meeting • is to illustrate the growth of the Department and its water systems and it's not to show the growth in our operations ,, the operating expenses per se.. TANAKA: Okay. Anybody else have any other questions to this area? Anybody else have anything else they want to bring up? Anybody want to speak or make--- DEPUTY I 'd just like to make one comment. It would really be interesting and very . - MANAGER: informative to the Commission members if you could find the time to read the Charter Reivew Committee minutes. There are, so many false statements in there and I can give you some very specific examples . Fred Koehnen, who I believe was the last Chairman of the Charter Review Committee, made a statement that the Honolulu Board of Water Supply was under the administration of' the Mayor; and this is entirely false. And the committee just goes on; nobody question that. They take it for what he says. Jack Konno made so many statements that he could not back up such as the employees of the Board of Water Supply want to go under the County; that .it would be cheaper for us to do our own work and repair on vehicles instead of contracting, that sort of things; we have facts to prove so, that it is not so. If you guys could just find the time to just go• over, you'd be surprised what you read. TANAKA: Like I said it before, I read everything. I read all of it. DEPUTY For the guys who have not. MANAGER: TANAKA: And .I agree' with you that there are discrepancies in some other facts that I found out otherwise but alongwith that . because of the Department's strong P stand, right, with regard to keeping it semiautonomous , are you folks planning to go to the public hearings to rebut any of these statements or you're going to just. let it be, without any clarification? DEPUTY Well , maybe the Commission should do something. • 'MANAGER: MANAGER: We feel that, I guess when. I say this, most of the employees feel , that we . would .like to see the Commission support us, support the Department. I understand the HGEA is going to support us and they have some groups that are going to support the semiautonomous part. TANAKA: Again, my questions, okay along the same lines, going back to the initial presentation, I notice some other department heads who were asked to present • -20- t I. . 5/23/79 Meeting testimony to the-.Charter Commission you know asked to be .excused because they were not prepared or they didn't have anything ready and I just wondered why it Was not brought before us for our consideration in terms of the initial proposals before it actually went before the Charter Commission. MANAGER: Because we didn' t have time to contact you. It was just a last minute thing; on,a •certain date, please come and testify and let us know about your Department and so at that time I had to go to Honolulu because we had the first •Finance :Committee hearing so I asked Ed to draft it outand we went • through the draft. and I came back that afternoon and presented that to the Charter Commission. • TANAKA: • No, but that's the point I 'm making. Some other department heads didn't make their presentation at the time they were scheduled to and they asked to be you know moved' to another time and I just wondered why. . . MAMANGER: We tried to. get it moved, but all they did was extend the time from 3:00 to 5:00 . TANAKA: • • Okay. MANAGER: At least. I checked. with Jerry, he was the Chairman. KAWAMATA: . Mr. Chairman, may I- say something. . TANAKA: Yes. KAWAMATA: . . .I think I 'm making an assumption, an assumption, that the staff, the entire water department staff, wants to be semiautonomous including all personnel of the Department of Water Supply.-- DEPUTY You cannot--- • MANAGER: TENGAN: That's an incorrect assumption. DEPUTY • You cannot make that assumption. MANAGER: TENGAN: We haven't polled the employees, so we don't know. • • TANAKA: You're just asking him to clarify the statement that he just made.. KAWAMATA: From what I thought that the poll, stated that. MANAGER: No, we didn't say about a poll . KAWAMATA: No, the general feeling was that. -21- 5/23/79 Meeting MANAGER: I 'm sure because I got word today that HGEA is going along with keeping. it semiautonomous . DEPUTY Well , if you read, well if you get back to the minutes, Jack Konno stated the MANAGER: employees wanted to be under the administration of the Mayor; then when he was asked to be very specific as to how many, he couldn't answer that. I think .he talked about one guy, this one person; but he didn't make a poll and yet he made a statement like that which we cannot make - it's a gut feeling • on us ,' but that' s no good. It would be wrong for 'us to make a statement like that; I don 't see how Jack Konno can make a statement like that. TENGAN: As far as polling the employees , I think it would be very difficult from the Manager' s position or even from the division heads if we are to conduct a poll because they may feel that we are pressuring them. KAWAMATA: Then, have the Chairman conduct a poll . TENGAN: • . Maybe the Water Commission. KAWAMATA: ' How about conducting a poll? KLECKNER: Yes, well , the question would be though what purpose would the poll serve. • It's our decision. MANAGER: That's right and when you look at it this way, you're appointed to the Commission you know to be part of the department. KLECKNER: As I understand it, Earl , after all the discussion is over and done with, we may, we have the option of not making any decision.. Correct? TANAKA: Correct. .That is correct. We may not make any recommendation at all you know. it' s up to us you know again as a body and that is the way you know it was presented to us if we do,not wish to make any recommendation, we can do so, we can stay mute and not make any recommendation; that's a decision that we have to make. IIDA: You know since you're talking about that, we didn't d is cus s Section 8-5 but in light of what Delmar said, it says supervision, administrative supervision, the Department of Water Supply shall come under the general supervision and control of the Mayor. I don't know, to me, this, what it really, there will be so much interpretation as to what is general supervision and control and. . . .so in light of what Del 's saying, too, here, you know, whether we propose • -22- f 4 t 5/23/79 Meeting changes to specific areas here or whether we keep it the same; if we keep it the same, let's say we agree to remain semiautonomous and I think the gray areas like you know 8-5, I don't know how we can change it but to me that's too general you know a statement or whatever; there's no real meaning to me. MANAGER: The newspaper, Hugh Clark's newspaper, quoted that I was one that said abolish, but that's not right. Civil Service says abolish that and Police says abolish that section. When they asked me, the only thing I told them this thing should be clarified instead of abolishing because to me I thought that the direction of the County, you got to follow one direction and where the County is going and that' s from the mayor and so it should be clarified to say what it means . I didn't say abolish that portion if you look into the Charter Commission minutes; but Hugh Clark said I said to abolish that section. I think we all should know where the whole County is headed for and that's where the general supervision will come in, not specific supervision like cooperation, that's the Commission 's job; that's why we go to cabinet meetings like that to know what's going on, what's the thinking of the County, the administration, where they want to go, the direction. IIDA: So that what you're saying maybe-- MANAGER: It should be clarified, define this. IIDA: What general supervision is and what control is. MANAGER: Instead of leaving it up to interpretation; some people don't know how to interpret this like the Police Commission and maybe Civil Service Commission like when they say knock it off, you know I didn't go along with that. IIDA: Yes, I remember reading that. TANAKA: Thank you for bringing that up. I think that you know we're very uncomfortable with Section 8-4 you know its a too broad and general area and but I still don't know how we can clarify it; personally, I don't have any specific recommendations in terms of clarifying that particular area but does anybody else have, does anybody else have anything specific with regard to general supervision? KAWAMATA: Maybe the Mayor' s office can do some clarification on that. Let the Mayor tell us what it is . -23- v E `. r • 5/23/79 Meeting KLECKNER: Well , may be it' s our prerogative to define it whether it gets accepted or not; but you know we are in a_ positi'on to define it, but the thing is headed with the term administrative supervision, it doesn't say operational supervision; it doesn't say, it doesn't specify other types of supervision but they talk about administrative supervision and that term in itself is very broad and very general . The way ,I feel that perhaps it has functioned or being interpreted at least up to now is a very loose interpretation because previous to that they talk about the semiautonomous nature of the Department of Water Supply and I think that has to be taken into account when you look at this particular statement for some of the other departments won' t have the same meaning. TANAKA: I know the night is drawing long and again, too, at this time is there anyone who would like to make specific recommendations, even not. specific, make - any recommendations to the Charter Commission on any level other than what has already been given as testimony to the Charter Commission, or if anybody would like to again as Commission members reemphasize something that we could consider at this time? IIDA: When is the next time that you know are we scheduled fora certain time or-- TANAKA: I just mentioned to them that we would be discussing I didn 't know whether we would be taking any action and I did get a copy of their schedule and the Charter Commission will still be having, continue to draft revisions to the Charter in June, in all of June they're going to finalize the draft, revisions, the first draft by June 19. But they're still going to have drafts and revisions with the attorneys and the deadline for a special election is November 3rd of 1979 and so that when I did discuss this matter with the Corporation Counsel, Steve Bess, before he left for the mainland, he said you know another thing, too, you know this is going to be the first time that we're going to discuss it, we've mentioned about it but we've never sat down and discussed it that you know it's not necessary for you to take any action you know at any specific kind of meeting, but again it' s the wishes of the majority of this Commission and so that we can then look at it and we can still consider it for further consideration. It's not--- IIDA: But you see, well you know I 'm thinking supposing if you know whatever, let's suppose we don't make any appearances and theCharter Commission is swayed -24- v 5/23/79 Meeting the other way that we abolish the semiautonomous water board? If we wait until then, I don't know what you know everybody' s position over here is, but if you wait until then, then we're not going to be prepared, right? TANAKA: That is correct. IIDA: To counter all the charges or whatever. TANAKA: But then again, too, there is time you know in looking at the Charter review schedule, they have a full complete schedule. KLECKNER: When is their last meeting in June. / TANAKA: Finalize draft of Charter revisions . Let's see, the get first draft and second draft. It says here August 7, finalize draft to Charter, revisions , second draft. August 7. KLECKNER: When is the last day for testimony to be included in' their deliberations? TANAKA: I really don 't know by this and to my understanding, I 'm assuming that it depends on them when they want to cutoff any more testimony to any revisions you know it gets to be--- DEPUTY Mr. Chairman. MANAGER: TANAKA: Yes. DEPUTY A question just came to my mind. I wondered if it wouldn't be too late to do MANAGER: anything after the first draft. MANAGER: You know they are really .looking for input, concrete input, so that .they can start drafting out the Charter. TANAKA: And, if that's the case; well , I don 't know. Roxanna, maybe you can help. ASSISTANT No. Call Stuart Oda and ask him. We can't have anything to do, our office CORPORATION COUNSEL: has nothing to do with the Charter Commission. TANAKA: Oh, I see. ASSISTANT Stuart Oda is their attorney so give him a call and ask him if they're going CORPORATION COUNSEL: to close public input after the first draft. KAWAMATA: Why don't we have a special meeting. . . ? TANAKA: By the way I look at this agenda, their agenda, they're going to finalize. draft of Charter revisions, first draft, June 19th and our next meeting is June 20th. -25- 5/23/79 Meeting KAWAMATA:' We should have a special meeting at least one week before or something and go over this again. TANAKA: Any: other discussion? KAWAMATA: At that time, at that special meeting, I 'd like to hear different inputs from other people. TANAKA: Any specific, you have anybody in mind.? KAWAMATA: Administration people. You seethe last time.the Mayor was here and' it was sort of embarrassing for us at that time with all the wordsgoing back and forth: MANAGER: You know I hate to say this you know like-you: get Public Works you know • Ed Harada came -down after he had testified, we didn't know 'he testified, when he came down to us he apologized he said, look you might read this thing. in the newspaper, but I never meant it that way because the Mayor took 'the position that he wanted to abolish and get everything under him, that, he had to take the position. So what he said was.. really ridiculous from outstandpoint,. but he apologized and said I had to. say that. Same thing with Sidney. KAWAMATA: I 'd like to see the thing' go ,you know ina civilized manner than what it was • or how it went the last time when the Mayor sat here. , There was a hard exchange of words between the staff of the water department and himself. • TANAKA: Okay, we still have, well , we didn't do nothing now; "our next meeting is, scheduled for, I will .announce it again, our next meeting is scheduled for • • 'June 20th at 1 :00 p.m. SUGIOKA: Somebody has suggested a special meeting. Didn't somebody suggest a special meeting? . . TANAKA: Raymond suggested a special meeting. SUGIOKA: To discuss only the Charter review. TANAKA: Again, too, June 2nd, I 'm gone so I don't want to influence you guys to meet on .a day that you guys don't-want to. KAWAMATA: When are you coming back? " TANAKA: • July 1st. KAWAMATA: . Well , why don't we get, what's 'the date today, why don't we do it the day. before • you leave? -26- . , 5/23/79 Meeting TANAKA: We no can make the meeting the next week unless we got to post. KAWAMATA: How many.days to transcribe? MANAGER: You know she won 't be able to transcribe the minutes. TANAKA: How many day's notice we need? IIDA: It's a special meeting you still have to; its ' a specific thing. MANAGER: To get this out. SUGIOKA: I don't think it's necessary.. TANAKA: How many hours do you have to get, you got to give, Akira? KAWAMATA: She needs time to take the minutes, I mean you know' to get the minutes out to us. TAKEHARA: Especially this one. It's going to take long. KAWAMATA: How long do you think it will take to get the minutes out? How long? Two days? TAKEHARA: More than that. MANAGER: She got other stuffs to do you know. TAKEHARA: Actually according to State law, I got one month before the minutes can come out. TANAKA: We need a special secretary for our Commission. KAWAMATA: We're going to have a special meeting just to discuss this . IIDA: Charter review proposition. KAWAMATA: And we forget about the minutes on this one. TANAKA: When is that? Any suggestion for a time? date? KLECKNER: Would the rules allow us to recess? TANAKA: We have to specifically say when we're going to reconvene though if we recess. ASSISTANT Well , you know the APA Workshop we had today; okay, your rules of procedure CORPORATION COUNSEL: in the back of the book, I don't have a copy. Did anybody bring the material with you? No, not the rules and regulations. I stuck a set in the back; no, it's a long sheet that I stuck inside in the back. . . Regular meetings of the Commission for the transaction of its business shall be held at 10:00 a.m. on the fourth Tuesday of each month. Special meetings may be called bythe chairman of the Commission when the date, time and place of such special meetings are announced prior to adjournment of a regular meeting, otherwise special meeting; shall be called only upon the publication of a notice of such meetings in a newspaper of general circulation in this county at least twenty-four hours in advance of such meeting. If the requirement with respect to publication of a notice cannot be met because of insufficient time, the -27- t �. 5/23/79 Meeting • meeting notice shall be made by broadcasting a minimum of three announce- • menus in the English language over F.C.C.-licensed public radio stations in this county or television stations with local audience. And so on and on. A brief resume of the principal business to be taken up at such meetings shall be stated in the posted notice as well as in the notice released to the news media. • This is the same provisions as the Charter provisions for other meetings so what you're going to have to do is the best thing to do is pick a date, time and-place now for your special meeting and then post it. Because otherwise if you don't do that now, then you're going to have to go on the radio and so on; it will be a nightmare. And the thing is you could schedule a special meeting now and always cancel it if it turns out that Stuart says • that you would be. able to submit information after the first draft, but you can set it; it's like making a hotel reservation, you can always cancel it, but trying to get one when the place is booked. . .but why don't • you do that, under page 6, Section l-2(3) (f) of Rule 1 that shows you how to set a special meeting. Special meetings may be called by the Chairman of the Commission when the date, time and place of such special meetingg; are announced prior to adjournment. Nobody has moved for adjournment? . TANAKA: No. I need a calendar. KAWAMATA: Mr. Chairman. 30th, the 30th is Wednesday.. TANAKA: 29th, Tuesday. Again, we're having the complications of meeting at night rather than day. TAKEHARA: I prefer day, I don't want to work at night. KLECKNER: Afternoon ,meeting. IIDA: Afternoon. TANAKA: Afternoon. 1 :00, 1 :00 Tuesday, May 29, in the Department of Water Supply office, right here. Okay. IIDA: For the specific purpose of--- TANAKA: For the specific purpose of the Charter review, okay. -28- } • • • MINUTES WATER COMMISSION SPECIAL MEETING MANAGER'S OFFICE MAY 29, 1979 MEMBERS PRESENT: Messrs . George Fujino, Hardy Iida, Raymond Kawamata, Clarence Keawe, Delmar Kleckner, Perfecto Quilausing, Jerry Saito, Tokuo Sugioka, Earl Tanaka, Akira Fujimoto, and Sidney Fuke - 1 :15 p.m. EXCUSED: Mr. Edward Harada OTHERS PRESENT: Mr. Harry Kim, Administrator, Civil Defense Agency, County of Hawaii Messrs. Edmund Hohu, Kazumi Okamura, William Sewake, and George Tengan CALL TO ORDER: Chairperson. Tanaka called the special meeting to order at 1 :00 p.m. INTRODUCTION OF GUEST: Mr. Harry Kim REVIEW OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CHARTER: TANAKA: I 'd just like to clarify the reason for this special meeting and it's specifically to discuss any recommendations that we may have to the Charter Commission with regard to the Department of Water Supply and the Commission, our Commission. I do want to again set some of the basic ground rules for today's discussion and meeting which is I 'd like to keep it as open as possible, I 'd like to have a free flow of discussion and at some point in time, when I feel that the discussion has been adequate that we will then look for specific recommendations from any member of this body. Okay, I do especially want to make sure that all of us understand that we speak with regard specifically to the Charter and the contents thereof and. nothing else because of the Sunshine Law you know, we don't want to get involved in talking about things we are not supposed to be speaking of. Okay, I hope that all of us have had some time to think about some of these things and consider some of the ramifications and I 'm sure there are still some questions in our minds and in some of the areas that we may not be clear with. So again, I 'd like to open this meeting by referring to page 18 of the Charter, Article VIII , Department of Water Supply, and Section 8-1 to Section 8-5. 5/29/79 Meeting The .floor is now open for any discussion in any areas from Sections 8-1 to 8-5 and any other areas that is relating to specifically the Water Commission and the Department of Water Supply in the Charter. Are there any questions? SUGIOKA: Mr. Chairman. TANAKA: Yes. SUGIOKA: Before we proceed, is it true that my understanding is that the Charter Commission had it' s last hearing, public hearing; it was in Kona and that' s going to be the last one and there won't be any more public hearings. Is that correct? TANAKA: I have the agenda here. The agenda shows April 24 as the last public. hearing in Puna, but I think they revised it because the Kona one was this month. SUGIOKA: They just had one last week. TANAKA: Yes; that's right. I believe that whatever we would submit to the Charter Commission will probably not be in the form of a public hearing per se; but you ,know again, too, all of the agencies or anybody who wants to can give testimony, can give testimony in writing to the Charter Commission because they will be reviewing all of the testimony that they have received thus far. SUGIOKA: Okay. TANAKA: Thank you for bringing that up. What I want to do again is clarify in everybody's minds is that remember that whatever recommendations we're making today, if at all , the Charter Commission still has to determine • themselves and so that whatever recommendations, it may not be what they will recommend. They may recommend completely different from what we are recommending. They will have to digest the information that has been submitted and from whatever research they have done and come up with the slate or how they are going to put it in the ballot for the proposed special election that is supposed to be held this fall ; and even the election for this fall is a proposed kind of thing; it's not a set thing yet. They haven't really determined whether they are going to have the election this year or whether they're going to have the election next year - they might have it with a regular general election next year. That has not been determined yet. -2- J• a 5/29/79 Meeting • So our recommendations to the Charter Commission is strictly a recommendation and the Charter Commission will make a review and study and they will come. up with something that will be placed on the ballot and the people of the County of Hawaii , the voters, will then have really the final, ultimate sayinto whatever proposed changes or recommendations with regard to the Charter. That's pretty clear to everybody. Okay, again, any other questions? Anybody have anything they want to bring up atthis time? Anybody want anything clarified at this time? KAWAMATA: What has been some of the thoughts in the back to date? If you could recap some of the thoughts that the Charter Commission has generated thus far or has spoken whether in favor of or not in favor of or about the autonomy, of the Commission and so forth. Give us a- brief rundown. TANAKA: From my understanding, as far as the Charter Commission members themselves , they cannot make any statement_ with regard to their attitude in any direction until they have completed all of the hearings, which from Toku's information is they just completed that, so during the time from January up to now, all they have been doing is taking in testimony, asking questions to get information and"not making any rule or not making any considerations; that's my understanding. KAWAMATA: What hasbeen some of the testimonies thus. far? TANAKA: Allof the testimony that. has been given to them thus far, most of it, not most of it but all of it, was that information that we have here in the office and if anybody wants to read who had given the testimony and what it was, Wendy had it available, for all of. us to review. I cannot tell you verbatim what each person had said and. I think that's not really fair for me to say that because then I would be subjected to ,making an opinion of what I thought somebody else said and I would rather not do that at this timeand 'I would rather have it if you had read something or you interpreted in your opinion what it was, I think that it should be left that way. Any other questions? Anybody have any recommendations in any direction with regard to anything that is being discussed today? No recommendations? -3- • - 5/29/79 Meeting • • KAWAMATA: Earl . TANAKA: Yes. KAWAMATA: On this part, on Section 8-2, on the geographical areas on Commissioners , I think it is set as a fairly good way although I do feel that an area like Kona because of its growth and the span of North and South Kona, • somehow I 'd just like, I guess I believe, there should be more than, one • • commissioner from that 'area. And,. I 'm not recommending that any other . areas should be knocked off or anything like that but I do believe somehow or another that area is big enough to warrant another commissioner, not an additional commissioner, but somehow. TANAKA: I guess then that particular matter is something that you know is really more a recommendation to the Mayor and the Council rather than to the Charter Commission unless .you're specifically saying as was recommended by the Department, and correct me if I 'm wrong, Akira, but the Department has recommended to the Charter Commission that in the Charter, they specifically state a number, give a specific number to each of the districts. At the present time, we show six districts without giving a specific number and it is left to the Mayor and the Council to determine the number of. commissioners from any given district and the Department has recommended to the Charter Commission that a specific number be placed to specific districts, am I correct, Akira? MANAGER: Yes. TANAKA: And, so is that the same thing you're saying as the Department is to set a specific number for a district? KAWAMATA: • No. I guess our. approach would be to the Mayor. TANAKA: As a recommendation to him to consider. So then you don't feel that, then what you're saying is that should we leave it as is? KAWAMATA: I would say so. • TANAKA: • Anybody have any thoughts contrary to that or any other specific thing? Is that in agreement with everybody that Section 8-2 should be left as is? • SUGTOKA: No objections. • -4 • - { .. . 5/29/79 Meeting • TANAKA: No objections .. Okay. I notice we're missing Section 8-1 . Anybody want to discuss Section 8-1 ; give their pros and cons. I think you knc since we're going to do it in order, why don't we take it beginning at the top. That's a tough one, but I think we got to discuss it. SAITO: I think 8-1 is the biggest question. TANAKA: Sure and you know a lot .of the other sections relate to 8-1 so that again ' tcocan we 'have, if everybody is ready to make a -decision, I think we should have a. motion to some effect and the Chair is now open for any kind of motion regarding Section 8-1 . SAITO: I move that we retain Section 8-1 as specified here. • ' TANAKA: Okay. SUGIOKA: Second. TANAKA: Okay. Discussion. Again, let me clarify what we're doing here is the biggest concern of the Charter Commission is for us to give them intent and the reasons why we 'are recommending such a thing, not only that we make a motion; all right, so that I want to give people an opportunity to say what they want to say okay. And, if you don't want to, you don't have to, all right; that's up to you. SAITO: Personally; I feel that Department has gone on real well under this setup. I know when we changed way back in 1950. probably, I don't recall any outrageous type of complaints of the structure in the water department and in speaking to some of the personnel they felt this is a good type of organization here and under those circumstances, we Ehould continue. To date it seems to- be okay; it seems to be running well and I don't see the reason for any change. TANAKA: Okay. Thank you, Jerry. Anybody else want to make any statement? • FUJINO: Well , speaking from Kona and I talked to some of the people there, you • know the club boys down there, they are quite dissatisfied with the way things are running; they weren't too happy about it. I don't know; more or less that's it. TANAKA: Anybody else have any comments? KAWAMATA: Give us time to think. • -5- • • R y • 5/29/79 Meeting TANAKA: Again, too, that's why we had this over the weekend for us to think about some of the considerations and I have my own thoughts and I do want to voice my opinions but I do want to give every Commissioner an opportunity to say something if they wanted to .allright and maybe the fair way to do it is to go right down the line since we started off `with Jerry and we go right down the table and we ask everybody; if you don 't have any comments, no problem, you can say you don't have any comments to make. Okay. Delmar, KLECKNER: I think I would have to kind of echo in some of the arguments that Jerry had raised that if something is working well , you don't fool around, you don 't mess with it. If in accordance with some of the concerns that have been raised by the public that things have not been run well or that there is need for improvement here and there, I think all or most of these people have had an opportunity to appear before the Commission when we • meet monthly to voice their concerns and to voice their opinions to cause ' us perhaps to question some of the items that they seemed to be concerned .. with, but to my knowledge this hasn't happened. I 've been a Commissioner for about a year and a half now and I have yet to have presented substantive. complaints with regard to the way the operations are being run, granted there are a couple of minor concerns that were raised here and there but I think those were resolved to the satisfaction of all concerned. So for the purpose of discussion,. I think. I would have to go along and say that Section 8-1 should be retained as is. • TANAKA: Okay. Thank you. .Toku. SUGIOKA: ' Well , personally and as a union member of the ILWU, I 've been, well since I became a Commissioner, exactly about three years ago,and during all that period nothing bad was said against the Department with this system so I feel that as Delmar has mentioned, leave well as it is . Why take a chance and do something that eventually might hurt the Department. That's how I feel , exactly as Delmar stated. And, we have at the union already taken action to leave Section 8-1 , organization, the way itis. We have three members on the Charter Commission, we are represented by • -6- 5/29/79 Meeting three members from our union on the Charter Commission and their consensus is the same. They feel the same way, it's more beneficial to the consumer buying water from the County. TANAKA: Okay. Thank you. Perfecto. QUILAUSING: I assume to believe that the Department is in favor of retaining Section 8-1 ; and if that is so, I have no powers with the Department and am in favor of what we have now. TANAKA: Clarence. KEAWE: Well , I 'm a relatively new Commissioner here. My knowledge is limited as far as the type of operations in the past. Based on that and not knowing how adverse a change might be, I would say retain this semiautonomous department at this time. TANAKA: Raymond. KAWAMATA: Well , I guess I have a little bit more selfish motive as far as Section 8-1 . To date, the: Commission, for the last six months, I guess maybe a year, has done quite a bit as far as the input and the response from the staff has been really strong and I 'd say the Commission has done a good job to date but the load is getting quite heavy and I 'm getting a little bit scared. I 'm a realtor and in fact it places me in a much more precarious position at times and at times I just get balled up and sort of feel that maybe I should not participate in certain things and I feel at this time that unless the Commission can really carry the load and bear the load because we are responsible for whatever the outcome may be, I feel some of the load should be placed upon on other people and I may tend not to go withthe semiautonomous department. As I said, it may be a selfish reason but. . . TANAKA: Okay. Hardy, I know you came late and you may not have heard all of the discussion. IIDA: Well , I also feel that up to now, it seems like you know things have been running pretty smoothly; however, I feel the same way Raymond does that I think from now we're going to be faced with a lot of heavy decisions like rate increases and you know what we're going to do with West Hawaii and so on; and I think if either we have to allow let's say, I don't -7- 5/29/79 Meeting • really think the business that the Commission needs to do can be done at one meeting a month, I think we're going to have to think of probably . having at least two meetings a month to really take care of and really do our job and so administratively I feel that you know maybe it should come under the Mayor's jurisdiction. TANAKA: Okay. .For myself again, too, I want to say specifically to the Charter and the way our present Charter is formed, we do have in the Charter basically a . strong mayor type Charter. This 'is in regard to all of the other areas of the Charter; we do have basically, a very st ron9 mayor type Charter. And, as a businessman working -for a large firm in terms of basic management from what I have been able to absorb, I just feel that a mayor type, direct control under the' Mayor, has its merits. I must qualify myself, too, again by- saying that it is by no means that I make this recommendation with any regard towards 'any personalities involved and it's strictly a kind of thing I see from a management principle, a management principle. At the same time,. I think that . the 'considerations _ that we look at with regard to when we talk about what is best for the County of Hawaii , what is best for the water . user, we do have to take into consideration that the staff that we have in the Department of Water Supply has shown that they are concerned about the user, they are concerned about offering the best services • available that they can offer. I also get my concerns as has been pointed out about the additional political ramifications because if it is thus put under the Mayor in my recommendation, then. we're talking about including .the Council ' and we' re talking about including again some more people who are directly involved in politics , in terms of • running for office, being elected and this may cause additional • problems, may cause, it may not at all . My' concern is to some extent the powers and duties and responsibilities that this Commission has at the present time being semiautonomous we really don't have anybody to answer to and I 'm hoping that all Of you continue to participate as • heavily and as much as you have this past few months and I really -8- 5/29/79 Meeting appreciate that I think it's a positive kind of thing; we are taking the responsibilities that we have been charged with and ask for continued support in that direction. I think that by our answers, by our individual answers, we have answered the question with regard to the recommendation that we will make to the Charter Commission, but for the record, we should put it down and we should vote at this time. • Any other discussion? Chair now asks for all those in favor of continuing to keep Section 8-1 as is , to please signify by raising your hands.. We have Delmar Kleckner, Jerry Saito, Clarence Keawe, Perfect Quilausing, and Tokuo Sugioka. Those voting against the.motion, please raise your hand. We have George Fujino, Raymond Kawamata, Hardy Iida, and Earl Tanaka. Okay. Thank you. Okay, moving on to the other areas of Section 8-2. Are there any recommendations to Section 8-2 besides the geographical areas. I think we clarified the geographical areas.. Can we move then to: "The manager of the department of water supply, the planning director and the chief engineer of the county or their designated representatives shall serve as ex-officio members of the water commission without power to vote." Any changes to that area? We've heard some recommendationseither way but are there any changes to that? Anybody have any recommendation for changes? None. Okay, moving on (Section 8-2) : "The water commission shall : (a) Manage, control and operate the waterworks of the county and all property thereof. " No questions on that? No changes. "(b) Adopt rules and regulations which shall have the force and effect of law relating to the management, control , operation, preservation and protection of the waterworks of the county." Any changes to that? (None.) -9- t $ 5/29/79 Meeting • "(c) Adopt an .annual operating and capital budget for the department, .subject to the hearing and advertising provisions of Section 10-4." • • No questions on that? . (None. ) • • "(d) Have the power to acquire by eminent domain, purchase, • lease or otherwise, and to sell , lease, or otherwise convey • real property in the name of the water commission." • No questions . . . • • "(e) . Have the authority to issue revenue bonds under the • name` of the water commission." • No questions. - • • "(f) Have such other powers and .duties as maybe provided by law." . No questions. "Section 8-3. Manager and Deputy. The manager of the department of water supply shall be appointed by the water commission and may be removed by the water commission. The deputy shall be appointed • by the manager witft the confirmation of' the water commission and • may be removed by the .manager with the approval of the water commission. The manager shall be a registered engineer." • • Any questions to that area? I have one. I .wouldlike to bring up • for consideration the last sentence' which states the Manager shall be • . a registered engineer. I think in terms of the. growth of the Department of Water Supply and its .specific' departments or divisions within which we are now' functioning, we do have a large staff of qualified engineers • • under the responsibility 'of an 'able engineer like Bill Sewake and. all his staff that you know my thinking is I feel very strongly that our • department head, administrator, or- his assistant, need not necessarily be an engineer but more-be of some administrative criteria. or background. You know that maybe he should be a business manager 'or have a degree in • business management or some equal qualifications .in years of service rather than having that specific qualification as a registered engineer. Anybody have 'any pros or cons about' that particular sentence? • KAWAMATA: . I 'd like to ask a question. • What is aregistered engineer? • TANAKA: . Akira, you want to answer that. • MANAGER: •Well , in most states' and in a lot of countries I would say, unless you're a registered professional engineer, you cannot call. yourself a professional and you • cannot sign plans. • -10- • f 1 5/29/79 Meeting • KAWAMATA: How does one become a registered rather than a regular engineer? MANAGER: You have to take a test and you have to qualify to take the engineering registration exam. • KAWAMATA: Each state has its own? MANAGER: les. Nbre or less the testis uniformed nationally. Unless you have that . license, you cannot practice professionally. KLECKNER: I think I would pretty much go along with Earl on that when you reach certain levels of management, the administrative skills become much more important and I think that I mentioned this at our previous meeting that I think if a person has a designation as a professional engineer or whatever or even,a CPA, it becomes a plus factor but not necessarily a requirement of the job; but definitely the administrative levels that we're talking about, the administrative skills would perhaps far outweigh the technical skills an individual would bring to-the job. TANAKA: Any other comments? Hardy. IIDA: I may seem to contradict that you know what I mentioned at the last meeting, but you know when we discussed this since I saw where it said the manager shall be .a registered engineer, I suggested maybe the deputy should be a registered engineertased on you know just On that statement. I felt • if that is so and if that is one of the requirements for the job, then the deputy, I felt, the deputy should also be a registered engineer. However, when we're discussing this Ithink Akira mentioned all thekinds of things that needed to be done and based on 'what he was saying you know really it seems to me that this position, both positions , would mean that the administrative skills are more important than having an engineering background because you have the engineers, registered engineers inyour engineering department andyour operations department and you know they'll be the ones to provide expertise as far as. • problems so I feel also that maybe we should change this . TANAKA: Okay. Anybody want to speak against that then? We have three people who spoke positively for changing that. Anybody have any thoughts about retaining that particular qualification? • • -11- 1 • 5/29/79 Meeting KAWAMATA: I would speak in favor'of deleting the whole sentence nevertheless if we are going to retain that the manager be a registered engineer, I would believe that just being an engineer, a registered engineer, would not be any asset to be the manager of the department. If one could say the manager should be maybe a hydraulic engineer, then I would say that it's something that is extremely a plus factor, but I don't know if an • • electronic engineer would beany plus factor to the department. I would be . . titre infavor of having more managerial skills than technical skills. TANAKA: Anybody else? SUGIOKA: It won't make no difference to me. •• KEAWE: . Earl , the term registered engineer could be misleading. There's all types of registered engineers. TANAKA: It's a 'very general area. I assume it's a very general area. MANAGER: For .one thing, a registered civil engineer, right now since he mentioned a hydraulic engineer, is capable of practicing hydraulic engineering. There's no such animal as a registered hydraulic engineer. KEAWE: Hydraulics deals with water. . . TANAKA: There's no specific requirements. FUJIMOTO: There's no specific license requirement for a hydraulic engineer; a civil qualifies. KAWAMATA: Is there such a thing as a fluid, engineer or something like that? KLECKNER: There are courses in hydraulic engineering. .. KAWAMATA: What are, some of the different kinds of engineers you could be a registered engineer, in the State of Hawaii? MANAGER: Electrical , civil , mechanical , '.structural , industrial ; that's about it, • generally most of it. IIDA: Civil covers all the areas. • MANAGER: Except civil cannot practice structural or electrical or,mechanical . TANAKA: There are some specific delineations, for each. MANAGER: The only thing is civil is versed in almost anything; but he doesn 't specialize in, any one branch. IIDA: He's an all around person. • -12- 5/29/79 • SAITO: . Mr. Chairman, I want toCask Akira a question. TANAKA: Go ahead. SAITO: How do you feel about this, Akira? You 've been axegistered engineer here a number of years now, do you think it would be better as an administrator, .a top administrator of the department, rather than an engineer? MANAGER: Well , a lot of our cases , we're more or less dealing with engineering decisions you know like when you go to negotiate contracts with engineers, it's good that you know; another thing, too, to supervise another engineer at least you can. Right now, the engineering portion takes • a heavy responsibility because we need a lot of improvements like that • and we got to depend on.-engineers for. their planning and this is where I guess the advantage I have maybe because I 'm an engineer that we can communicate easily and that's about it. It's a big help because lots • of times-you go out, you meet other people and you have problems and you like to get help from other utilities; even from the mainland you deal more or less with the engineering oriented people and to communicate with them is easy. TANAKA: Let me ask Jerry a question because HELCO is a utility type. • Like the president of HELCO or the manager, are these electrical people or are they more administrative in nature? SAITO: More administrative I would say. But they hire good electrical people, engineers in various .areas to help them make their final decisions. While Akira being an engineer maybe acquired the administrative ability and an engineer may be much better here. TANAKA: Really, I'm not against having someone who does have .a license; it's great to have somebody.who has it but I don't think it's a prerequisite, a basic requirement. I think that as we grow, the administrative abilities to me get to be more important in government and then the technical assistance, the expertise, in specific areas can be drawn on from the staff and that's why we have staff; that's why we have support and again it's a management kind of principle that I believe and I feel for. Hardy. -13= • 5/29/79 Meeting IIDA: Well , I was going to say once again we're not I don't think in our comments we're not saying you know we don't want Akira; we naturally want him to be a n d it's fine that we have him, but this Charter review is going to be something that's going to be done once in 10 years, every 10 years , and so we got tolook into the future. Idon't know how old Akira is, but he probably retires by the time the next Charter review comes around so this is what I 'm thinking about when I make that kind of comments. TANAKA: Thank you. Anybody have any objections on that recommendation to delete that specific qualification? If not, I sense that's unanimous at the same time I would like to ask if somebody has any specific recommendation they'd like to put for criteria or would you like to leave that open? Shall we leave that open and not set any real criteria for that? KLECKNER: . I would think that it should be left open only from the standpoint that in order to maintain flexibility within the department and the department's needs and so forth so , it has to be left up to whoever the Commission people are at that time, I would think. TANAKA: I agree, too. Any other discussion? .okay, moving on to Section 8-4. IIDA: You,'re not going to put this in the form of a motion? TANAKA: No, by consensus I assume it to be unanimous or I accept it to be unanimous, if there are no objections. "Section 8-4: Water Fund. There shall be established a separate water fund which shall be utilized solely for water purposes . State and Federal water grants or appropriations and revenues from operation of the water system shall be included in the water fund." Clarification on this one. Have we at any time receivedany grants from the County? MANAGER: We received grants only one time because you see when we went to the legislature as we normally do asking for funding, somebody in the County told the legislators the County is willing to match the money and I went down and said look, we didn't say that; so at one joint committee hearing, one of the senators asked one of the Councilmen whether this was true and the guy said yes , we' ll match it. They almost reneged -14- • a' 5 • 5/29/79 Meeting but somebody else straightened that for us but really they didn't match all projects only on certain projects; that's about it. . TANAKA: I 'm reading this Section 8-4 where we have State and Federal water grants or appropriations and revenues. ' There is a possibility that there will be some County grants. You know why or is that assumed that the Water Department is under the County so when I read it it specifically . states State and Federal water grants and nothing about County grants; but yet in the future, we're looking at the Charter now, for the next ten years, we may be able to get some funds from the County. MANAGER: I doubt it. TANAKA: You know at the growth rate we're having, the tax dollars are being increased. We know that CIP appropriations are coming less' and less ; we' re going to have to find different alternatives for getting money; there is a possibility though that that can happen. My question is how. come in the Charter it doesn't say County? It just says State and • Federal . • Anybody have any thoughts or 'comments on this? SAITO: I don't think it will hurt by inserting "County.." TANAKA: • It's a matter of semantics and terminology and I think that if we do that at least we're saying that we're recognizing the County being able ' to at some time in. the future to come up with some grant money for the department and we would be more than happy to consider that kind of funding because wherever money comes from for the development of water, we • surely would need the support from whatever government agency we're talking about. So, I 'd like to include the word "County" before the word "State," so it would read "County, State and Federal water grants. . . " KAWAMATA: I have a ridiculous question. MANAGER: . I think one of the reasons why or maybe - on State funds, we don' t really get the actual money. The County; too, sometimes when they pay for something, we just make the voucher and they do the paying. The State never gives lump sum money to us . The only people who do that is maybe the Feds. After you use up so much, then you get your -15- ' • 5/29/79 Meeting auditors , then they bank it into a separate account for that project. The funds will never come to you. TANAKA: I think it's just for clarification; it's .just that there's no co-mingling of funds. MANAGER: I guess the original people who made this Charter were worried about or didn't want co-mingling where the County would be using the waterworks funds for general funding. TANAKA: Ray, you have a question. KAWAMATA: Like I' said, it may be a ridiculous question. Has there ever been any kind of private grant that has come up in the past? Any kind of private grant? • MANAGER: Private - it's either aid in contribution or aid in construction. George. TENGAN: They don't contribute money per se; except for our customers who pay facilities charges and storage fees. I am not aware of anyone coming in with $50,000 and saying here, use it. KAWAMATA: How about land? Would that be considered donating properties to the Department? TENGAN: I think in this case, we're talking about money per se. MANAGER: We have strict ,controls over money in the State laws . TANAKA: Anybody have any objections to including the word "County" there before the word State as a recommendation? It's just a clarification of the semantics. If not, the recommendation is unanimous for that. Okay, moving on "Section 8-5. Administrative Supervision. The department of water supply shall come under the general supervision and control of the mayor." Any recommendations? Any thoughts? Go ahead, Hardy. IIDA: Once again, I don't know, the term "general"and "control " over there, I don't know, maybe they should put a subsection "a" and define what they mean by general cause otherwise you know you might have all kinds of communications problems. As for how we are going to define general and control , don't ask me; I wouldn 't know. To me it' s very vague you know and you can take it whichever way you want. -16- • z 5/29/79 Meeting TANAKA: Questions? Under Section 8-3, which we went over very easily, has some connection to Section 8-5 and the Department did submit to the Charter Commission on January 17 a memo, and we all have a copy or we should have a copy, with regard to some specific items. There are some good recommendations. Do we have copies of this? (Copies of page 2 of the memo of January 17 were distributed to the Commissioners . ) As we can see on the second page, Section 8-3, Manager and Deputy, the Department has recommended some specific items and I 'm assuming that the specific items are the line items. Whatever is lined there is what the Department has proposed to the Charter Commission for their consideration. So if anybody have any questions to the Department on any of those things, the floor is now open or Akira you want to say something. MANAGER: I guess this is more or less to clarify or to kind of differentiate us against the other Commissions whose appropriations come from the Council . Because I think there wasn't any section beyond this pertaining to us, but there is a section in the other parts of the Charter that says certain department heads shall be appointed provided the monies , appropriations, are available from the Council . That kind of stuff. TANAKA: So that because of the semiautonomous nature that we have, we have to have specific guidelines. MANAGER: That's right. So we don't get confused with the Council ; so that what you pass, we don't have to go back to the Council to get their approval . IIDA: This came from the Charter Commission? TANAKA: . No, this came from Akira. MANAGER: You see, when we testified, the only thing we did, we didn 't make specific recommendations; we assumed that the Charter Commission wanted to know how we operate and then they asked for recommendations. TANAKA: This was the reply. IIDA: This would be under 8-3. TANAKA: Any other questions to Akira? I 'd like to recommend that we also go record to submit these items -17- • 5/29/79 to clarify Section 8-3 and it also does have some clarification on Section 8-5, that we recommend these same items for consideration by the Charter Commission. Any objections , any questions? I think it does give again, too, you know as we discussed earlier about administratively if we read some of these things , these are very specific administrative type re Tonsibilities for the Manager so it delineates again to some extent qualifications; and as Hardy has pointed out, in the next 10 years our future predecessors in the Water Commission are going to have to make a determination as to who's going to be the new manager at a point in time that Akira decides that he wants to retire and so at least this will give again our predecessors some guidelines in determining the kind of manager that they would want to hire. KLECKNER: The interpretation of Section 8-5 is really going to be based on exception as opposed to what it is. It will be interpreted in accordance with 8-1 and 8-3 and whatever else that would have some bearing on administration of the department. TANAKA: Because I think that part of the general supervision, correct me if I 'm wrong Akira, is naturally the manager of the Department of Water Supply is included in the cabinet of the County of Hawaii and in all cabinet meetings that are held, the Manager is asked to attend those functions and discuss some of the overall directions or goals that the Mayor and the administration may be working towards. Am I correct, Akira? MANAGER: That's right. TANAKA: I think those are the things that qualify under this general supervision. .MANAGER: When they asked me, that's what I told the Charter Commission. IIDA: You know I 'm thinking either if this is specific like this now, under Section 8-5, I don't know maybe it should be worded differently. MANAGER: It should be clarified. The only difference on this one is that take . for instance, you folks pass the budget, then at sometime we didn't -18- 5/29/79 Meeting even have to go and get approval from the Council , but certain times we have to, depends on how the Corporation Counsel interprets. Like when we need the creation of a new position, I justify it to you. Then we send it to the Personnel office; the Personnel office now has to revise or amend the Salary Ordinance of the County of Hawaii . At time, it used to be an automatic thing when it comes to the Council , they would just pass it; but recently they call me up to justify the positions so we have to explain to them that the appropriations has been made by our Commission not by the Council . That's to clarify it; that' s why we put this because in the Charter in the general areas you have these but it says Council instead of Water Commission. It makes the Manager' s job and in fact maybe the Commissioners ' job easier. IIDA:. So, that's why I say you know since it's defined to me over there and then over here administrative supervision, I don't know if it needs to say this over here. Maybe it should say something like, I don't know, should work closely with the. Mayor in problems and areas related to water or development or whatever, I don't know. MANAGER: We know what it is but some people don't want it; maybe it has to be clarified because maybe sometimes the Mayor goes into the nitty-gritty • of telling the departments, certain commissions , how to run or something like that like the Police Commission or Civil Service Commission, where he starts taking supervisory controls that's why maybe it should be clarified. As far as we are concerned, from my area, I know how to interpret it. IIDA': Yes, you know so that's. .. TANAKA: But you know I think the problem here for us as Commissioners is that is very gray and we don't_ know where we fit in the whole scheme of when you read this, it's a very gray kind of thing so our concern as Commissioners , I think, is where does it put the Commission when you say administrative supervision. MANAGER: A lot of times I say I got to get approval from the Commission, I have to come back to you. -19- I I • 5/.29/79 Meeting . TANAKA: So you don't have from the department any real recommendation, any specific wording to Section 8-5. MANAGER: Maybe we can work on something but what I say may affect a lot of other commissions, too. TANAKA: Yes , well--- MANAGER: I can write up something. TANAKA: See again,. too, I 'm looking at the Water Commission and the Department of Water Supply being very unique in the County of Hawaii . In all of the different areas when we look at it, we have a very unique situation as compared to the other commissions, even Police and Civil Service, the biggest uniquress that we have is we're talking about a revenue generating kind of department as compared to the other two; the other two are, you know, very strong service and policy making type and although we have that here in the •Water Commission and Department, but some of the real major factors in this Department has to do with generating income, generating funds , you know it's a money kind of thing besides the policy making you know so that there's a uniqueness to this Department and Commission so that since Article VIII pertains to the Department of Water Supply by us looking at some kind of a recommendation, why don't we do it this way since ourselves as Commission members, we are not really firm on it and maybe the Department could come up with some kind of recommendation that we could look at because I know that the Charter Commission will continue to accept additional testimony; it doesn't have to be a public hearing, but I think if we submitted it in writing, they will accept you know whatever we submit. MANAGER: • Maybe when you submit, maybe you should say that portion should be clarified and our recommendations are so forth because it adds a lot of cOonnfwuhatofeaels otis of etnheirnagl s sdueppeeron onantd he omntyroorl , too. IIDA: ion he TANAKA: Any objections to that? Why don't we do it that way and by January 20 when you folks have your meeting, I 'm sure the Department will have -20- • L 5/29/79 Meeting something that they could give you folks to look at. KLECKNER: June 20. TANAKA: June 20. What did I say? I 'm sorry, it's •June 20. • SAITO: Can we wait that long? TANAKA: Yes. I 'm sure. My feeling in talking to Mr. Legaspi and the Charter Commission people is that they're still going to be drafting and rewording studying and taking it bit by bit and so that whatever additional testimonies or information that they receive they will be very happy to receive it. SAITO;. In other words , they will consider it. TANAKA: I 'm sure they' ll look at it, whether they're going to accept or not • again like all the other things we are recommending, that's pretty much their decision. I think that most of all , the important thing is that at least we are giving them some of our personal thoughts, some of • our ideas with regard' to the Water Commission and the Water Department . and it's still their responsibility to accept or to reject or to • make recommendations. KLECKNER: I would imagine they would have some type of cutoff date though; you know • they can' t continue to accept testimony forever and forever.. MANAGER: Maybe just inform them that you folks went on record to retain semiautonomous organization and further details and recommendations and specifics will be forthcoming. , • TANAKA: Right, exactly. That't what we're going to have to do immediately. MANAGER: Then at least they know where.you folks stand. TANAKA: I will • inform the Charter Commission Chairman, Mr. Sakata, that we do have these recommendations and again, too, we have a very busy secretary • that has to put all .of•this together and submit all of this to them so it might take a little bit time but we will be sending something to them in detail . Any other items with regard to the Charter, specifically to water? Just going back again, I want to make one general statement with regard to the Water Commission and my recommendation of putting it back under the Mayor that in addition to that, my personal feeling -21 • - 5/29/79 . was that all commissions should be, if it was our Water Commission was to be accepted as such under the Mayor, that all commissions should be advisory commissions and have the powers to be held with the Mayor and the Council mainly because they are elected officials and their accountability is to their constituents. Anybody else want to make any general statements to that effect? If not, I declare this meeting adjournedand thank everybody for coming today and I already reminded everybody of the next meeting which is on the 20th. Thank you. Meeting adjourned at 2:10 p.m. Secretary-Administrative Assistant -22-