Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN AWEEMC 2020/07/21 2018-2020 Committee on Agriculture, Water, Energy, and Environmental Management 18th Session Hawaii County Building 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, Hawai i July 21, 2020 CALL TO The regular meeting of the Committee on Agriculture, Water, Energy, ORDER: and Environmental Management was called to order at 1:36 p.m., in the Council Chambers, Hilo, by Mr. Herbert M. "Tim" Richards, III, Chair. ROLL CALL: Present: Mr. Herbert M. "Tim" Richards, III, Chair Mr. Matt Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Vice Chair Mr. Aaron S. Y. Chung, Member Ms. Maile Medeiros David, Member (via videoconference from Kona) Ms. Karen Eoff, Member (via videoconference from Kona) Ms. Ashley L. Kierkiewicz, Member (came in later) Ms. Susan L. K. Lee Loy, Member (came in later) Ms. Valerie T. Poindexter, Member (came in later) Ms. Rebecca Villegas, Member (via videoconference from Kona) 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.) CHR. RICHARDS: Okay, having no testifiers, I'm going to close public testimony. COMMUNI- The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, CATIONS: Communications. (There were none.) CHR. RICHARDS: Moving forward Order of Resolutions, Clerk, please. ORDER OF The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, RESOLUTIONS: Order of Resolutions. AWEEMC-18 July 21,2020 Res. 681-20: REQUESTS THE HAWAII COUNTY CORPORATION COUNSEL TO JOIN LEGAL ACTION, CITY & COUNCIL OF HONOLULU VS. SUNOCO LP, ET AL., CIV. NO. 20-380, AGAINST FOSSIL FUEL COMPANIES TO RECOVER CLIMATE CRISIS-RELATED COSTS THAT HAVE IMPACTED THE COUNTY OF HAWAII Seeks to recover damages caused by impacts of climate change. Reference: Comm. 994 Intr. by: Rebecca Villegas and Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder (Note: Comm. 994.1, dated July 21, 2020, transmitting proposed amendments to Res. 681-20, was circulated.) Motion to Approve: Ms. Villegas moved to recommend adoption of Res. 681-20. Seconded by Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. CHR. RICHARDS: I guess we'll start with you Rebecca. Go ahead, please. MS. VILLEGAS: Thank you, Mr. Richards. Thanks for this opportunity to bring this resolution forward. Matt and I actually met with the Administration in the latter part of last year, and talked about this opportunity. Because other municipalities Honolulu, County of Oahu and Maui have both signed on to this litigation case prior. Just to give—and my apologies I will actually be sharing the PowerPoint presentation. Josh Stanbro flew over and met with us, to help kind of guide us through this process when we met originally with Mayor Kim. And there is a lengthy report that includes all of this specific data, facts, and evidence. That prove that the petroleum industries had knowledge of what they were doing. And that in 1988 the fossil fuel companies organized and created disinformation campaigns, and they created a deception campaign. But then activated means for protecting their own assets. It outlines climate cost and the party's impacts and claims. So unfortunately after that meeting, we were essentially told that our county was not going to be participating in this litigation. Which was very disappointing. However not too much to bring it back up. And I think it's really important that the members of our community and here on the Big Island, know what's happening, what's available. And as we look at climate change, and we're already dealing with the economic downturn and crisis caused by COVID. We are also going to be continuing to look at increased impacts and cost related to climate change. We signed that climate declaration resolution earlier in this term, which, you know, we aligned ourselves with that being a priority. And I think it's important—excuse me one second. My apologies. So essentially this lawsuit is seeking financial support, or basically it's holding these companies liable. And helping different municipalities pay for the mitigation, caused by the worst impacts of climate change. Page 2 AWEEMC-18 July 21,2020 We know that the volume of raw carbon taken out of the ground allows scientist to calculate the emissions. Humans have been responsible for all of the increase in greenhouse gases, in the last 150 years. With agriculture and deforestation being responsible for 25 percent of the greenhouse gas emissions, and the other 75 percent is all coming from coal, oil, and gas. There are direct links to fossil fuel companies, and the emissions to climate change. And we are witnessing those impacts here now. With chronic coastal erosion, we have more frequent and powerful hurricanes and tropical storms, intense rainfall, and flood events. Sea level rise threatens our coastal infrastructure. According to the Hawaii sea level rise and vulnerability and adaptation report from 2017, a three foot of sea level rise in this century is real and likely to be higher and more rapidly occurring. Hawaii faces flooding threats in main urban areas, including low-lying areas in Kona, Puako, and Hilo Bay. Approximately 4,500 acres of land on the island of Hawaii is estimated to be located in the sea level rise exposure area, with a 3.2 foot sea level rise. Approximately 20 percent of that 4,500 acres is currently designated for urban land use. Some of the examples of exposure to chronic flooding, include Ka`upulehu portions would be permanently flooded; Waimea where there would be new and expanded wetlands around historical and agriculture areas; in south point, Hawaiian farmsteads and coastal resources are already flooding during the high tides; and Hawaiian Beaches, shoreline erosion is increasing as well as flooding; in the Hamakua Coast they're looking at bluff erosion and potential catastrophic bluff failures; in Puako, flooding and potential permanent inundation. Over the next 30 to 70 years, homes and businesses located near the shoreline will be impacted by sea level rise. Approximately 130 structures will be chronically flooded. More detailed economic lost is needed of our Hawai`i's critical infrastructure. Much of the information included in this report, which identifies a potential economic loss island-wide at $426 million to move the infrastructure on our coastlines. I find that extremely concerning. While it's not as large of a number as some of the other counties, Oahu mainly, with Waikiki, and the value of their resources right on the water. That's a bill the taxpayers are going to end up having to pay, to move our infrastructure up away from the coastlines. I mean we just had a sewage spill in Kailua Bay, due to the eroding sewer lines there. As we look to replace and fix them, I think it's wise to also look to the future and how we're going to need to move some of these infrastructure pieces. I don't think it's fair, I don't think it's wise, nor do I think it's responsible for us to put this burden on our taxpayers. I was excited, and a number of us were, at the planning conference on Maui last summer when a lot of this information was brought forward. That a number of professionals and scientists, and planners throughout the country are recognizing the need for petroleum companies that knew what they were doing, the facts are there, the statistics and the evidence has been proven that they knew what they Page 3 AWEEMC-18 July 21,2020 were doing when they were extracting carbon from the earth, and releasing it into the atmosphere. There are a number of different websites, a number of different resources, and a number of different states and municipalities, who have joined on to this lawsuit, which would hold the petroleum companies financially liable. Unfortunately at this point, we are so far headed in a certain direction that mitigating climate change and sea level rise is an even more monumental task. However holding the companies responsible because they knew what they were doing, and continued to do it, and continue to this day to do it. And so requiring them to provide financial support to municipalities, to help us pay for the mitigation that we're going to have to work through to move our infrastructure up and away from coastlines. And to me $426 million and that's in today's dollars, and it also does not take into consideration the cost of hurricanes, the cost of rain bombs, you know,these bigger weather patterns. Nor does it take into consideration the cost of moving airports, and harbors, and piers. So we're really looking at a drastic cost to our county, and the other counties in the State of Hawaii. And I would very much like to see the Administration take steps to sign on to this case, and for us to include Maui and Oahu in this litigation. And align ourselves with the opportunity for some financial compensation, as that time—it's going to take a while. But as this case travels through the court system, I think it's wise for our county imprudent for us to participate and join forces with the other counties in our state. And with that, I'll yield for now. CHR. RICHARDS: Thank you. Matt. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Tim. Appreciate it. I still remember Aaron Chung's opening statement to our Council at our inauguration, almost about a year and half ago, almost two years ago. And he rightly labeled climate change is one of the biggest issues that we would be dealing with. I think little did he know, COVID-19 was coming. But he we are, and I really have to say mahalo to Rebecca for bringing this forward. I was unaware of the lawsuit until she brought it up, and we had a discussion with the Administration and some of our Corporation Counsel. And I'm grateful that she's allowed me to be a part of this. I really do feel that climate change among other things, is going to be a huge issue for our state. Sea level rise, you know, we're looking at a tropical hurricane, a tropical storm or hurricane. Was it David or hurricaneI forget the name, sorry. Hurricane name with a"D" in the ocean, coming towards us and we are in the middle of our king tides. And we have seen again, and again, year after year increase flooding in all parts of our state. So this is going to be a challenging issue for us to address, and part of that is looking at who is responsible. And you know, this industry has profited from the manufacture of fossil fuels, but they haven't had to pay any consequences. They knew well it's included in this Page 4 AWEEMC-18 July 21,2020 document that Rebecca has put forward this lawsuit, is that they knew from what science was giving them 30 years ago. That this is going to be probably, it's not probably, it's going to be detrimental to our entire Earth. But they took no steps to counteract that. So what we're asking here, is that the taxpayers should not be bearing the cost. The taxpayers should have been warned 30 years ago that this was going to happen. And now we are making the companies who have profited for years, accountable for their conduct and for the damages that come with that conduct. And that's really what we're talking about. So I fully support this resolution. We in Hawai`i will be facing some of the most increased sea level rises, due to the way that water and hydrodynamics work. As our ice caps begin to melt, which they already are, we'll see high rises here due to the water will pull towards the equators,than you will see in other areas of the world. So we actually are in a worse position than many other parts of the world, given our placement in the Pacific and at the equator. So again, Rebecca mahalo for putting this forward, I'm glad to be a part of it. And I hope everyone here can support this. And like you said, many other counties and states and nations are jumping into this same lawsuit. So mahalo. CHR. RICHARDS: Thank you, Matt. And with that I'm going to open up for questions and comments. MS. VILLEGAS: Chair Richards? CHR. RICHARDS: Yes. MS. VILLEGAS: Excuse me Chair Richards, my apologies. I had an ice cream after lunch, and I've got blood sugar brain. I needed to introduce an amendment if possible to this resolution. CHR. RICHARDS: Okay, let's go ahead and do that now, so we're talking about one document. So go ahead. Motion to Amend: Ms. Villegas moved to amend Res. 681-20 with the contents of Comm. 994.1. Seconded by Ms. David. CHR. RICHARDS: Go ahead Rebecca, lead the discussion. MS. VILLEGAS: Yes, there was a mistake in the title, and we needed to transition the word"Council"to "County." And we also wanted to include the source of the information listed in the Whereas that talks about over the next 30 to 70 years homes and businesses located near shoreline will be impacted by sea level rise. Hopefully you guys all have a copy of this. Page 5 AWEEMC-18 July 21,2020 MR. RICHARDS: We are sharing one. So with that, thank you for that Rebecca. Comments or questions concerning the amendment? I'm seeing none here in Hilo, how about Kona. MS. VILLEGAS: No. CHR. RICHARDS: Since I'm not hearing anything there. Call for the question on this. All approving the amendment please signify by saying "aye." Vote on Motion The motion to amend Res. 681-20 with the contents of to Amend: Comm. 994.1 was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz, Lee Loy, Poindexter, Villegas, and Chair Richards –9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. RICHARDS: Resolution is amended with the information contained in Comm. 994.1. So now we are back to the original motion on the table concerning Res. 681-20, as amended. Thank you. So continue on with that. So thank you, Rebecca. Comments or questions or concerns from the Council Members? I am hearing none on the Hilo side. On Kona side? MS. EOFF: Mr. Chair? CHR. RICHARDS: Yes, go ahead. MS. EOFF: I just like to say thank you, to Matt and Rebecca for moving forward with this. I don't know if we need to hear from our Corporation Counsel, but that may be—if everyone's ready to CHR. RICHARDS: We do have Joe Kamelamela in chambers right now. Do you have any further comments Karen, because if not I'm going to call Joe up for MS. EOFF: Go ahead and call him up. CHR. RICHARDS: Okay. So I'll come back to you Karen, when pau. Joe, may I ask you to come up, and comment on this resolution, please? (Note: At this time Corporation Counsel Joseph Kamelamela came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. KAMELAMELA: Good afternoon. Joseph Kamelamela, Corporation Counsel. In regards to the resolution,just to let you know our office had been Page 6 AWEEMC-18 July 21,2020 reviewing this climate change litigation for over two years now. Because I had my deputies attend a lot of the planning sessions, and so they reported back to me as to what to do. This is resolution in itself doesn't mean we're going to file a lawsuit right away. What it does is when the appropriate time to get involved, we can get involved. And this is what I mean, I mean right now this climate change litigation has been filed with Honolulu City and County Corp. Counsel's Office. And you know, we have been working with them on this issue. And then we recognized that there are a differences from what we have in Honolulu, and what we have on this island for example. Because I was raised in Oahu, there are a lot of low lying areas where we can see a lot of damage that's going to be caused by the sea level rise. Here, our island, most of it is cliffs. You know, that is a difference. So we continue to monitor because—oh. Yes, I am, but I was trying. Anyway so, thank you. Anyway, you know, this is something for us to really kind of watch out for. And so we've been looking at the other jurisdictions and how they been handling this. Just to let the public know we're in the Ninth Circuit. And so if there's going to be a lawsuit, you know, we're trying to follow as much as we can how the Ninth Circuit is handling a lawsuit like this, which is brand new actually. So I don't mind like waiting, you know, let Honolulu make whatever mistakes they need to do. And then when there's an opportunity to help—because we do help one another anyway. I've worked with other counties on many different things, and so we're always in contact. Because in a lawsuit like that, because they're so brand new, you know,there are basic issues that has to be resolved by the Ninth Circuit. And just to give you an example: you know, recently there was some children who sued on climate change. And although part of the reasoning there, you know, it may not apply here, the Ninth Circuit said they have no standing. But I'm sure that there's other issues, and with other circuits we have noticed a difference in how they rule. But we're looking at what the Ninth Circuit does,because that will control what can and what can't be done here. So this issue hasn't to been brought up to the Ninth Circuit yet. Besides it being new, because we're suing for damages there are questions that had to be vetted. You know, such questions as, you know, how much do they care, what did they really know, when did they know it? That's just a massive amount of information. We got some of it, but not all of it. And then trying to prove, you know, whether there's damages, you know, in this situation. And that too, in a case like this, very difficult to prove, you know. But this resolution,just gives us an opportunity to keep it alive. Let us kind of look at it, because there are other things we can do. Like I said we do cooperate, and if we need to file like an advocate's brief to support them, you know, that's the thing that we could do down the road. Until some of these other issues get Page 7 AWEEMC-18 July 21,2020 resolved, I've always had informed people that it's okay to wait and join in. Because we can join in later, when the right opportunities happen. MR. RICHARDS: Okay, thank you, Joe. Now you made one comment when I was sitting there. And actually before I go forth, I promised Karen I'd kind of get back to her. So, Ms. Eoff. MS. EOFF: I just wanted to say, that I'm happy to support this resolution. And I understand our island, the geology, etcetera,the coastline, the cliffs, the lava, it's all very unique and it is different than Oahu and there may be more low-lying areas on the islands. But we also have low-lying areas, we coastal flooding, we have other impacts that will affect us. So I encourage Mr. Kamelamela, and I'm glad he stated he's going to be watching carefully what happens and at the proper time with this resolution it will allow him to move forward. And I would say that it, like was stated earlier, it was something that even Mr. Chung stated at our inauguration, may be our most pressing issue of our time. And so I believe we need to stay on the forefront if there are any ways to help us compensate for the impacts financial that we will see here. So thank you, again. And I'll yield, and keep listening. Mahalo. CHR. RICHARDS: Thank you, Karen. Do we other comments from any other Council Members? MS. DAVID: Chair Richards? CHR. RICHARDS: Is that Maile? MS. DAVID: Yes. CHR. RICHARDS: Go ahead, shoot. MS. DAVID: Thank you. Alright, thank you, Rebecca and Matt, for doing this. I have a few questions, it's pretty much a procedural thing for Mr. Kamelamela. If I understand you correctly, are you saying that in this particular First Circuit action we are unable to join in that action? And we would be considering filing our own civil lawsuit, when the appropriate time? Because the resolution is asking us to join in the legal action. So are you saying we at this time, cannot join their civil action? Just wanted some clarification. MR. KAMELAMELA: Yeah. You know, it's always been my opinion right now it's premature. And I actually to actually join into something like this, were probably got to get like a special counsel or something. So the vehicle to actually be involved in a lawsuit would be, you know, doing a resolution to get special counsel. Page 8 AWEEMC-18 July 21,2020 MS. DAVID: Okay. I'm just wondering would we be in a position. Would the county be in a position to support the efforts of the first circuit case? And if we do would it be possible to be in like a Supreme Court case? You could do an amicus curiae brief for the original action? MR. KAMELAMELA: Yeah. MS. DAVID: Is there something that we could do like that on the circuit court level? MR. KAMELAMELA: Yeah. So that's something I talked about earlier, but if we was to actually sue a company, you know, so then we have to go through a process because I don't know of any other state or county if they could actually sue these huge companies and be successful. But yes, you know, we could do amicus. And like I said, I had many discussions with the current Acting Corp. Counsel in Honolulu, Paul Aoki. Because you know, we have meetings and talk about this. And also I've been in contact with other counties, like Kauai and Maui, to kind of see where they are at this time. Because of COVID, I haven't heard anything from them about this one. Only because COVID seems to be on our mind a lot for the past six months. MS. DAVID: Okay, that's what I was wondering, if we could do something more in helping to support this initiative and move this forward. But I understand this is a resolution and it's asking that this county join the City and County. In that respects maybe in the meantime, you can look for maybe another realistic way to make our position even more solid than waiting to see what the results is going to be, and take a proactive approach and actually joining in on an action. I'm not sure if we can actually—what I'm understanding is since this law firm has already initiated the lawsuit, I think what would be nice is if we could actually be part of the list of attorneys representing the City and County on behalf of Hawai i County. So I don't know its legal questions that I think you can MR. KAMELAMELA: Well I'll explore that last part with the Mr. Aoki. MS. DAVID: Like a co-counsel kind of thing instead of trying to see if we could afford to bring a lawsuit against these caliber of defendants on our own dime, and going in jointly co-counseling with the other attorneys that I see have a lot of mainland attorneys that are joining in to help. So if you could look into that, I think that would make itit wouldn'tI think the cost on the County of Hawai i wouldn't be that much, if anything. MR. KAMELAMELA: Okay, I'll do that. MS. DAVID: I think that would be theI think that's what the quest will be as opposed to us as a county taking on these huge companies by ourselves. So if you Page 9 AWEEMC-18 July 21,2020 can look into that I'd appreciate it. And yes, I will be supporting this resolution. Thank you. CHR. RICHARDS: Thank you, Maile. Val. MS. POINDEXTER: Thank you, Chair. So Joe, what is the difference between taking this lawsuit on verses the one we did with opioids? MR. KAMELAMELA: So like that one, we had a lot of information and then that one we had worked with the different departments. To see what kind of damages we could prove. And we were fortunate to have not only one law firm that was willing to take on this case, but there was also a clear track record of a lot of wins. You know, because these opioid litigation been going on for a while, so at least we can see how the law had developed in our favor. I mean right now, there's just uncertainty and speculation that we have right now. So that's the major difference. MS. POINDEXTER: Okay. So it would be worth looking into, correct? MR. KAMELAMELA: Right. MS. POINDEXTER: Okay. And I think there may be some cases out there that are related to this. MR. KAMELAMELA: Right. MS. POINDEXTER: That you guys will still need to research? MR. KAMELAMELA: Right. MS. POINDEXTER: So this resolution will kind of give that push for you guys to start looking into some of the maybe some similar cases and start building something that you can come back to us and say, "Hey we want to join in that lawsuit." MR. KAMELAMELA: Well actually we started the push long time and then we just keep on, you know, watching these cases as they kind of resolve. MS. POINDEXTER: Right. So this resolution will kind of even push it further to say yay or nay. MR. KAMELAMELA: Yeah. Because now it's something that's important for the Council. Page 10 AWEEMC-18 July 21,2020 MS. POINDEXTER: Right. Okay, so thank you. Thank you, Rebecca and Matt, for bringing this forward, and I am definitely supporting it. Thank you, Joe,too. Aloha, I yield, Chair. CHR. RICHARDS: Thank you, Val. Any other comments or questions? Chair Chung. MR. CHUNG: Thank you. Yeah, I'm going to support this resolution. But as is the case or often the case, you know, when you have nine different members, you know, you have varying degrees of agreement. And I'll tell you what my reasons are. You know, I do appreciate the fact that both Matt and Karen recalled me, you know, talking about climate change on that one occasion on the inauguration. But I had on two occasions during the course of the Council meetings, and I also texted Maile a picture of it. A very famous poster, and that was from Earth Day in the 1970's. It was a cartoon with the Pogo character looking over a trash strewn landscape, and saying, "We have seen the enemy and it is us." Very famous poster. And I still believe that, it's us. Yeah, maybe we're enabling the petroleum companies to do certain things, they are after all profit driven. But it us, and we're conveniently blaming other people for our shortcomings, as mankind shortcomings. Like for example me. I had a hybrid car one time, but I got two cars in my household and they both use petroleum. I cannot speak for anybody else over here, but if—oh you have? MR. KAMELAMELA: Gas guzzlers. MR. CHUNG: But unless—and it all starts here. Unless we have all electric cars, then it is us. We are the problem. But having said that, I've also said that in order to address climate change issues it's going to take a lot of money. Because we're going to have to relocate communities, we're going to have to redevelop infrastructure, we don't have that kind of money as a county. So I was just thinking, what we got to seek federal help or something, right. So if we can get money from the deep pockets, well then so be it, right. I don't think they're totally to blame, but if it's possible to get money from them, then let's do it. It's going to be a hard sell though in court, I will say that. And I'm not in any mood to hire special counsel. If somebody is going to do it for free, well then that's okay, they can take their cut. And give us, you know, $1 or $2 or $300 million, right. But I see that as being unlikely, but I still support this. Hopefully we can get some money. Thank you. CHR. RICHARDS: Thank you, Chair. Matt. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I'm just going to say, Aaron once in a while you really surprise me. Thank you. I've never seen that poster, but I think you Page 11 AWEEMC-18 July 21,2020 are completely on point that it is us. That was a really well said comment, so thank you for that. I yield. CHR. RICHARDS: Thank you, Matt. Other comments or questions? I'm seeing nothing here in Hilo, how about Kona? MS. VILLEGAS: Yes, please. CHR. RICHARDS: You're going to have to say your name, because I cannot see that far. MS. VILLEGAS: Oh, I'm sorry. It's Rebecca. CHR. RICHARDS: Okay, go ahead, Rebecca. MS. VILLEGAS: Okay, great. Thanks for bringing it back this way. I guess in response to Mr. Kamelamela's comments, I want to make it very clear that this opportunity was brought forward that does not require cost from the County of Hawai`i. Perhaps some nominal fees for filing of paperwork. And thankfully Mr. Riley Saito is already working on different projects, projects that are bringing to light the fiscal cost of sea level rise. And it's something that we're working on as a county, so it's being incorporated in the reports. It's also providing very specific—you know, I was really surprised by the comment about because our coastlines are mostly cliffs, that this doesn't affect us as much as other counties in our state. In just doing some research in the sea level rise vulnerability and adaptation report form 2017, something I read there says that, "The impacts to Native Hawaiian communities and cultural resources, include coastal portions of Hawaiian Homelands such as Kawaihae." Kawaihae will be flooded with sea level rise, and it's going to displace Native Hawaiian families. Three of the 27 Hawaiian Homelands homesteads on Hawaii Island, are estimated to have the greatest potential for people to be displaced by tsunamis, waves, and sea level rise. Those three areas include Keaukaha, Maku`u, and Kawaihae. That's extremely concerning to me. And when we look at communities that already struggle with other economic challenges, to me that falls under not prioritizing something like that and making that top of the list. The term, you know, environmental racism comes to mind on that in not making decisions to protect vulnerable areas, where people may already be struggling with economic challenges. And ironically we're looking at economic losses in low-lying coastal areas. While they're island wide, the greatest lost they're looking at is between Puako and Kailua-Kona. Which we know from the recent increase and property taxes, is where the majority of the high value residential properties, commercial and resort land structures exists. So you know, a primary source of our tax base is also located in these areas that come under threat. Page 12 AWEEMC-18 July 21,2020 I see this is an opportunity to be a leader. To be a county that recognizes something going on, an opportunity to participate at little to no cost to the county with the potential upside being at least covering what it's going to cost to move our infrastructure. Instead I would say that the Administration has been pushing against it. And it breaks my heart, and the ironies, I can't ignore the irony. You know, the opioid crises and lawsuit came up, you know, when I first got into office and so much of this is very similar. And it was Corp. Counsel that brought that to us, and asked us to be included. And so much of this lawsuit follows suit in a very similar capacity, and both of them following suit for big tobacco. I have in front of me a recent press release about the government of the District of Columbia, Washington D.C.just signed on to this lawsuit. And they say, "That the lawsuit alleges major players in the fossil fuel industry knew as early as the 1950's, that emissions from burning oil and gas pose an existential threat to humanity. And in response the companies embarked on a multi-decade, multi-million dollar public relations campaign to ferment doubt and hostility towards climate research in order to protect profits. As a scientific consensus around fossil fuels and climate change grew, the companies then exaggerated their commitments to reducing reliance on fossil fuels. And concealed their product's harm, a practice that continues today." To me that's the difference between me driving my car, and trying to make the best decisions I can about the impact I have on this planet and operating a business that's deceiving, denying, and delaying, any and all efforts that have been made to mitigate our consumption of fossil fuels. I'm just grateful for everybody's support on this. Thank you Matt, for walking through this process with me, and this learning curve. I look forward to sharing more information. I'm hopeful that this resolution will pass today. And that as we move through these next couple of months while everything is still very tentative economically for us and with this health crisis with COVID-19, that we sum up the courage as a county to participate. And we take the necessary steps to protect ourselves, and to protect our communities. And regardless of how they compare to the other counties, and their level of shoreline areas, that we value our people, their homes, and their exposure just as much as anywhere else. And with that I yield. CHR. RICHARDS: Thank you, Rebecca. Any other comments, questions, or concerns? Kona, if you have any more, you've got to waive really hard or say something. Seeing nothing in Kona, or here in Hilo I'm seeing no further comments, so let me finish up. First of all, as always Chair Chung is very articulate in his speaking. When you referenced Pogo, I was quite sure half the Council are not old enough to even Page 13 AWEEMC-18 July 21,2020 know who Pogo was. Not Checkers and Pogo,predates that one. But all kidding aside, the point is the enemy is us, and I don't disagree with Chair Chung at all on that. And so I'm interested in listening to this, and Joe your comments are pointed and well-taken. Procedurally I have a question. Before we were to get into a lawsuit, you would come back before this body for an authorization to do that? MR. KAMELAMELA: Yes. CHR. RICHARDS: Okay. So procedurally, I wanted to identify that. And I think Chair Chung point is very well taken, that oil has supplied the fossil fuel, predate that is coal. But we also consume that, and so we are culpable as well. Because everybody here uses oil every day. The question I guess would come down to the practices of going forward, and ignoring. I am completely on board with concerns about global warming coming forward. We are lucky on the Big Island, because our island is the youngest. So our shorelines are steeper, but still we're going to have effect on that. And I am concerned about that going forward. I like the fact that we're going to be investigating this, because I'm not convinced. I don't have enough data in front of me, and I'm very data driven. But I am very concerned. And so from hearing you Joe, what you're saying is we're going to investigate and go forward with that. So for that reason I can support this resolution going forward, because we're going to investigate, not signing on. I've tried to do work, and again, I don't have enough information before us. But I have enough information to support exploring going forward. So with that I think it's time to call for the question. MR. CHUNG: Mr. Chairman? CHR. RICHARDS: Go ahead. MR. CHUNG: I do apologize because I always like, you know, I think the Chairman should have the last word. But I've got to get clarification. CHR. RICHARDS: Absolutely. MR. CHUNG: So if you decide to initiate a lawsuit or join on to a lawsuit, you have to get authorization from the Council, or is it only if you hire special counsel? MR. KAMELAMELA: Well there is going to be a need for special counsel, so I have to come back for that. MR. CHUNG: Oh. Alright that's all. Page 14 AWEEMC-18 July 21,2020 MR. KAMELAMELA: Now I wouldn't need to do it if I file one amicus brief, that's something different. MR. CHUNG: But would an amicus brief entitle us to money? MR. KAMELAMELA: No. MR. CHUNG: Oh, why the hell we going to do that for then? MR. KAMELAMELA: Yeah, no. But there's two things happen there. MR. CHUNG: Alright, okay. CHR. RICHARDS: Thank you, Chair. So with that, call for the question, probably best to do roll call. Go ahead, Clerk. Vote on Res. 681-20: The motion to recommend adoption of Res. 681-20, as Draft 2 amended to Draft 2, was carried by the following roll call (Approved) vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz, Lee Loy, Poindexter, Villegas, and Chair Richards —9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. (Note: Mr. Richards voted "kanalua"then "aye.") CHR. RICHARDS: Resolution 681-20 goes to Council with a positive recommendation. Is that all the business we have to come before the committee today? MR. BROWN: I believe so, Chair. BILLS FOR The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, ORDINANCES: Bills for Ordinances. (There were none.) Page 15