Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN PWMTC 2020/04/22 2018-2020 Committee on Public Works and Mass Transit 21st Session Hawaii County Building 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, Hawaii April 22, 2020 CALL TO The regular meeting of the Committee on Public Works and Mass Transit ORDER: was called to order at 12:18 p.m., in the Council Chambers, Hilo, Hawaii, by Ms. Susan L. K. Lee Loy, Chair. ROLL CALL: Present: Ms. Susan L. K. Lee Loy, Chair Mr. Matt Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Vice Chair Ms. Maile Medeiros David, Member (via videoconference from Kona) Ms. Karen Eoff, Member, Member(via videoconference from Kona) Ms. Ashley L. Kierkiewicz, Member Ms. Valerie T. Poindexter, Member Mr. Herbert M. "Tim" Richards, III, Member(via videoconference from Waimea) Ms. Rebecca Villegas, Member (via videoconference from Kona) Absent& Excused: Mr. Aaron S. Y. Chung, Member STATEMENTS The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, FROM THE Statements from the Public on Agenda Items. PUBLIC ON AGENDA ITEMS: (There were none.) COMMUNI- The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, CATIONS: Communications. (There were none.) ORDER OF The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, RESOLUTIONS: Order of Resolutions. (There were none.) PWMTC-21 April 22,2020 BILLS FOR The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, ORDINANCES: Bills for Ordinances. Bill 157: AMENDS CHAPTER 23, ARTICLE 2, SECTION 23-10, OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE 1983 (2016 EDITION, AS AMENDED), RELATING TO DEFINING, ACQUIRING, AND IMPROVING ALTERNATE, CONNECTIVITY, EVACUATION, AND MASS TRANSIT ROUTES ISLAND-WIDE Lists certain private roadways in the Puna district which the County would be required to acquire and improve to dedicable standards to be used as alternate, evacuation, and mass transit routes in order to decrease traffic congestion, facilitate connectivity between subdivisions, and provide emergency access. Reference: Comm. 868 Intr. by: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder Motion to Approve: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder moved to recommend passage of Bill 157 on first reading. Seconded by Ms. Poindexter. CHR. LEE LOY: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, please lead the discussion. MR. KANEALII-KLEINFELDER: Mahalo, Chair. So before we discuss the details of Bill 157, I'd like to preface with a few points. As we have removed oral testimony due to CODIV-19, I'd like to ask the Council's patience and allow me to discuss procedure. For everyone's information, a bill takes three readings to become law. Any amendment to Chapter 23 is automatically referred to both Planning Commissions and the Planning Director for review. I look forward to future discussions including public testimony. When I entered office in 2018-19, the two biggest issues that I heard in Puna were public safety and roads. In three months our office managed to increase police presence in Puna. My previous job, took me to all parts of Hawaii. With that said, no one can hold a candle to Puna roads. The main challenge are private subdivision roads, which is hundreds of miles of unpaved roads that are maintained, in the majority by the lot owners either through voluntary or through mandatory road dues. As I came to understand, Chapter 23 in the Hawaii Code states that a private road cannot be dedicated to the County unless the individual subdivision brings it to County standards, which is set forth in Chapter 23, as well. The financial burden for any community to comply with the construction requirements, to upgrade roads is prohibiting to say the least. In the past two years, Highway 130 has been closed multiple times. Hurricane Lane, "carmageddon," and the recent fatality to name a few. Each event sent thousands of vehicles onto unmarked private backroads, trying to get to and from Hilo. The need for marked alternate routes is a county necessity and not a subdivision responsibility. Page 2 PWMTC-21 April 22,2020 In 2019, we were all handed the Mass Transit Master Plan. We won award for that plan, SSM was the creator. I have set on years of connectivity meetings. We have added Puna emergency access routes. We have a PCDP, the Puna Community Development Plan. We created a subdivision taskforce meeting, and we've met with individual subdivisions over the past couple of months. Each one called for building bridges between communities, and yet there's still not a lot of headway that's occurred after decades of talk. What I'm hoping to have happen with Bill 157, is that I'm hoping to require the County to acquire, improve, designate, and maintain any route that is a mass transit alternate evacuation or connectivity route. Any Council Member may add a route for their community by amending the last section of this bill, so this isn't Puna specific. This is island-wide, and this allows other Council Members at a point in the future to designate an area for their community that they find important. Overall, Bill 157 is a way to drive,pun intended, progress forward, and share the sacrifices of community together. So, this is our opening. This is committees. I look forward to any comments that we may have. Again, this is a year-and-a-half of watching and looking for solutions and meeting with the directors and trying to wrap my head around the history involved here, and how we can, you know, how we can move forward in light of recent events how critical this need this. And looking at the timeline involved for this to be given to the Planning Commissions, which are not meeting right now, and the Planning Director, I do find this necessary at this point to move forward in one way or another. So, I look forward to your comments. I may have an answer to questions if you ask me. I know the Planning Director and Deputy Acting Director are here today for any questions, as well. But I look forward to any comments, and I yield. MS. EOFF: May I ask a procedural question? CHR. LEE LOY: Sure, go ahead, Ms. Eoff. You have the floor. MS. EOFF: Okay, to Mr. Clerk, I guess. Should the motion be to refer then? Rather thenI think he made a motion to pass it on to Council? MR. HENRICKS: It's okay to have an underlying motion, a main motion to forward to Council with a positive recommendation, and any member can make a subsidiary motion to refer to Planning Director and Planning Commissions. MS. EOFF: Okay, thank you. MR. HENRICKS: You're welcome. Page 3 PWMTC-21 April 22,2020 MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Can I then make a motion to refer this to the Planning Commissions and Director? MR. HENRICKS: If you feel that's the appropriate time. If you make that motion, then discussion will be limited to the referral itself as opposed to the main subject matter of the bill. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Understood. Okay, I'll wait then. MR. RICHARDS: Chair? Richards. CHR. LEE LOY: Go ahead, Mr. Richards. MR. RICHARDS: Okay, thanks, Chair. First of all, Matt, you are highlighting on the biggest problems in our County, I think. I won't speak for other Council Members, but I think we could speak for other Council Members. We all have these roads in our districts. And it is my understanding, as you just articulated, this gets referred to Planning, and I believe Planning is in the room right now. My concern is going forward, though I'd love to do this, what are the legalities of this? What are our liabilities of this? And I think we need to have a very robust discussion. Last time we talked about roads in our County. I know we have 1,000 miles of road, that we have a repaving cycle of about 35 years right now, which is staggering. After these several episodes, I don't know what it is now but. Chair, can we call Planning up and just get their perspective on this? I assume Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder has had some preliminary discussions with them? (Note: At this time, Planning Director Michael Yee and Acting Deputy Planning Director April Surprenant came forward to address the members of the Committee.) CHR. LEE LOY: Alright, Mr. Richards. Ms. Surprenant, Mr. Yee, why don't you kind of provide us some thumbnail sketch of what your understanding of Bill 157 is? MR. YEE: Good morning. Michael Yee, Planning Director. MS. SUPRENANT April Suprenant, Acting Deputy Planning Director. MR. YEE: I'm going let April lead us off. MS. SURPRENANT: Okay. So thank you for this bill. We understand what you're trying to achieve. We have met with you in the past, talking about road issues, and various ways to solve them. And honestly, were not anticipating this Page 4 PWMTC-21 April 22,2020 bill, so we were a little surprised to see it, so we had not reviewed it ahead of time. I think we would have some concerns. Obviously, there's a process that we'll need to go through, and that's already been acknowledged. But I think we would have some other concerns about the precedents that this would be setting. There would be some concerns about the requirement to acquire these roads without doing sort of some of the processes that DPW (Department of Public Works) would normally go though, with surveying the roads and looking at the land on either side of the road and things of that nature. It also appears to be requiring that they be brought up to standard, and that could be a really big issue in the sight of having a lot of budget concerns right now and going forward, and also being in a position where our County cannot currently maintain properly all of the roads that we currently have under our purview, that bringing it up to standard might be a prohibitive cost in some places. So I think all of those kinds of things need to be brought in to consideration. I don't know that putting this in the Subdivision Code is necessarily the best way to get to what you are trying to achieve. The biggest thing that it would require is funding, and it doesn't provide for that, and so we would have to look for—even though it says "shall" acquire, if we don't have funding to do that. So I think coming up with some creative ways to finance some of these efforts really should perhaps be a first step to requiring the County to acquire them. It could also set a precedent that we would be concerned about for future subdivisions. We already are challenged with developers wanting to keep their roads private so that they don't have to meet County standards. And then if we are continuing to create issues, then this puts in a precedent that the County would have to acquire certain roads for alternative purposes such as Mass Transit and evacuation and things of that nature. So I think it also sets a precedent that--that type of precedent with developers that we might be challenged with. MR. RICHARDS: Chair, can I continue? CHR. LEE LOY: Absolutely. MR. RICHARDS: Okay. Thanks, April, I appreciate that. Like I said, we've all got these roads that we've been trying to figure out how to attend to. You know, the point, alternative safety route, I have in my district, Kohala, we have one road, and that's a constant concern in trying to figure out how to go forward. And maybe Planning isn't the one to ask, but concerning liability of the road, if we're subpar—well, maybe back up first. I know we don't take roads unless they are in a dedicateable engineering condition, et cetera. Where did that come from? How long is that? I mean, it makes sense to me at this point, but it also taking substandard roads with that policy in place. Is that a policy be longstanding? And maybe Planning is not the one to ask, maybe Public Works is. Planning, can you comment? Page 5 PWMTC-21 April 22,2020 MS. SURPRENANT: Yes. At least through the Subdivision Code, that has been a longstanding, since 1960 provision that has been in various versions of the Subdivision Code. So I cannot speak for Department of Public Works in that regard. MR. RICHARDS: Okay. And thenobviously, I don't think Planning would comment on liability. But Chair, I'll have to yield over to my other colleagues. But, Clerk, maybe could we ring up and get Corp. Counsel on the line or something? I don't that they need to show up. But if we could them, can they answer questions via phone? Are we allowing that? CHR. LEE LOY: Mr. Richards, could you repeat the question for our Clerk? MR. RICHARDS: Clerk, concerning the liability standpoint, can we ask Corp. Counsel concerning that, and can they just answer on the phone or do they have to be in chambers? MR. HENRICKS: It would probably be just as fast to have Joe come over then get him on the phone. MR. RICHARDS: Okay. I would question on the liability because I—like I said, I'd love to do this; I don't know how we would fund it. And I am concerned about liability, so if we could get Joe? And then I'm going to yield to my other Council Members, Chair. CHR. LEE LOY: Sure, Mr. Richards. Any other Council Members while we wait for Corporation Counsel? MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: If I could offer something while we're waiting. So this discussionI mean, April is right. I sat down with April, and I sat down with Mike. I think as soon as I walked in the office, because I was looking for solutions and I'm creative, and I don't like "no" as an answer. And so we had many discussions. As far as bringing to standard, yes, that is an issue, and we've seen that on Road 8, Moho, which was barely wide enough. And some of those problems stems back to the creation of those subdivisions, and not actually creating a wide enough roadway that we consider to our standard to be dedicable. That's what I've come to understand. And if I say something wrong, I want you to correct me so I can understand. But I've been doing my homework and trying to wrap my head around this for about two years. So what was considered, would be to create a variance. We have a minimum right-of-way, that we call an agricultural road or a minimum right-of-way, which comes to 40 feet. Some roads would qualify for 40 foot. And we could create a Page 6 PWMTC-21 April 22,2020 variance, which would allow us to create a dedicateable road that would adhere to that variance in these types of situations. And, Tim, your question on funding is great. Well, if you notice, the bill calls for clarifying whether each route is an alternate, an evac, a mass transit, or a connectivity route. Now, I know that we increased GE(General Excise)tax earlier this year to 4.78 percent. Now when we did that, that half-percent interest was to go directly to mass transit, which is public transportation and for mass transit means. So with that said, there is funding available. Now we will see, and this is unfortunate, we will see a decline in GE income due to COVID-19, I'm very aware of that. But I also know that the funding is already there. Connectivity as a separate issue has been funded for years. There has been an ongoing discussion, a very circular discussion, on how to acquire the connectivity routes between each one of my subdivision in Puna, and I have watched this circular conversation occur. I have sat in the meetings, and I have seen it with my own eyes that in some ways I feel that the political will to achieve our goals of connectivity is not always there. Therefore, a bill requiring all of the above: the acquirement, the dedication, the maintenance, and the improving to a standard. And it was very purposeful that I left this open to the entire island, because yes, we all have these roads in our district, in varying forms. And when it comes down to a plan or unplanned event on our roadway that forces people to backtrack or use an alternate route, then those routes become a lifeline for the communities on the other side of the event. So that is what I can offer from my end, as far as what I know. And open to more comments or furthering discussion while we wait for Joe. CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. Mr. Yee. MR. YEE: So while we wait, some comments from me would beso, Matt, I don't think anybody disagrees like this is a big problem for every district throughout the island. The best example I have within my experience of three years here was the vacation rental bill. The problem that exited throughout the island that demanded alignment from the Mayor's Office and different departments, and a huge effort on everybody's part before it even got to Planning Commission level, right. My advice here would be given the complexity, which is even larger than the vacation rental, you've had these conversations, there should be many more with the Mayor's Office, with different departments, to try to shape this into a product that we can really look at. I think at this point, it's even deficient of trying to go to Planning Department to even have Planning Commission meeting, because there will be so much work on us to try to take it in its general current form to even try to work with it. So then you would put the work on Planning Commission staff to Page 7 PWMTC-21 April 22,2020 try to have sort through all the issues, which is in this crisis, we don't have—it's not a priority to have to do that under the situation. And so, I just urge you to have more collaborative meetings to see how we want to shape this. You've already started them; I think we just need a continuation in this. This bill was a little too premature at this point and time. CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Mr. Yee. Mr. Richards, any follow-up? MR. RICHARDS: First thing, Michael, your comments yeah, I'm sitting here thinking, Matt, because I like your outside of the box thinking, but again it comes back to the dollars and cents, and I am concern about the liability standpoint. And I appreciate the fact that you left it open for the County, because truly, you know, this is a County issue and we can all very quickly start listing to a whole bunch of roads. And maybe that's the next step with it, is to talk about the metrics. One of the things I don't see in here is, how do we prioritize it? Let's say you have, what, over 11 listed roads here. And let's just say we say we all have 11 roads, so 11 times nine is—we're talking about 100 roads that we could list. What is the metrics for—and if this says "shall," how do we acquire 100 roads that we don't have enough money to take care of? Again, I appreciate what you're saying, Matt, and I don't disagree because I've got roads since I've taken office, that I want to help, but they're private. And it's been very clear that we cannot use public funds on private roads, so I'm trying to figure out how we can make something like this work. And then, of course, the liability side. I too am like you in the sense, Matt, I don't like the word"no." They may say "no,"but what I hear is, "Ask a different way," so I try to keep looking for a solution and I'm trying to figure out how to help make this as a possibility. Do we have Corp. Counsel? Are they there yet? MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Not yet. MS. LEE LOY: Not yet. But I do see Val's light on, Mr. Richards. So if you want to yield? MR. RICHARDS: Yeah, I'll yield. I want to hear other people, as well. CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Mr. Richards. Ms. Poindexter, go ahead. MS. POINDEXTER: Yeah, and I understand where Council Member Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder is coming from. Because if anybody has that same amount of roads or maybe even more, is in Hamakua. You know, during the—even before the closure of the sugar company, you know, the County inherited some of the roads; however, most of the roads since the closure of the sugar company became the ownership of our associations and our camps. Page 8 PWMTC-21 April 22,2020 We have a lot of roads. Even down Hilo Coast Processing, when that closed, and that road going down, they've been for years now trying to get that dedicated to the County. It's a nice, big road, but the County cannot afford to take any more inventory. And then, on top of that, we have what we call the roads-in-limbo, which is over, I forget, 150 miles or something, and more than 50 percent of that is in Hamakua. So when we talk about, you know, alternate routes, I'm concerned about that, you know, for Hamakua. You know, one way in, one way out. I agree that there's—we've got to start talking about this because we've got to look at emergency routes. And if something closes down, how does the community get out? A perfect example is what happened up in Pa`auilo mauka, when the bridge went down, yeah, and there was no way to get out. So thank you for bringing this up to spark the conversation and to start it. And when you look at, you know, the situation where in today with this pandemic—and if we get a disaster within a pandemic, boy, we're screwed right now. So roads is, you know, a conversation that needs to take place. We cannot just keep saying, "Well, we don't have the money and let's put it on the back-burner, you know. We've got to start talking about the issues on what roads need to be taken care of for emergency purposes. Connectivity is so important. Because even our census coming up, it's all based on connectivity, right, when you start plotting the districts out and the population, and you've got to have connectivity. So thank you, Matt, for bringing this forward,just to kind of start that Community Development Plans (CDP) conversation. And I think whether they start meeting with the CDPs, or I don't if you're going to involve the CDPI think definitely the CDP should be involved with this. You know, one member from each CDP, forming a committee, and then start working with Matt to come up with a bill that we can push forward to the Planning Commission. I don't know how to start that process or what the process should look like, and I think that the Planning Department can help guide that process, I'm hoping. I yield at this time. Thank you, Madam Chair. CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Ms. Poindexter. Ms. Kierkiewicz, go ahead. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Chair, if may? Thank you. And thank you, Matt, for putting this forward. I think between the two of us, public safety, roads, big issues, and we've also got recovery on top of that, and now COVID. So any bright spot for our community is awesome. I worry about the County's existing kuleana and its inability to take care of the roads it has to take care of right now and adding more. I wonder if we can take a Page 9 PWMTC-21 April 22,2020 step back and think about some things that were brought up during a meeting that we had with the Administration. After carmageddon 2.0, that unfortunate car accident, I asked Roy and Moe to pull together a meeting, where Matt and I were both there. April was there from Planning. We had Tasha from Public Works as well as Director Yamamoto and others. Director Yee, were you there? I can't remember. Sorry,just so many things to remember these days. Anyway, there were a number of things that we talked about; in terms of safety, calming measures,just creative solutions. But at the end of the day, what was apparent was we as a County can't have those discussions on our own. They have to be broad. They have to include the State. They need to include private sector where it made sense, because if we're going to be acquiring roads that are on private land, we need to have those owners, you know, to have a seat at the table, and it takes just a lot of work. I say this, and I speak from experience. Because last year I introduced a resolution to start a bee working group, and it's literally been months that I've met every other week with beekeepers from all over the island. Planning's been there, Corp. Counsel's been there, State Department of Health and Agriculture. Everybody's coming to the table for our bees. And I wonder if that's an approach that you and I can lean on behalf of Puna, is creating a working group where we are very focused in our approach to solve this issue in a way that is feasible for everyone and is inclusive of the entire community. I just think that we need a little bit more focus and to really prioritize what is possible. And I say that because we are in this pandemic. There is a lot of stress, economic devastation. I don't want to put anything forward that sets a false sense of hope, right? I kind of worry that this is what this bill might be doing, so I just want us to take a step back and be creative. You know, we think about the various associations. Some work great; many in Puna do not, right? And so they are also partners that needs to have a seat at the table. And so on the State level, finding a way for State, potentially County, to be working in partnership with these associations so that they have the tools they need to get the job done. And it's not always like government having to be the savior. And so I appreciate the conversation. Very curious around what Corp. Counsel has to say. You know, I'd like to find a way for us to kind of move forward in a unified way for Puna because it's a very big area. The subdivision I live in, in HPP (Hawaiian Paradise Park), 133 miles of road. And one of the things that I had talked about—and I'm continuously working with Planning, with Public Works, and, you know, is there room for public-private partnership around associations doing a little bit, County doing a little bit, road and improvement districts on top of that? So I just think we have to get a little creative and be really diligent and disciplined in dedicating ourselves, you know, on a weekly, biweekly basis, to talk story as a group, come up with a way forward and then proceed together. So thank you, Chair. I yield. Page 10 PWMTC-21 April 22,2020 CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Ms. Kierkiewicz. I want to check in with Kona if anyone from Kona has any questions for April. MS. DAVID: Chair Lee Loy? CHR. LEE LOY: Go ahead, Ms. David. MS. DAVID: Yeah, this is Maile. Thank you. Thank you, Matt, for bringing this forward. You know, I'm listening to the discussions and the comments from Planning and from Council Members. And I think the concept is a goal, but how we get there, I think, I'm hearing is the issue. For one thing, as Council Member Richard said, in every district—when I think of private roadways,just Ocean View comes to mind, and we've got tons of miles of private roadways over there. And my thoughts are, you add that, you add roads everyone's district for that matter, how will the County manage these roadways? The other thing, I agree that this is a very complex issue and it has many components to it because you've got other departments involved with something like this. You've got DPW as well as others. But I think what Ibefore we even get to that point, I think I agree that there are a lot more to be investigated and done so that we make sure that what we're doing now, or what you're requesting now, does not conflict with any of our other code requirements, not only for the changes you're recommending but for other code sections that might be related to the intent of what you're trying to do. I think it's a work in progress that has to be, I guess, done much like Council Member Eoff can attest to. Her initial vacation rental bill ended up taking severala couple years to actually fine tune it and really get it to the point where it was implementable; and still at that point in time, doing the implementation process, we're discovering too that there are issues that still come up. Not to discourage you from what you're planning to do, but I think I can agree that there's a lot more things that need to be considered in taking this huge step that will definitely impact not only Puna but the entire island and our ability as government to finance these things. The other thing that I'm thinking about listening to everybody is, this is a very huge topic that does involve the entire island, and wondering if whether it would be something that should be kept or discussed when we do not have this set up that we have right now in conducting our meetings, where we can have our public come in and weigh in on this issue. I think there's a lot I mean, we have testimony, written testimony, but I think just an open discussion in our normal meetings bring forward a lot of suggestions and recommendations that, you know, sitting up here we might not be able to think of all of them. And I think just the input from our citizens and experts in one field or another relating to this kind of issue, I think is important. Page 11 PWMTC-21 April 22,2020 So while I see where you're going, I think I can cautiously say that I think we kind of wait. You know, do a little bit more investigating and research and working with the different departments to see how this actually be done successfully. And for now that's all I wanted to say. I think this is an important issue. And while we do have an unusual way of having our meetings now, I just sense that this is a real public topic that I'd like to see the public weigh in, in a normal sense. That's all I have to say or comment on this, Matt. But thank you for your initiative. It's just—that's all I can offer you for you at this time. So thank you, and I yield. MS. EOFF: Ms. Lee Loy, hi. CHR. LEE LOY: Go ahead, Ms. Eoff. MS. EOFF: I was just going to add, these are all really good comments. And also the fact that Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder does want to think out of the box and find solutions, I think it's very commendable. And for his first term to want to provide something meaningful, I think that's really commendable. And it is, it's frustrating. And part of our job is learning government and big changes to our code. Any of our laws requires a lot of discussion behind the scenes. Besides the vacation rental bill, I was involved in some other legislation, even working for the prior Councilman, and the more work you can do with Corp. Counsel and other people in the various departments that would be impacted by changes to the code, you know, the better off your product will be. Yeah, I would suggest that patience is going to be something important going forward; because the more likely to get something passed, would be the more buy-in and communication, and maybe even some compromise But the more information you can gather and solutions you can consider before even attempting the actual bill, will really go a long ways. But I wouldn't discourage you. I think this is something, yeah, we all have. These roads in our district, and we have a lot of specific situations. And I think the point that Mr. Yee made a little while ago, I haven't thought of this, but the fact that it could lead—or maybe it was April—it could leave loophole for future developers for future developers to think they can build just any kind of road to get away with less of an investment, and expect the County to bring it up to standard, or to somehow, acquire it in the future. I think that's something worth a lot of thoughts. So anyways, I don't really know what you want to do from here. But those are my comments. Thank you. CHR. LEE LOY: Ms. Villegas, anything you want to add to the conversation? MS. VILLEGAS: I just want to thank Matt for taking the initiative and having the courage to present something like this. But I guess it's sounding like it's not exactly the right timing. I agree with Council Member David talking about Page 12 PWMTC-21 April 22,2020 perhaps that this will be—wiser to address when we are in a different state of even just our physical capabilities of hosting testifiers to talk about it. But I also really want to recognize for the representatives of Puna, the challenges, and so much of this comes back to the historical creation of these subdivisions under circumstances that were less than ideal, less than wise, and more than questionable. So I feel it's tragic that we're still haunted by the circumstances that have been created in those subdivisions. And my heart goes out to the people who are consistently affected by those, especially as we've experienced such intense crises on this island with the lava flow and evacuation routes. So at this point, I have some hesitation in pushing this bill forward. However, I would like to work with Matt and make sure that we kind of get to the best solution possible. And I recognize your frustration with kind of feeling like it's constantly chasing tail and having meetings. And coming up with tangible resolutions can be really frustrating. I just want to thank you once again for bringing this forward and being open to suggestions and opportunities to continue navigating this process to better roadway systems and evacuation routes for the Puna area, within the current confines of budgets and departmental limitations. So thanks for that, Matt. With that, I yield. CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Ms. Villegas. Joe is here, and I know Mr. Richards, and I think even Ms. Eoff had some questions regarding the liability. Mr. Richards, if you don't mind, I don't mind giving it back to you to ask that question. MR. RICHARDS: Sure. Thanks, Chair. Joe, can you come up please? (Note: At this time, Corporation Counsel Joseph Kamelamela came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. KAMELAMELA: Good afternoon. Joseph Kamelamela, Corp. Counsel. MR. RICHARDS: Thanks, Joe. I appreciate you coming back, unusual times and weird how we're conducting business. But the questioned I had, are you familiar with the contents of Bill 157? MR. KAMELAMELA: I read the bill, and then I had some discussions with several attorneys from my office. MR. RICHARDS: Okay, thanks. Why we called you up here, with Joe, is we were discussing the possibility, won't recap everything but everybody in the Council feels the frustration with our lava roads in our own districts. The question specific for you pertains to the liability. We have a policy in place, and according to April, it has been in the Subdivision Code since early `60s, as far as accepting only dedicable roads through the County. The question I had was the liability of Page 13 PWMTC-21 April 22,2020 accepting a nondedicateble condition road, meaning substandard. What are we looking at from a liability standpoint for the County? Could you comment on that? MR. KAMELAMELA: Yeah. So I'll try to go beyond that too, because MR. RICHARDS: Sure. MR. KAMELAMELA: We do have a policy, and as I understand it, it's based on a wide, broad policy that applies to everybody. So when the County Council do enact—certain ordinances, its intent is for the public good for the entire island. And what April is talking about, is that at least for new subdivisions, you know, it is very expensive to build roads. County just doesn't have the type of financial resources to build it. So what happens is that as part of the calculation for building the road, it's shared with those who purchased the property. So at least those lots that are sold, you know, they're paying for the abilities that they have. So that is a benefit to the County. So that's one point. The second point is, when you create a bill like this, as in its current form, there's two things that are involved here. One is, if a bill like this gets passed, then it subjects us to lawsuits, because as we know, there's practical considerations in trying to move forward. Because how do we acquire property? Well, the way we acquire property, there's different ways, but one way is through the power of condemnation based on public purpose. And if we go in to try to acquire these roads, which I think must have at least 100 or more owners, we have to condemn everything. We don't have the money to acquire. If we don't have the money to acquire, then somebody is going to sue us. That's one thing. The second thing is we have some tools, may not be the perfect tool, you know, to help subdivisions, that have been in the books for a while. One tool is to have an improvement district, because I see it before. We have seen it with the sewers. I've seen it once with roads in Kea`au. So there is a mechanism there. And the recognition there is because people who are within the subdivision share in the cost. A bill like this, it doesn't seem like there's a process where people within the subdivision are sharing the cost. They want the entire island to pay for it. And because of that, I'm not sure it's a good policy. Now process wise, I heard that the process is, which is correct, send it back to the departments, have people look at it, and then who knows, maybe there's a creative solution that comes out that's going to help us. So there are things that could be considered by the Public Works people and also from Planning Commission, that are maybe going to help us through this. But as it is now, I think it's bad policy as it is now. CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Mr. Kamelamela. Mr. Richards, a follow-up? Page 14 PWMTC-21 April 22,2020 MR. RICHARDS: Yeah, a follow-up. I'm just—from—if I understand our policies concerning liability overall, there is a federal standard for roads at different levels. If we accept a road that is not of that level, is there a greater exposure of liability for bodily injury or anything like that, or is that part of the consideration? MR. KAMELAMELA: It is a part then. And, you know, once it move towards acquiring something substandard, then if there's a lawsuit, if there's a defect, then, you know, the we'd the County would get sued for that. But also, I'm thinking of what'sI mean, there's a hurdle to get over. The hurdle is, can we have enough Council Members to say, by at least a two-third majority that there's a public purpose in improving a private road, to such the extent that we're going out and do all of the Puna road, and that's it, without any reasonable process in place that can help the Council Members to determine whether we should here rather than there. So there's that huge issue—is this the kind of case where this Council wants to say "public purpose" for basically taking over one private road? I mean, it hasn't really been done in Hawaii. But you know, that's creative, But is that the way this Council wants to go? MR. RICHARDS: Okay, Joe, thanks. I yield, Chair. I yield. CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Mr. Richards. Ms. Kierkiewicz, please. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chair. Hey, Joe, nice to see you again. Just wondering if you could clarify for us the GET funding? Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder is saying we can use those funds, our half-percent surcharge, to acquire private roads. But it was my understanding, because it's State money, we can only use it to fund, acquire, improve public roads and mass transit, which is why we were advocating for some flexibility around GET and fuel tax so that we can, you know, improve private roads. So can you just clarify whether or not GET can be spent to fund this bill? MR. KAMELAMELA: At this time, no. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Okay. Thank you. CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Ms. Kierkiewicz. Anyone else? Any questions for Mr. Kamelamela? Go ahead, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, Joe, I have a question. So first clarify, this just isn't just Puna roads, this is island-wide, because we all have the same problems across the island. Sothis isn't just to pay for Puna private subdivision roads. Also, clarifying for everyone here, the routes included in this bill are only to be mass transit, alternate routes, evacuation routes, or connectivity routes. So Page 15 PWMTC-21 April 22,2020 this is not taking over every private road across the island. That seems to be a point that we've missed. Now, I'm looking down the line. We have increased our GE tax poll for our County. The SSFM report came out and listed and created a series of routes across the island, that we accepted as a Council as our Mass Transit Master Plan. Now if we're going to require that subdivisions let the County use their road as a mass transit route, then I'm going to ask a very blunt question, why is that not public purpose? How can a mass transit route used by County buses in a private subdivision not qualify as a public purpose? How can an alternate route that we called Puna Emergency Access Route, that we currently maintain at our cost, that we do not own and we never acquired, not qualify as a public purpose? And if it's not public purpose, why on earth do we maintain Road 8? MR. KAMELAMELA: Okay, so I'll answer those two. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: But sorry, I need to furthermore to further that point, if GE Tax is for mass transit purposes and public transportation, why would it not apply to the route that the buses are going to be taking? And I'm looking down the line, if we're going to send buses on roads that are substandard, we're going to kill our buses and we're going decrease the lifetime of our equipment that we're purchasing brand new. It is actually in our best interest to be doing this at any point in the island, where we have created a mass transit public purpose route on a road that a normal car can barely pass on an unplanned event like we saw earlier this year. MR. KAMELAMELA: Okay, let me start with the GET. The legislature was clear, at least couple years that I know of, that the monies is not to be used for private roads. You know, it's something that we have thought about on how to see if there's wiggle room, and then really there isn't because the way that the statute is set is set up for the GET, it is specific. And that's why at least for the past couple of years, or several years that I know, both the administration and Council members, you know, have been going to the legislature, "Please, let us use the money also for this," and they tell us, "No." So that's the thing with the GET. For the PEAR(Puna Emergency Access Route) road, yes, that is one emergency, but the County does have an interest in that through an easement. The easement was acquired over ten years ago. The deputy who was in charge of that one, you know, who is now the Director at the Liquor, Mr. Takase, you know, he was the one that helped the County at that time to acquire Road 8. Now, getting back to mass transit. The only thing that I really know about the routes that I can be certain about, is that when communities ask the administration for a route, they will study it and then see if there is a need, and they will work with the community to determine, you know, whether to take the bus to a certain area. I don't know, if the current community doesn't want it, then maybe you Page 16 PWMTC-21 April 22,2020 should make it clear to mass transit, "We don't want it there." There is that option, dealing with mass transit. The last point that I wanted to make, because you were asking me for clarification, about the applicability of this. I said, you know, I didn't disagree with you. All I said is, "Does this County want to take this step with this particular bill in its current form?" In its current form, it's a bad policy. Maybe when you take it back to Planning, work with Public Works, and maybe a solution can come out from the committee because we're going to have the public involved. Now, we have been trying to figure out, like Puna connectivity, how that works. It's one of the most difficult problems that I've seen because sometimes we have subdivisions that are at odds with each other. For example, I know of a road in between two subdivisions, even if the County was to acquire the road, one subdivision has the power to cut off the road so that the other side don't use it. So then the County has to not only condemn that segment, but the entire road system so that they can leave it open. So, I am not familiar with all the roads that have been identified here, but there are a lot of issues that got to be looked at, got to be considered. The best route, if this thing moves forward, is to send it to the Planning Commission. But I'm thinking send it to both of them, both the Leeward and the Windward, because this is one island-wide concern. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I agree with you. It actually—it has to. If it were to pass today, it would have to go to both Planning Commissions and the Planning Director for review. It has to be referred to them. I've been in the same meetings, and I've seen the same problems pop up again and again, it is the connectivity. Just connectivity routes, we cannot seem to figure out how to acquire. And it is very difficult working with different subdivisions and coming up with a common plan. When was connectivity for first conceived and when did the discussion start? Was it before you were here? MR. KAMELAMELA: You know, I that part, I don't know if it started prior to this administration. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I think it's been going on since the early 2000s, if not before that. MR. KAMELAMELA: I kind of recall a discussion with a former chair of the Puna Connectivity Committee, telling me that they might have had a plan back in 2008. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I agree. So that's kind of why I brought this. Not kind of, that is why I brought this forward. MR. KAMELAMELA: Yeah. Page 17 PWMTC-21 April 22,2020 MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: When I see something take 12 years, and I watch the State Highway, or the State DOT (Department of Transportation), work to take over parts of Highway 130 from multiple owners and lot owners along the highway, they manage to get it done. We, the County, we have a lot of tools at our disposal. I mean, I found a section that homeowners can actually donate parts of their land to the County. Land can be donated to the County. And yes, you brought up the Improvement District process. The Improvement District process is a tool that the Council can use through a County bond, but the funding of that process, and that Improvement District, falls on the homeowner of each subdivision of each lot that's affected. So I've looked at all these options and I'm discussing these options with my communities. But again, I'm back to when I see roads that are actually County purpose, that fall in a private subdivision, then we come to an interesting gray area. And when I realize the depth of our code, and that it was written to say, "From here on, after 1966, these rules would be adhered to." But from 1966 and past, sorry, or in the past, those roads will not be able to be dedicated to the County until they meet the standards hereon, which was in the 1980s that was amended. I see that we have effectively locked private subdivisions out of coming back to bring their road to standard. And how can we ask these subdivisions with private roads to financially fund a road that we use? And that is what got me, that aspect of what we have created in our code. And why should the burden fall on them? These are average taxpaying citizens of Hawaii County, and yes, they knew what they knew what they were buying when the bought it. But I mean, if it's ours, it's ours. I'm not trying to create a precedent here, but I am trying to take care of a good portion of this island that has roads that we use; and if we use them, if this County uses those roads, then we should be willing to participate in the cost regardless of precedent, regardless of financial obligation, because that really is our civic duty. Speaking to liability, what if something does happen, like Ms. Poindexter said? When Highway 130 closed, what if something happened on one of those back roads that we put people on as an alternate route to get to and from Hilo? There is a liability concern on the backside of that situation. Now one thing I can agree on right now is that the timing of this bill is unfortunate, and to everyone I apologize. Timing is timing in the County, and this took months to get through and done and around and it then popped up, and here it is. I do believe, and I agree with every Council Member who said, that I would like to see public input because this is an island-wide bill. I am more than willing to go back to the drawing board with all the different departments involved, and I would love to have everyone's opinion. Because this is just not Puna, and that's what I came to realize in creating this bill. This is not Puna. This is not Puna centric. It's a huge issue in Puna, but this is island-wide. So, I yield. I would like to hear what Page 18 PWMTC-21 April 22,2020 anyone has to say beyond that. And, Joe, I really appreciate your time and your thought on this. This is incredibly important. MR. KAMELAMELA: You're welcome. CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. I'm going to try and take a swing at it, because there are number of tools in our toolbelt. It's how to build the synergies around them, right? And my concern is if we send this bill through its normal processes, we've actually pigeon-holed the Planning Department and the Department of Public Works to look at it in this current framework. And we won't be able to take into consideration some guiding principles, like if it's identified as a mass transit route, if it's used as an emergency route. Some of the broader problems we have in Puna is that it is a bedroom community. It doesn't have a lot of commercial services, which is why so many people drive in. And maybe something with our General Plan or our Community Development Plans that provide community services within in Puna, so that there isn't so much pressure on the roads. These are all different scenarios and solutions that could emerge. Unfortunately, the way the bill is written, and I'm hearing it's somewhat deficient and wouldn't even give the Planning Commissions and/or the Department of Public Works an opportunity to provide some broad strokes. There is the issue with GE(General Excise) and the wonkiness of whether it could or could not be used. That's a State issue, and that's a State policy shift that we would have to make. And I asked Public Works to take an area take-off on how many miles of road in Puna there is, and just—it's a political subdivision, there is close to 1,000 miles of road just in Puna alone. And so to try and address it in a bill, and the way it's framed up, I'm concerned that it's actually not only deficient but setting us up to not include more broad solutions. I'm generally concerned that some of the roads that are identified are listed are listed on our State Historic Preservation list, and so I don't even know how we could even begin to acquire Old Volcano Trail, that's been identified as a State Historic Preservation trail. So all of these things are what needs to be put out on the table for broad consumption by many stakeholders and many individuals with the technical expertise to understand that. So, I am hearing you that the fundamental question is, how is it identified as a mass transit route? We adopted it, so we should be caring for it, but it's more complexed than that. I've also heard a number of Council Members offer help and solutions. I'm just going to ask out loud, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, if this not ready for primetime, if you would be willing to withdraw it and take in a lot of the feedback that you've got today? Because what I would hate is for it to run through its processes and come back with unfavorable recommendations from Windward, Leeward, and the Page 19 PWMTC-21 April 22,2020 Public Works department, and we would have wasted even more time. Those are my thoughts. Even the Improvement District, that's another tool that we could maybe leverage some of the road association fees with. Those are all creative financing tool options. And maybe another way is to identify a community that is ready, willing, and able; and a functioning association, and use them as a model. You know, this is a very complex situation, and it really does lead or need a lot more thought than what we have here. Those are my thoughts. The options we have is to forward it on to Planning Commission and Public Works for their technical review and comment. Or, like I said, another option would be to withdraw, work on it some more. Take the feedback you've got today and put something a little bit more comprehensive forward. Those are my thoughts. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Mike, I have a question for you, or April. Sorry, not sure. (Note: At this time, Planning Director Michael Yee and Acting Deputy Planning Director April Surprenant came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Is this bill suitable for Chapter 23? And if not, then why? MS. SURPRENANT: I'm not sure I can totally answer that question right now. I'm not sure it is suitable in its current form for Chapter 23. It may be in a different form. But I think that's why we need to kind of go back to the drawing board and do some more work. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. Would having the Planning Commissions view it be detrimental to this bill, because you basically would be offering your suggestions at that point? MR. YEE: You know, I think that the timing and bandwidth right now is just bad timing. You can either send something like this in its form to Planning Commission; they're just going to probably send it back to say, "It's too deficient for us to even try to assess. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. Would you be willing to work with me on bettering this bill so that I can bring it to Planning Commissions? Because I think we've all agreed that this is an incredibly important issue, but how we get there is another discussion all together. So can I ask you to participate with me in creating this bill to be, as it was put, more capable and not deficient in the future? Page 20 PWMTC-21 April 22,2020 I will give you that this is bad timing, and I understood that when I went through but here we are. MR. YEE: So I think, Matt, you know April and I in Planning Department, we're planners. We always welcome the opportunity to sit at the table to dialogue on any issue. As I said before, there are a lot of other players that have to be around the table, but you know April and I will always be there. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. I'm going to make a motion, but I'd like to know if there any other comments before I make that motion? CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. Anyone? Kona? Tim, in Waimea? Alright, seeing none, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder? MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I would like to motion to postpone this bill for further review from my office, and I need to know, from the Clerk, should it be to the call of the Chair? To the call of the Chair, okay. Vote on Motion to Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder moved to postpone Bill 157 Postpone: to the call of the Chair. Seconded by Ms. Poindexter (Approved) and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members David, Eoff, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder Kierkiewicz, Poindexter, Richards, Villegas, and Chair Lee Loy —8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Chung— 1. Excused: None. CHR. LEE LOY: I think that takes us to the end of the agenda. ADJOURN- There being no further business, at 1:34 p.m., Ms. Poindexter moved to adjourn the MENT: meeting. Seconded by Mr. Richards and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members David, Eoff, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder Kierkiewicz, Poindexter, Richards, Villegas, and Chair Lee Loy —8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Chung— 1. Excused: None. Page 21