HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN COUNCIL 2020-08-05 2018-2020 Hawaii County Council
481h Session
Hawaii County Building
25 Aupuni Street
Hilo, Hawaii
August 5, 2020
INVOCATION: Pastor Daniel Tomita of Kinoole Baptist Church gave the morning's invocation.
CALL TO The regular meeting of the Hawaii County Council was called to order at
ORDER: 9 a.m., in the Council Chambers, Hilo, by Mr. Aaron S. Y. Chung, Chair.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Mr. Aaron S. Y. Chung, Chair
Ms. Karen Eoff, Vice Chair(via videoconference from Kona)
Ms. Maile Medeiros David, Member (via videoconference from Kona)
Mr. Matt Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Member
Ms. Ashley L. Kierkiewicz, Member
Ms. Susan L. K. Lee Loy, Member
Ms. Valerie T. Poindexter, Member
Mr. Herbert M. "Tim" Richards, III, Member
Ms. Rebecca Villegas, Member (via videoconference from Kona)
PLEDGE OF The Chair directed the Council to the next order of business, Pledge of Allegiance.
ALLEGIANCE:
(At this time, Ms. Lee Loy led the Council in the Pledge of
Allegiance.)
PETITIONS, The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business, Petitions,
MEMORIALS, Memorials, Certificates of Merit, and Expressions of Condolence.
CERTIFICATES
OF MERIT, AND (There were none.)
EXPRESSIONS OF
CONDOLENCE:
STATEMENTS The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business, Statements
FROM THE from the Public on Agenda Items.
PUBLIC ON
AGENDA ITEMS: The following individuals registered to speak and came forward when called by
the Chair:
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
Shirley David: Bill 179, Draft 2 (Comm. 989.30), in support.
(representing Community
Alliance Partners)
Max Newberg: Comm. 989.33, in support.
(representing Hawaii Regional
Council of Carpenters)
Joe Belisario: Bill 179, Draft 2 (Comm. 989.30), in support and
opposition.
Shaun Roth: Bill 179, Draft 2 (Comm. 989.30), in support.
Gail Takaki: Res. 700-20 (Comm. 1021), in support.
(representing Hawaii STEM
(Science, Technology,
Engineering, and Math)
Community Care)
Jason Fujimoto: Bill 179, Draft 2 (Comm. 989.30), in support.
(representing HPM Building
Supply)
Darryl Oliveira: Bill 179, Draft 2 (Comm. 989.30), in support.
(representing HPM Building
Supply and Hawaii Island
Housing Coalition)
Rebecca Choi: Res. 700-20 (Comm. 1021), in support.
(representing Hawaii STEM
Community Care)
Jakob Au: Res. 700-20 (Comm. 1021), in support.
(representing Hawaii STEM
Community Care)
Dean Au: Comm. 989.33, in support; and
(representing Hawaii Bill 179, Draft 2 (Comm. 989.30), comment.
Regional Council of Carpenters)
Ann Toma: Bill 150 (Comm. 798), in support.
Charlene Nishida: Bill 150 (Comm. 798), in support.
Leslie Cole-Brooks: Bill 178 (Comm. 988), in support.
Page 2
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
Paul Normann: Bill 179, Draft 2 (Comm. 989.30), in support.
(representing Neighborhood
Place of Puna)
Clarence Mendonca: Bill 150 (Comm. 798), in support.
Toby S. Hazel: Res. 700-20 (Comm. 1021), in support.
Gilbert Aguinaldo: Bill 179, Draft 2 (Comm. 989.30), comment.
Susan Cordell: Bill 178 (Comm. 988), in support.
Kaikea K. Blakemore: Bill 178 (Comm. 988); and
(Neighborhood Place of Puna) Bill 179, Draft 2 (Comm. 989.30), in support.
Rebecca Ostertag: Bill 178 (Comm. 988), in support.
Sebastian Wells: Bill 178 (Comm. 988), in support.
(representing University of
Hawaii —Hilo)
Hannah Hedrick: Res. 700-20 (Comm. 1021);
(representing Rural Resilience Bill 178 (Comm. 988); and
Hnb Network) Bill 179, Draft 2 (Comm. 989.30), in support.
James O'Keefe: Bill 179, Draft 2 (Comm. 989.30), comment.
(Department of Water Supply)
Joyce Alberta Folena: Res. 700-20 (Comm. 1021);
Bill 178 (Comm. 988); and
Bill 179, Draft 2 (Comm. 989.30), in support.
Gregory Todd Smith: Res. 700-20 (Comm. 1021);
Bill 178 (Comm. 988); and
Bill 179, Draft 2 (Comm. 989.30), in support.
CHR. CHUNG: Let's take up Bill 178 before we take a short break.
Change Order As directed by the Chair and with no objection from the Council Members, the
of Business: following items were taken out of order:
Page 3
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
Bill 178: AMENDS CHAPTER 19, ARTICLE 8, SECTION 19-59, OF THE HAWAII
COUNTY CODE 1983 (2016 EDITION, AS AMENDED), RELATING TO
NATIVE FOREST DEDICATIONS
Creates three native forest categories (native forests, functional forests, and
successional forests), and establishes a dedication process for forest preservation and
restoration.
Reference: Comm. 988
Intr. by: Ms. Poindexter
First Reading: July 22, 2020
Motion to Approve: Ms. Poindexter moved to pass Bill 178 on second and final
reading. Seconded by Mr. Richards.
CHR. CHUNG: Ms. Poindexter, go ahead.
MS. POINDEXTER: We've had a lot of discussion on this, so if you have any
questions. On the tax portion, I know Keita Jo is supposed to be here, but I just
ask for your support. Thank you.
CHR. CHUNG: What was that again, Ms. Poindexter?
MS. POINDEXTER: If anyone had any questions on the tax portion, I know
Keita Jo was supposed to be here. I think he may be on his way because Lisa had
said he would be in Hilo. I don't know if Lisa's in Kona, if anybody has any
questions.
CHR. CHUNG: I think we discussed that the last time.
MS. POINDEXTER: Yes. So, I think
CHR. CHUNG: Yeah. Mr. Richards.
MR. RICHARDS: Yeah,just a quick one, Chair. I'm going to echo and put my
wholehearted support in this. As a land manager for many decades, this is the
right direction to help us head in the right direction. So, I fully support and ask
for the Council Members' support as well.
CHR. CHUNG: Anybody in Kona? Anyone?
MS. DAVID: No, thank you.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay. I personally wanted to thank Ms. Poindexter. It's a great
effort. But I also wanted you guys to consider that suggestion that I made with
regard to using the PONC (Public Access, Open Space, and Natural Resources
Page 4
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
Preservation Commission) funds for mauka properties that the communities now
could really get involved in this type of effort. I think that would be really good.
Okay. We have a motion on the floor. Let's do it by roll call just as a formality
today.
Vote on Bill 178: The motion to pass Bill 178 on second and final reading
(Adopted) was carried by the following roll call vote:
Ayes: Council Members David, Eoff,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz,
Lee Loy, Poindexter, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair Chung—9.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay, motion is carried. Congratulations. Thank you. Let's
take a shortoh, I'm sorry. Okay, let's take that, 180.
Bill 180: AMENDS SECTION 25-8-33 (CITY OF HILO ZONE MAP), ARTICLE 8,
CHAPTER 25 (ZONING CODE) OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE 1983
(2016 EDITION, AS AMENDED), BY CHANGING THE DISTRICT
CLASSIFICATION FROM SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL— 10,000 SQUARE
FEET (RS-10) TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL—20,000 SQUARE FEET (CG-20)
AT WAIAKEA HOUSELOTS 2ND, WAIAKEA, SOUTH HILO, HAWAII,
COVERED BY TAX MAP KEY: 2-2-021:008
(Applicant: Ted Tran/Tran-Tonnu Family Trust) (Area: 20,812 square feet)
The Windward Planning Commission forwards its favorable recommendation for
this change of zone, which would allow the applicant to develop a 9,500 square-foot
warehouse building with three 720 square-foot food stalls and a 17-stall parking lot.
The property is located at 78 Lanihuli Street, approximately 150 feet northeast of its
intersection with Kino`ole Street.
Reference: Comm. 990
Intr. by: Ms. Kierkiewicz (B/R)
Approve: PC-50
Motion to Approve: Ms. Kierkiewicz moved to pass Bill 180 on first reading
and adopt Planning Committee Report No. 50. Seconded
by Ms. Lee Loy.
CHR. CHUNG: Discussion? Ms. Kierkiewicz.
Page 5
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Chair, we have the representative for the applicant here if
Council Members have any questions. But we discussed this at length at our
Committee meeting, and we're all in favor of the favorable recommendation to
approve.
CHR. CHUNG: We did. Anyone in Kona want to weigh in on this? If not, we
have a motion on the floor. All those in favor, signify by saying "aye."
Vote on Bill 180: The motion to pass Bill 180 on first reading and adopt
(Approved) Planning Committee Report No. 50 was carried by the
following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members David, Eoff,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz,
Lee Loy, Poindexter, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair Chung—9.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
CHR. CHUNG: Motion carried. You know what, Mr. Clerk, why don't we go
with Resolutions 695, 696, and 697 to all donations?
Res. 695-20: AUTHORIZES THE ACCEPTANCE OF A MONETARY DONATION OF $150
FROM THE FRATERNAL ORDER OF EAGLES TO THE DEPARTMENT OF
PARKS AND RECREATION'S PANA`EWA RAINFOREST ZOO AND
GARDENS
Reference: Comm. 1014
Intr. by: Ms. David (B/R)
Waived: FC
Motion to Approve: Ms. David moved to adopt Res. 695-20. Seconded by
Ms. Lee Loy.
CHR. CHUNG: Any discussion?
MS. DAVID: I just want to say thank you to the Fraternal Order of Eagles and
defer to Ms. Lee Loy, and this is her district. Thank you.
MS. LEE LOY: Asking for continued support.
CHR. CHUNG: All right. We have a motion on the floor. All those in favor,
signify by saying "aye."
Page 6
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
Vote on Res. 695-20: The motion to adopt Res. 695-20 was carried by the
(Adopted) following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members David, Eoff,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz,
Lee Loy, Poindexter, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair Chung—9.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
CHR. CHUNG: Motion carried.
Res. 696-20: AUTHORIZES THE ACCEPTANCE OF A MONETARY DONATION OF
$2,600 FROM POLYNESIAN ADVENTURE TOURS, LLC, TO THE
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION'S PANA`EWA RAINFOREST
ZOO AND GARDENS
Reference: Comm. 1015
Intr. by: Ms. David (B/R)
Waived: FC
Vote on Res. 696-20: Ms. David moved to adopt Res. 696-20. Seconded by
(Adopted) Ms. Lee Loy and carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members David, Eoff,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz,
Lee Loy, Poindexter, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair Chung—9.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
CHR. CHUNG: Motion carried.
Res. 697-20: AUTHORIZES THE ACCEPTANCE OF A DONATION OF A COLOR COPIER
AND TONER SUPPLIES FROM ABLE ELECTRIC, INC., TO THE
DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION'S KAMANA SENIOR
CENTER
Reference: Comm. 1016
Intr. by: Ms. David (B/R)
Waived: FC
Page 7
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
Motion to Approve: Ms. David moved to adopt Res. 697-20. Seconded by
Ms. Lee Loy.
CHR. CHUNG: Any discussion? Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I just want to say mahalo to Able Electric
for donating this to the County of Hawaii, specifically for the Kamana Senior
Center staff. Thank you.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay, anyone else? There being none, we have a motion on the
floor. All those in favor, say "aye."
Vote on Res. 697-20: The motion to adopt Res. 697-20 was carried by the
(Adopted) following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members David, Eoff,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz,
Lee Loy, Poindexter, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair Chung—9.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
CHR. CHUNG: Motion carried. So, now, it's 10:41 exactly. Let's reconvene at
10:50; nine minutes later, okay.
Recess: At 10:41 a.m., the Chair called for a recess.
Reconvene: The meeting reconvened at 10:50 a.m.
CHR. CHUNG: Mr. Clerk—where's Mr. Clerk? Well, anyway, we're going to
take up Bill 150 as soon as the Clerk comes in.
Page 8
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
Bill 150: AMENDS SECTION 25-8-33 (CITY OF HILO ZONE MAP), ARTICLE 8,
CHAPTER 25 (ZONING CODE) OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE 1983
(2005 EDITION), BY CHANGING THE DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION FROM
MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL— 1,500 SQUARE FEET (RM-1.5) TO
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL—7,500 SQUARE FEET (RS-7.5) AT
WAIAKEA, SOUTH HILO, HAWAII, COVERED BY TAX MAP
KEY: 2-4-028:009 (Planning Director Initiated) (Area: 3.292 Acres)
The Windward Planning Commission forwards its favorable recommendation for
this change of zone. The Planning Director recommends returning the parcel to its
original designation to create an appropriate land use pattern for the area. The
property is located at 364 Hualalai Street, east of the Hale Nani Street-Hualalai
Street intersection.
Reference: Comm. 798
Intr. by: Ms. Kierkiewicz (B/R)
Approve: PC-49
Motion to Approve: Ms. Kierkiewicz moved to pass Bill 150 on first reading
and adopt Planning Committee Report No. 49. Seconded
by Ms. Poindexter.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay, any discussion on this matter? Ms. Kierkiewicz, go
ahead.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Chair, we had a robust discussion at Committee, but I also
have the Planning Director here in case there are any questions. My office has
been in contact with Mr. Vincent Tai. He's not able to make it because he's on
Oahu and feels that he is in a vulnerable population. So, he is streaming this
meeting and asks that my office alert him of the outcome of our decision today.
But we did hear from a number of neighbors that were for the bill that's before us.
I yield.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay, anyone else? Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder.
MR. KANEALII-KLEINFELDER: I just had a question about the the testifiers
brought up the road concern, and I was interested to know if there was a
movement of the outlet of that property onto a different road than before. Or what
changed; what happened in that process? I don't know if Mr. Yee wants to
answer that or if that's a DPW (Department of Public Works) question.
(Note: At this time, Planning Director Michael Yee came forward to
address the members of the Council.)
Page 9
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
MR. YEE: Michael Yee, Planning Director. I don't know of any changes to it,
but I would also probably reflect that, given that there wasn't an application for a
project, there was nothing to review in terms of having to move it yet.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, but it sounded like the property that
they were talking about, the medical facility, their entrance was adjusted at some
point. That's what I was getting from the testimony that I heard before.
MR. YEE: Right, but I guess I don't understand the question in terms of this
property then.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Yeah, I didn't either. I was just listening to
their concerns and wondering if we had adjusted the right of access or the access
point to the medical facility at some point in the past.
MR. YEE: Yeah, I don't know. That was before my time, so I don't know about
the medical facility, and we wouldn't have addressed the Vincent Tai property at
this point.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Chair, thank you.
CHR. CHUNG: Let me briefly address that question because I started to think
about it when they were talking about it as well. I've heard these are separate
issues really, okay. I've heard about the concerns and the complaints regarding
that traffic, particularly after or during the construction of that new facility. And
my understanding is—and this was prior to me coming back here—it was
reconfigured somehow, that turning situation.
So, it has posed a problem, but I believe that it is not germane to this issue. It's
not something that the Department of Planning or the Planning Commission really
looked at. It's something else. We're looking at compliance with planning
commitments by Mr. Tai entering his ordinance. And so, yeah, I was kind of
taken aback when I heard those comments. I was familiar with them but not in
the context of this downzoning. Okay. Go ahead.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Yeah, thank you for that clarification. I was
thinking about that, and I just wanted to clear that up. Thank you.
CHR. CHUNG: Anyone else? Okay, so, we have a motion on the floor. Let's do
a roll call vote.
Page 10
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
Vote on Bill 150: The motion to pass Bill 150 on first reading and adopt
(Approved) Planning Committee Report No. 49 was carried by the
following roll call vote:
Ayes: Council Members David, Eoff,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz,
Lee Loy, Poindexter, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair Chung–9.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
CHR. CHUNG: Motion is carried. So, this goes on to second and final reading,
right, two weeks from now. Okay, what shall we take up next? How's about—
why
boutwhy don't we just go from the beginning?
MR. HENRICKS: Take it from the top?
CHR. CHUNG: Take it from the top.
Return to Order The Chair directed the Council to return to the order of business.
of Business:
APPROVAL The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business, Approval
OF MINUTES: of Minutes.
Vote on Approval of Ms. Lee Loy moved to approve the Minutes of June 3,
Minutes: 2020. Seconded by Mr. Richards and carried by the
(Approved) following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members David, Eoff,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz,
Lee Loy, Poindexter, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair Chung–9.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
CHR. CHUNG: Mr. Clerk, before we go any further, we're not ready to take
Resolution 681 yet. So, let's not take it from the top, but we'll go after that.
MR. HENRICKS: Okay.
Page 11
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
Vote on Approval of Ms. Lee Loy moved to approve the Minutes of June 17,
Minutes: 2020. Seconded by Mr. Richards and carried by the
(Approved) following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members David, Eoff,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz,
Lee Loy, Poindexter, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair Chung—9.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
CHR. CHUNG: The minutes of June 17, 2020, are approved.
Vote on Approval of Ms. Lee Loy moved to approve the Minutes of July 1,
Minutes: 2020. Seconded by Mr. Richards and carried by the
(Approved) following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members David, Eoff,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz,
Lee Loy, Poindexter, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair Chung—9.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
CHR. CHUNG: Motion carried.
Change Order As directed by the Chair and with no objection from the Council Members, the
of Business: following items were taken out of order:
Res. 683-20: AUTHORIZES THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TO NEGOTIATE A
MULTI-YEAR LEASE OF REAL PROPERTY, BEING A PORTION OF
34 RAINBOW DRIVE (OLD HILO HOSPITAL COMPLEX), SITUATED AT
PIIHONUA, DISTRICT OF SOUTH HILO, COUNTY AND STATE OF
HAWAII, AND IDENTIFIED AS BEING A PORTION OF TAX MAP
KEY: 2-3-026:008, TO THE BIG ISLAND SUBSTANCE ABUSE COUNCIL
Authorizes the Finance Director to negotiate a lease for 15 years with an option for
three additional five-year terms with the Big Island Substance Abuse Council, to
be used as a residential and outpatient treatment facility, with an annual cost of
$10.
Reference: Comm. 999
Intr. by: Ms. David (B/R)
Approve: FC-127
Page 12
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
Motion to Approve: Ms. David moved to adopt Res. 683-20 and Finance
Committee Report No. 127. Seconded by Mr. Richards.
CHR. CHUNG: Discussion?
MS. DAVID: Just ask for your continued support. This passed with a unanimous
vote in Committee. Thank you.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay, anyone else? And just for everyone's information, newly
installed Judge Peter Kubota had a discussion with both myself and Ms. Lee Loy
stressing the importance of having on-island residential treatment programs, as
opposed to having our residents sent away to either Maui or Oahu. And I think
this might not solve everything, but it's going to be a very good first step. We'll
see how that goes, but we want to take an active role in trying to get more of these
onboard. So, anyway, we have a motion on the floor. All those in favor, signify
by saying "aye."
Vote on Res. 683-20: The motion to adopt Res. 683-20 and Finance Committee
(Adopted) Report No. 127 was carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members David, Eoff,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz,
Lee Loy, Poindexter, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair Chung—9.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
CHR. CHUNG: Motion carried.
Res. 684-20: CHANGES THE FUNDING SOURCE OF ONE ACCOUNT CLERK POSITION
A contract position with the State Workforce Development Division would be
retained as a permanent position by the County's Elderly Activities Division.
Reference: Comm. 1000
Intr. by: Ms. David (B/R)
Approve: FC-128
Motion to Approve: Ms. David moved to adopt Res. 684-20 and Finance
Committee Report No. 128. Seconded by Mr. Richards.
CHR. CHUNG: Any discussion?
Page 13
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
MS. DAVID: This passed with seven ayes, and I'll defer to you, Chair, and
Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder who were absent that day. Otherwise, I ask for your
continued support.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay. Anyone else? There being none, all those in favor say
Ic aye.
Vote on Res. 684-20: The motion to adopt Res. 684-20 and Finance Committee
(Adopted) Report No. 128 was carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members David, Eoff,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz,
Lee Loy, Poindexter, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair Chung–9.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
CHR. CHUNG: Motion carried.
Res. 700-20: AUTHORIZES MEMBERS OF THE HAWAII COUNTY COUNCIL TO
DESIGNATE A PORTION OF FEDERAL CORONAVIRUS AID, RELIEF,
AND ECONOMIC SECURITY (CARES) ACT FUNDING TOWARDS
PROGRAMS/PROJECTS IN RELATION TO THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC ON
THE ISLAND OF HAWAII
Each Council Member would be allotted $100,000 of CARES Act funding that
must be designated for use by September 30, 2020, and expended before
December 30, 2020, with all expenditures made in accordance with criteria as
established by the CARES Act.
Reference: Comm. 1021
Intr. by: Mr. Chung
Waived: FC
Motion to Approve: Ms. Lee Loy moved to adopt Res. 700-20. Seconded by
Mr. Richards.
CHR. CHUNG: If you guys don't mind, I'm going to explain a little bit about
this, and hopefully Ms. Deanna Sako, Finance Director, comes down here to add a
little bit more. But from my view—and here she is. And correct me if anything I
say is not correct, okay. But I think that this resolution has the potential of being
a measure which really enhances the collaboration between the Council and the
Administration.
Page 14
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
As we saw during the tail end of last fiscal when a lot of the discretionary monies
were diverted to the COVID (coronavirus disease) effort—and I think very ably
so by several members of the Council that this body really can put monies to
good use when it comes to the COVID situation. But now, this is a little different.
And first of all, I wanted to recognize the efforts of our Finance Chair
Maile David. I just have to sign this really quickly and move it through, but she
was instrumental in all of this as well. Because when we were having discussions
with both the Finance Chair Sylvia Luke and then later on with Ms. Sako when
we were talking about accepting the $80 million, Ms. David and I did make a
request of the Administration if they would be willing to put in some money for
the Council Members.
And the reason why I didn't surface it up until this time is I didn't want there to
be any appearance that these monies would be used as a campaigning tool. I'm
very conscious about those things. But right now,we're on the eve of the
election, and it looks like everything's going to be resolved after Saturday and
then we can go ahead and move.
Now, the mechanism for getting these monies to the community is going to be a
little bit different from what we are doing with the CRFs (Contingency Relief
Funds). Again, I wanted to really give a lot of credit to Deanna and Craig Masuda
from the Corporation Counsel's office who came up with this framework. Now,
what's going to happen is—and maybe Deanna can explain a little bit more but
what we're going to try to do is it's not going to be done by resolutions. This is
going to be something where each Council Member will go and talk to the
Administration, and we can fast-track these monies out. And later on, we can
come up with a listing as a communication of all of the monies that were
distributed out just for the sake of transparency.
Now, talk about teamwork, it's vital on this one because certainly I don't think
any Council Member wants to use their $100,000 or any fraction of it on
something that the Administration was already going to use it on, right? But
that's where we've got to talk, and that's why I think it's so important. And I
think this could be a model for collaboration between the Council and the
Administration. And I really do appreciate all of your efforts, Deanna, and your
openness in this. But do you want to say something as to how this mechanism is
going to work exactly?
One more thing, too, we made a drop-dead date sunset clause of September-
something. And the reason for that is if we don't use all of our money, we've got
to get it back into the hands of the Administration so they can do something by
the November deadline.
Page 15
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
(Note: At this time, Finance Director Deanna Sako came forward to
address the members of the Council.)
MS. SAKO: Thank you, Chair. All I want to remind people of is that, because
it's Federal funding, we have to follow all the rules. We have the website in the
resolution so that everybody's aware; if you can work with us. In addition, we
have to follow procurement; 2 CFR(Code of Federal Regulations) 200. So, it is a
little different than the CRFs, but we're happy to work with you to make sure it
works.
Definitely, we did do the RFP (Request for Proposals). They're still analyzing the
proposals. Those will be awarded later this week or early next week. And if
there's some that maybe didn't get as much as had been hoped for, your different
allotments could actually be utilized to boost those up a little bit, too, because we
did go through the procurement process on them.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay. And, Deanna, I'm really glad that you mentioned about
complying with the parameters of this CARES (Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and
Economic Security) Act package because we have to follow that. And that's why
discussions with Deanna is going to be crucial in all of this. Okay? So, what do
we do now? If we want something done, we come to you, talk story, right?
MS. SAKO: Yeah. Email me. We were going to work on a form; we'll try and
get that out. But if not I mean, don't wait for the form. Just come talk with us,
and we're happy to help coordinate that.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay. And we can start doing this forthwith already, right, after
today? We waived
MS. SAKO: I am assuming you're going to sign the reso (resolution)today. So,
yeah, you guys can come talk story today.
CHR. CHUNG: And, Mr. Clerk, do we have to make any kind of waiver of ?
MR. HENRICKS: Yeah, your reconsideration rights.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay, very good.
MR. HENRICKS: Assuming that it passes.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay, anyone else?
MR. RICHARDS: Chair?
CHR. CHUNG: Mr. Richards.
Page 16
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
MR. RICHARDS: Yeah, thank you. So—don't run away too fast, Deanna this
is going to be coming through Finance? Is that what I understand?
MS. SAKO: (Inaudible.)
MR. RICHARDS: This is coming through Finance? That's the department we'll
be dealing with?
MS. SAKO: Yes. And there may be cases that we have to ask other departments
for help depending on what the request is. But we'll be coordinating it to make
sure it all gets spent in time. We don't want to lose any of the money.
MR. RICHARDS: Okay. And then this isforgive me if this is the wrong place
to ask the question, but—so, I'm thinking about agriculture. And we have big and
small, but they're running expenses that they ordinarily would not have been
running if it wasn't for COVID. How do we fund them? Do they go through a
501(c)(3), or can they be funded directly? How does that work?
MS. SAKO: I think some of them may qualify for the small business grants that
are being made available as part of the rest of the RFP. So, we can talk story a
little bit more unless you have a more creative idea. But if it's for the expenses
that they are incurring that they normally wouldn't, they probably will already
qualify under some of the other programs. So, we can see what's left after that.
MR. RICHARDS: And then, Chair, I don't know if this is a question for you, but
this iswe potentially can be very district specific because the thing about some
of the guys that have come and said, "I've got these expenses that I can't cover
right now."
MS. SAKO: Yes, we will do our best to abide by that.
MR. RICHARDS: And so, we can target it through the grant program and talk
story with you directly.
MS. SAKO: Mhm.
MR. RICHARDS: Okay. Thanks, Chair, I yield.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay. And I think there could also be some district sharing, too,
if the need arises, right. I mean, first we've got to look at our districts, but—
MS.
utMS. SAKO: Right. There may be some programs that everybody wants in their
district, but there could be some that may apply to only certain districts, yeah.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay. Anyone in Kona?
Page 17
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
MS. EOFF: Aloha.
CHR. CHUNG: Karen, go ahead.
MS. EOFF: Hi. No, I just want to thank you, Mr. Chung. This sounds like a, like
you said, a way we can help the Administration to utilize the monies that have
been given to the County of Hawaii and make sure that the things that we hear
more direct from our constituents or our knowledge of our districts, the money
can be directed quickly and effectively. So, I just thank you. This sounds like
and I'm glad you have worked this through so we can do it, I guess, without the
step of a resolution but just by giving Finance and them agreeing that this would
be an allowable use, and then working out the details to transfer money to
whatever project it may be.
So, if I understand what you're saying, if that's correct, I just want to say thank
you and this will be—we'll all be contacting Deanna. Deanna, do you have a
contact person in the department or just call you, or which do you prefer?
MS. SAKO: You can contact either me or Steve.
MS. EOFF: Okay. All right, thank you.
CHR. CHUNG: And you should actually look at the person to your left
Maile because she was really instrumental in all of this.
MS. EOFF: Okay.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay, anyone else?
MS. DAVID: Thank you, Chair.
MS. EOFF: Well thank you, then, to Maile; Finance Chair as well.
MS. DAVID: Well, actually
CHR. CHUNG: Anyone else?
MS. DAVID: I do have just a few suggestions, yeah. Thank you, Chair, for this
and I beg to differ of my involvement, but thank you for that. I think it was a
joint effort with a lot of people, including the Leg. (Legislature). So, thank you to
them too.
And I just wanted to make a note that, in your resolution, I'm happy that you
included the website. Because, what I found in there that really would apply, if
we can just review that before we maybe contact Deanna's department, is that, in
Page 18
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
that website, they have a relief fund guidance for state and counties and also the
Frequently Asked Questions. So, I think if we just I had it printed out. My staff
printed it out, and it contains a lot of answers too. And it might help speed up the
process because we are under the gun on this one. So, I want to thank you for
providing that and let everybody know that that website is really awesome. So,
thank you again, and thank you, Deanna folks, for all your hard work. And I
yield, mahalo.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay, anyone else? Oh, Matt, go ahead.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I just want to say mahalo to everyone who
did this. This is a very interesting aspect of what we can do as a County and with
the CARES funding. Deanna, if this passes and we go to spend this, do we have
to worry about things that are previously funded via any other Federal programs,
SBA (United States Small Business Administration) ?
MS. SAKO: We still have to worry about duplication of benefits, but it really
depends on what the type of costs are. And we'll work with each person to try
and make sure. We have to ensure no duplication of benefits, but that doesn't
mean there aren't other pieces of it that we can't cover.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Perfect. Thank you. Thank you for doing
this. Mahalo to the Administration, Mr. Chair, and Mail David and everyone else
who helped on this. This is great. Thank you.
CHR. CHUNG: And then,just touching upon what Matt asked, too, I mean—and
that just underscores the importance of talking with the Administration on this,
okay. We have to get everything coordinated. Everything has to be really
efficient when we move these things through, yeah. But thank you very much,
Deanna. And then again, extend my thanks to Craig. You guys really came
through on this. Thank you so much.
MS. SAKO: No problem. Thank you.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay. There being no further discussion, all those in favor
signify by saying "aye."
Page 19
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
Vote on Res. 700-20: The motion to adopt Res. 700-20 was carried by the
(Adopted) following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members David, Eoff,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz,
Lee Loy, Poindexter, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair Chung—9.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
CHR. CHUNG: Motion carried.
Vote on Motion to Ms. Lee Loy moved to suspend Council Rule 15 to waive
Suspend Council the 5-day hold for reconsideration. Seconded by
Rules: Mr. Richards and carried by the following voice vote:
(Approved)
Ayes: Council Members David, Eoff,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz,
Lee Loy, Poindexter, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair Chung—9.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
CHR. CHUNG: Motion carried. Thanks, Deanna.
Page 20
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
Bill 179: ESTABLISHES A COUNTY CONSTRUCTION CODE RELATING TO
(Draft 2) BUILDING CONSTRUCTION AND RELATED SYSTEMS WITHIN A
BUILDING UNDER CONSTRUCTION BY AMENDING THE HAWAII
COUNTY CODE 1983 (2016 EDITION, AS AMENDED), AS FOLLOWS:
1) ADOPTS NEW CHAPTERS 5 (CONSTRUCTION ADMINISTRATIVE
CODE), 5A (BUILDING CODE), 5D (ELECTRICAL CODE), 5E(ENERGY
CONSERVATION CODE), AND 5F (PLUMBING CODE);
2) AMENDS CHAPTER 2, SECTION 2-39; CHAPTER 3, SECTIONS 3-14
AND 3-15; AND CHAPTER 25, SECTIONS 25-1-5, 25-4-10, AND 25-4-60;
AND
3) REPEALING CHAPTERS 5 (BUILDING CODE), 9 (ELECTRICAL CODE),
AND 17 (PLUMBING CODE)
Establishes a new Construction Code for the County of Hawaii by: repealing
existing Chapter 5 (Building), Chapter 9 (Electricity), and Chapter 17 (Plumbing);
creating new chapters for installation provisions for Building, Electrical, Energy
Conservation, and Plumbing; and combining administrative provisions from
Chapter 5, Chapter 9, and Chapter 17 into a single, new chapter. The amendments
also include adoption of a new electrical code based on the 2017 National Electrical
Code and adoption of a new plumbing code based on the 2012 Uniform Plumbing
Code, adding a new appendix for tiny house building standards, and transitioning
the County from requiring separate construction permits to a single-permit system.
Reference: Comm. 989.30
Intr. by: Ms. Lee Loy (B/R)
First Reading: July 22, 2020
and
Comm. 989.31: From Council Member Matt Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, dated July 28, 2020,
transmitting a proposed amendment to Bill 179 relating to photovoltaic equipment
and components.
; and
Comm. 989.32: From Council Member Herbert M. "Tim"Richards, III, dated July 28, 2020,
transmitting proposed amendments to Bill 179 relating to horticulture buildings
and barbed wire fences.
; and
Comm. 989.33: From Council Member Valerie T. Poindexter, dated July 28, 2020, transmitting
proposed amendments to Bill 179 relating to factory-built housing.
(Note: The following were circulated:
Comm. 989.34, from Council Member Valerie T. Poindexter dated August 5,
2020, transmitting proposed amendments to Bill 179, Draft 2;
Page 21
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
Comm. 989.35, from Council Member Herbert M. "Tim" Richards, III, dated
August 5, 2020, transmitting proposed amendments to Bill 179, Draft 2; and
Comm. 989.36, from Council Member Valerie T. Poindexter dated August 5,
2020, transmitting proposed amendments to Bill 179, Draft 2.)
Motion to Approve: Ms. Lee Loy moved to pass Bill 179, Draft 2, on second
and final reading. Seconded by Mr. Richards.
CHR. CHUNG: Discussion? Or would you guys want to bring up amendments
now? Do we need more discussion on this matter? Okay,
Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, why don't you start off by going with
Communication 989.31.
Motion to Amend: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder moved to amend Bill 179,
Draft 2, with the contents of Comm. 989.31. Seconded by
Ms. Poindexter.
CHR. CHUNG: Discussion? Matt, go ahead.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I would ask for your support on this
amendment. This is, I think, a very minor housekeeping issue. It does not pertain
to Appendix L or any of the parts of the Building Code that are being discussed,
but more of an industry-specific amendment that I feel is important. I did reach
out to some of our head inspectors and discussed with them, and there's a
consensus. And as long as this meets the guidelines of what they were thinking.
There was a consensus that many times permits are not being pulled for this work
anyway. And given that our solar industry is between 15-20 years old, we're
going to see more and more repair and replacement. And when it comes to a
piece of equipment that is exactly the same going back in the same place, I just
feel it's prohibitive to the industry and to the consumer and to the whole line of
people involved to have to pull a permit to replace a piece of equipment. So,
that's my feeling, and I would hope for your support on this amendment. I'm
here to answer any questions, and yeah.
CHR. CHUNG: Matt, first of all, I mean this is, as you said, a small amendment.
Why don't you explain what it is?
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. The amendment is removing the
section that says to repair, I'm sorry, to remove and replace a piece of equipment
that is the same in the same location of—and in particular to solar photovoltaic
equipment. If you look under—where it caught my eye was if you look under
solar hot water, there's a very similar exemption granted. So, there's a permit
required for removal and replacement, but there's also a following exemption that
Page 22
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
is allowed if the location is the same and it's going in the same place. I looked at
that and I realized that for the solar industry, there's not a similar bill or a similar
requirement. There's no exemption for that removal and replacement without
coming in for a permit.
And so looking at that, I realize that, one, there's a discrepancy into the two
fields. Water's not the same as electricity and I understand that, but at the same
time if I'm coming from the field, if I'm replacing a panel with the same panel in
the same place, there's not a lot of thought that goes into that. And those may be
the wrong words. I mean, you're doing a very simple remove and replace. If you
replace a piece of roofing or a solar hot water panel and you replace it with the
same thing in the same position, you're not readjusting anything, then it should be
a very streamlined process from the County.
So, looking to create less prohibitive measures in our Code and just simplify
things a little bit. If you were to remove and replace an entire system and do it
with new components, a permit is still required. But in this case, the removal of a
panel, a microinverter, an older inverter that's crashed; one, if you look down the
line, the consumer has to realize that the equipment has gone down, which can
take months sometimes because they rely on their electric bill to make that
assumption. And then a contractor has to be called to come and fix what was
done. You have to find the piece, bring it in, and then have it installed and
replaced.
And in the meantime, the consumer, the homeowner is out the usefulness of their
equipment, specifically a PV (photovoltaic). If you have a central inverter for a
PV system and your inverter goes down, your system makes zero energy. And
the homeowner will not catch that until their bill comes back to them and they see
a spike in their bill, which can take at least a month or two, especially if you're in
the middle of summer and you have credits built up.
So, with that in mind, this streamlines the process, removes unnecessary wording,
doesn't create another exemption for something that's a required permit for, and
just trying to be helpful. I hope that sums it up for everybody. Maybe I'll leave it
at that. You've got questions?
CHR. CHUNG: See, you are an electrician. Right?
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I am. I'm an electrician.
CHR. CHUNG: How's about this, Matt. So, what you did is you took out a
sentence, right?
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Yes.
Page 23
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
CHR. CHUNG: Okay. And that sentence reads, which would trigger a building
permit: "Replacement of photovoltaic equipment and components (i.e. panels,
inverters) in the same location and of the same type."
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Yes.
CHR. CHUNG: Under the current law, that would trigger a building permit.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: It's an electrical permit, and it's $11.
CHR. CHUNG: Electrical permit, I'm sorry.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: It's an $11 permit. And from speaking to
—
I talked to an inspector in Kona, and he said, "I can't even remember a time when
anyone's pulled a permit to do the work on this side of the island." And I thought
about that because I know equipment's being replaced. So, we'll just leave it
right here.
CHR. CHUNG: So, by taking that out, you don't need that permit whenever you
just replace some pieces of equipment as part of the entire system?
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Yes.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: As long as it's same equipment, same
location. That's important.
CHR. CHUNG: So, you could even replace some panels possibly, as long as it's
of the same system.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Yup.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay. And then from your experience, if you don't mind the
dialogue, what's the life of these solar systems usually? When do they start—?
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: A lot of the equipment that I've seen—like a
solar panel usually is given a 10-year manufacturer's warranty and then carries a
30-year power production warranty. That's forI think that's a SunPower
module, which is more like your Mercedes-Benz for a solar panel. But the
30-year power production guaranty, this guarantees "x" amount of power will be
produced over the lifetime of the panel. Maybe too much information.
CHR. CHUNG: Too much.
Page 24
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: But most equipment carries about a 10-year
warranty. And given that we're 15-20 years in, you're going to see this
equipment—you're not going to see; it's happening already where pieces of the
solar system are starting to break.
CHR. CHUNG: Right.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: And you have replacements already. But in
some cases, for example, again, the central inverters, a lot of those will crap out at
about nine-and-a-half years, which is funny that they seem to do that. But nine-
and-a-half years. So, we call it a replacement, but it does take time to get those
replaced. And meanwhile, the customer's out.
CHR. CHUNG: Yeah. So, for these replacements, you don't need a permit.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I don't, yeah.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay, so now, anybody else wants to weigh in before I call up
our building and electrical experts? Neal, Gary, you guys want to weigh in? I
mean, at least we want to hear what the Administration has to say about this.
(Note: At this time, Acting Deputy Building Chief Neal Tanaka,
Department of Public Works, came forward to address the members of the
Council.)
MR. TANAKA: Good morning, Council Members. Neal Tanaka, Acting Deputy
Building Chief. So, Matt, I appreciate you reaching out to our inspectors,
supervisors with regards to this amendment. I was out of the room at the last
reading when this was brought up, and I believe our supervising building
inspector in Hilo said no, it is a safety issue. And you mentioned that it's a
replacement of failing parts from a ten-year life cycle, maybe nine-and-a-half
years for the central inverters.
And so, our concern is you're not finding equipment from ten years ago to replace
same for same. And so, what you're doing is you're eliminating language for
replacement for parts that you're not finding and then allowing that change to
happen without the impacts of the newer equipment to the existing system.
Panels nowadays are up to 400 watts, right. Back to ten years ago, 170 maybe,
right.
Microinverter technology has changed. Central inverter technologies all changed.
The impacts of one panel at 170 to 400, five panels at 170 to 400; that needs to be
reviewed, permitted, installed by licensed contractors.
Page 25
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I would totally agree with you, but the
wording we took out was permit required for same equipment, same location. If
you come back and put new components in, the wording is still there; it's a
required permit.
MR. TANAKA: That's not what—so, hold on a second. Let me pull up your
amendment: "Replacement of photovoltaic equipment and components (i.e.
panels, inverters) in the same location and of the same type." Right?
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Yes.
MR. TANAKA: So, panels equals panels?
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Same
MR. TANAKA: Same type.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Same type. And I would go as far as to say,
too, coming from the industry, if you go to try and replace a 180-watt panel with a
400-watt panel, the size is not the same and you're going to push your panels off
the rails and you're going to be falling off onto the roof. So, it won't actually
physically work for some of that equipment, and I do speak from experience.
MR. TANAKA: Right, but you're the experienced guy. What this does, without
a permit, experienced guys are no longer required to do the work.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Again, I like the discussion, thank you. The
sentence before that, read that sentence for me.
MR. TANAKA: "Complete new installations of all solar photovoltaic residential
and nonresidential systems, or the replacement of an existing system with all new
components, or relocation of panels from roof to ground or vice versa."
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Yeah. So, that sentence is interesting
because it's saying, "new components."
MR. TANAKA: It says "all new components"
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: "All new components." This is existing
language you know.
MR. TANAKA: I understand that.
Page 26
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: And the next sentence goes to say, if
replacing—well, the permit is required if you're replacing same location, same
equipment, same place.
MR. TANAKA: "Replacement of photovoltaic equipment and components (i.e.
panels, inverters) in the same location and of the same type."
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: So, same type. So, if I was to replace, say, a
SunPower 250-watt panel with a SunPower 250-watt panel, that'd be same
location, same equipment.
MR. TANAKA: Correct.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: But if I came back in and put a 400-watt
panel in there, that would no longer be same-same.
MR. TANAKA: To an experienced installer, yes, that would no longer be same-
same.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: To anybody. You don't have to be
experienced to understand a panel is a panel.
MR. TANAKA: This is the trigger to require a permit, right.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Yes.
MR. TANAKA: And those that are pulling permits know the requirements.
Those that are not pulling permits do not know the requirements of same-same.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Agreed.
CHR. CHUNG: Can I? Is there any common ground between your two
positions? I mean, I'm just kind of wondering if maybe in concept you agree, or
you agree to disagree totally in concept with this replacement.
MR. TANAKA: My electrical supervising inspector spoke to you about it at the
last meeting, and he was saying that it is a safety issue. One panel, five panels, a
whole string of panels, right, introduces a lot of risk at the installation portion of
that repair and replacement. Grounding, bonding. Not requiring permits, not
requiring those inspections is critical.
CHR. CHUNG: How about this? Sorry to get in the middle of this thing, but
what if there's something in there that says "done by a licensed electrical
contractor" or something like that? Would that work? I mean
Page 27
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
MR. TANAKA: Chair, with all due respect, all electrical work needs to be done
by licensed contractors regardless.
CHR. CHUNG: So, we don't have to put that in there then. It's kind of
understood already then.
MR. TANAKA: When a permit is required, yes.
CHR. CHUNG: Oh.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Can I say something?
MR. TANAKA: Sure.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: From what I understood, this is kind of a
gray area anyway within this section. No matter if I take it out or leave it in,
there's still the allowance of anybody—any goof off can go off up on a roof, pull
a panel and replace it with whatever they want to do. That exists regardless of
whether I change this or not. But for those people who choose to follow the
Code, this is a requirement.
MR. TANAKA: They're guaranteed life and safety inspection.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Yes. And I remember Gary talking about
the electrical bonding and the inspection of that issue. Now, let me give you an
example. Nowadays, microinverters, they fail very frequently. I've had them fail
immediately after installation, which requires a trip. But only once you turn it on,
you can act and you can see, given the data provided by the company, that that
microinverter has failed.
Now, if I go and pull one microinverter in a field of a hundred panels, if it wasn't
mapped properly, it's a pain in the butt to find. But, too, if I was to go and tell the
inspector we changed one microinverter in the middle of this field of panels, when
they go and inspect, they're going to have to find that panel, walk out on the
system, pull up the panel to find the microinverter to see if it was bonded
correctly.
But I would also add that the new technology coming in that would equal that
microinverter type the wattage, the output and everything they don't have the
same connections that the old ones did.
CHR. CHUNG: You know what, Matt? Sorry to interrupt right now, but we have
Chief Bobby Perreira here and he's got to leave, but I think he wanted to weigh in
on this matter as well, I think. Right? Yeah, go ahead.
Page 28
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
(Note: At this time, Deputy Fire Chief Robert Perreira came forward to
address the members of the Council.)
MR. PERREIRA: Good morning. Deputy Chief Bobby Perreira, Hawaii Fire
Department. So, why I'm here is because technology with photovoltaic
systems—and there's a difference between solar panels for water heaters and,
obviously, photovoltaic systems because solar panels for water heaters are usually
two panels on the roof and it doesn't affect the Fire Department as much as solar
voltaic [sic] panels for power, which are energized which pose issues.
But the biggest issue for us is access on the roof. If you look at many roofs
around our island, they were permitted in the older Code that didn't require access
pathways and ventilation opportunities for the Fire Department. And so, without
access pathways and without ventilation opportunities, it is very unsafe for a
firefighter to get on the roof to 1)rescue somebody that might have gotten hurt on
the roof during repairs, or 2) if they have to get on the roof to ventilate for fire.
So, if you look at a lot of the properties, they have permits that were pulled prior
to. And so, if we allow them to do work without a permit, then it prolongs this
problem that we have. We need them to meet current codes when they pull a new
permit. If they're going to do work, they should meet current codes. Current
codes require access pathways even on residential roofs. So, commercial and
residential roofs have that requirement.
So, that's something that's life safety for the person installing, the person
maintaining, the homeowner that might go up and do some roof maintenance, and
the Fire Department when we respond to whatever emergency that it might be.
So, having a requirement to pull a permit would give us the surety that that system
would meet current codes and current requirements for life safety.
CHR. CHUNG: Before I call on him, though, I just have a question. How many
instances have there been where your department has had to save somebody on a
roof and then it became a problem with these ?
MR. PERREIRA: Sorry, I wouldn't have that information readily available. I
would have to go through years of data.
CHR. CHUNG: I mean,just off the top of your head, though. You've heard of
any kind of stuff like that?
MR. PERREIRA: There's been instances where we have to access the roof.
CHR. CHUNG: I mean, but that it was hampered because of the solar system?
Page 29
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
MR. PERREIRA: There's instances where we cannot get on the roof because of
the solar system. Yes.
CHR. CHUNG: Oh, okay. Anyway, go ahead, Matt.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. I'm aware of those because for
years we've actually had to make changes to our PV systems to meet the
installation requirements of the Fire Department, which include access way and
that"x" amount of feet of panels must have a certain amount of footage of
walkway space between rows.
And I think that it's almost confusing the point when you're talking about life and
safety challenges being presented by the removal and replacement of a panel that
was already permitted and installed. And if the system was already installed, then
I think it would be grandfathered in. And that if you're going to go back and
replace a panel with a very similar piece of equipment, I don't know that it would
be creating a life-and-safety issue for Fire Department personnel.
MR. PERREIRA: Okay, so, basically you're telling us that if we permit it and we
allow it to remain, then that homeowner or that business owner has to realize that
the Fire Department cannot access that roof, and we will refuse to access that
roof. What I think you have to remember is that the photovoltaic technology was
faster than the code adoption came to place. And so we're behind, and that's
where I think that we have to err on the side of safety for not only the people out
there, but our firefighters if we have to get on that roof. And it might be saving
one of the electricians that are installing that might have gotten electrocuted. You
never know.
So, with photovoltaic, because it's powered by the sun, it's always energized. So,
that's just something that we need to really consider. I don't want to go back and
forth arguing about it. It's something that, for me and the department, we've
looked at it and we've jumped on it as fast as we could with the Building
Division, trying to get the access pathways and ventilation opportunities available.
It is a challenge. There are some that are in compliance, and there's a lot that are
not in compliance.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I'll ask you one follow up question. So,
let's just say that you had a system that was permitted by the County of Hawaii,
has not been altered in any way, someone came in to replace a panel or a
microinverter under a panel. You're saying the Fire Department would actually
deny that permit to replace the equipment based on new code requirements?
MR. PERREIRA: If it's required to come in for a permit, then we would make
requirements for that to meet the requirements of the access pathways, ventilation
Page 30
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
opportunities, and there's one more section that I can't remember off the top of
my head. But there's three main things that we would require. One of those is
labeling of the conduits.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, thank you.
MR. PERREIRA: Because we're cutting through the roof, we might be cutting
through that conduit. And that could be putting our person in danger, our
personnel. So, I just wanted to share. I have to get back to the EOC (Emergency
Operations Center). If any other questions from anybody else?
CHR. CHUNG: Anybody want to ask Bobby anything? You have enough
answers from him?
MR. PERREIRA: Thank you.
CHR. CHUNG: Thank you, Bobby. Okay, go ahead. Keep on going.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I don't want to belabor this. I felt that the
code that we have,just again from speaking to different people, including some of
our own County personnel, felt that this was already a gray area. And that by
removing this sentence, the requirement is still there to get permits for removal of
an entire system or all new components for a system. So, we're not removing that
requirement, but we are removing the wording that is prohibitive to the consumer.
And then I feel, and I would hope that this body also feels, that just creates an
unnecessary step.
And we can go down the line of safety, and I understand that. From electrical,
I've been shocked on the roof. And I understand the compliance issues that the
Fire Department has brought up. But I think this sentence is more of a prohibition
to getting work done efficiently and quickly and creates another step for the
industry to follow. And given the amount of PV systems that exist and the
amount of equipment that's going to need to be replaced and the fact that you're
not seeing a lot of permits for this already, that we just created an unnecessary
step for the industry to follow that creates more work for everyone to do.
And again, I would say that a lot of the equipment coming back in, this has to be
similar. And I could have created an exemption which is like the solar hot water
code, but I felt that creating the exemption creates kind of a back and forth where
we have an okay to do and then an exemption to not do. And that is confusing.
It's actually slightly—it's a requirement that you have to look in two different
places to see if that is okayed in one section and not okayed in another. So, it's
confusing. So, this is, to me, a clear way of delineating what a permit is required
for and not what an exemption would be given to.
Page 31
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
MR. TANAKA: I respect that. But just because it's a gray area and people are
doing it without permits doesn't make it any more right or any more safe. Your
example of that one microinverter in a field of a hundred, how did you get to that
one? You took off all those panels to get there?
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: No. We have maps. So, you can go in, and
you can find the inverter.
MR. TANAKA: No, I understand that, but how did you get to it to replace it?
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: You take the panel off.
MR. TANAKA: Yeah. So, you're touching all of those panels to get there.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: No. Just one panel.
MR. TANAKA: In the middle of a field?
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Yes.
MR. TANAKA: You're walking all over your panels?
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: There's no other way to do it, especially if
you're the contractor paying for someone to go and do it.
MR. TANAKA: So, you're not accessing these other panels to get to that one to
replace it?
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: No.
MR. TANAKA: As a licensed guy, you know how to do that, obviously.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: And I would say I think what you're getting
at is unlicensed guys doing work. Again, you're not going to stop that from
happening, and that's unfortunate. I think contractors should be doing the work.
And I understand your concern that if we don't require a permit for it, then the
contractor may or may not be doing the work. But I think most people who have
a PV system, if they call anyone, they're going to call the contractor who installed
the system the first time because they have a relationship with that person.
MR. TANAKA: If they're around.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: If they're around because many have gone
out of business. But in that case, you're going to call another contractor, one,
because you don't want your system to not work. You want to know it's going to
Page 32
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
work at the end of the day. And it's not easy to install this equipment either. You
have to know what you're doing. So, you don't just call Bob's Electrical Service,
have them come change your inverter. You want to know someone's going to do
it correctly. So, you will be calling a contractor. And for those people who aren't
going to call a contractor, they're not going to call a contractor anyway.
MR. TANAKA: I hear that. We just respectfully disagree.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Agreed. And I like the discussion. This is
good. And I have an interesting—what was interesting to me is I actually know
this system and this breakdown. That's where I feel personally involved in this.
I'm not a contractor, and I don't own an electrical company, but I did install solar
for ten years. So, I understand this system and the way this works. And this is
just a way, I think, for us to make it a little bit simpler in the world and not create
hurdles for everyone to follow. And in my eyes, there is still a safety component
built in.
CHR. CHUNG: Let me ask a question if you don't mind.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Yup.
CHR. CHUNG: Is there any middle ground between—like for example because
Matt's amendment is really a common sense thing that makes things simpler for
people. Right? And in case the thing breaks, they want to be able to fix it quickly
without having to go through the whole bureaucratic thing. Would it be okay if
it's only reserved to this: You can replace only maybe on residential? And
whenever a contractor is going to replace any equipment, they send a notice to
theI'm just kind of thinking of something that would address your concerns but
yet further the intent of what he's trying to accomplish.
MR. TANAKA: I don't think so.
CHR. CHUNG: No more, huh? Okay, I just figured I'd ask. Okay, all right.
Robyn, you
MS. EOFF: Mr. Chung?
CHR. CHUNG: Yeah, go ahead.
MS. EOFF: Well, I'm glad you said that because my mind was kind of going in
the same place. Because, I think a lot of these people, contractors or installers,
wouldn't be opposed to getting a permit. It's just the time that it—sometimes
simple things get pushed to the bottom or something. So, is there a way to—we
don't want to sacrifice safety, of course, but is there a way that the permitting
like Matt said, it's the same type of unit, same location, something like that; yes,
Page 33
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
like you said—could be done a different way so the department knew it was going
to take place, but it didn't have to go through a long involved system of
permitting.
CHR. CHUNG: Is that a question of Neal or a comment?
MS. EOFF: It was kind of a comment. I don't know if anyone has a thought. I
liked where you were going with your attempt to find a middle ground there.
CHR. CHUNG: Well, how about this? Why don't you assume the chair for a
little while because I've got to leave the room for a bit, okay. So,just continue
talking.
MS. EOFF: I yield, but if you need
CHR. CHUNG: Just assume the chair.
MS. EOFF: Okay.
Relinquish Chair: At this time, Chair Chung relinquished the chair to Acting
Chair Eoff.
ACTING CHR. EOFF: All right. Well, we're going to continue with the
discussion.
MS. POINDEXTER: Madam Chair, someone came up to the table from the
department, and I think he wanted to comment on something.
ACTING CHR. EOFF: Okay. Since I can't really see you, can you just introduce
yourself? And then we can go ahead with your comment.
(Note: At this time, Supervising Electrical Inspector
Gary Kaho`ohanohano, Department of Public Works, came forward to
address the members of the Council.)
MR. KAHO`OHANOHANO: Aloha. My name is Gary Kaho`ohanohano. I'm
with the Building Division, Supervising Electrical Inspector. My comment here
is about safety, and I understand the perspective of going through the system and
how long it takes. I understand all that. But the No. 1 thing for me is safety. I
would say, like if you were to replace a panel, you wouldn't have to get a permit
on the site. After they do the work, we can process that because it's almost like
an emergency repair.
Page 34
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
I would agree to get a permit after the fact and work it out that way if that would
work. You know what I mean? That would be a compromise by the Building
Division, but it's an idea, okay. I cannot get around not seeing the work or it
being not permitted, even if it's just for one panel.
ACTING CHR. EOFF: Thank you for that comment. Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
did you want to consider further, or is there any more discussion?
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I would look for any comments from the
Council. I know Sue has her light on. I'd just like to hear what everybody else is
thinking. Ultimately, the Council can decide whether they want to do this or not.
And I looked at everyone's input. I think it's important to have a discussion. I
have my own opinions, and I'm sharing them. But I'd like to hear what Sue has
to say.
ACTING CHR. EOFF: Okay, thank you. Ms. Lee Loy, go ahead.
MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Chair. Matthew, I know a lot of this work for solar
panels was initiated by a tax incentive done by the State, right. If you went and
put in solar panels, there was a tax write-off that you could take advantage of,
which is what sparked a lot of the renewable solar panels. And just looking for
work-arounds or even common solutions. And maybe even Ms. Kierkiewicz
might be able to weigh in on this as our GREDC (Governmental Relations and
Economic Development Committee) Chair. And then even speaking to what
Gary mentioned.
If it would be worth walking back to the State that provided that tax incentive,
that if these types of repairs are necessary because the equipment is aged and
failing, we could provide another tax incentive with our State Legislature that
would help the industry bring a lot of the panels, one, up to current standards
repair and replacing—while providing exceptions with the permit process where it
would be inspected. And just kind of maybe bundle this in a manner that would
incentivize use carrots to get the work done by licensed electricians and then
shock the system with people wanting to spend money on their homes, which
would be some economic recovery for us. Those are my thoughts around this just
because the permit process is that gatekeeper.
And what I hear you explaining, some people would just do it because no matter
what. But that's the trigger for the review of all these other things. So, if we
could bundle this, and take it to the State where the State could incentivize it
because it would not only benefit Hawaii County,but it would benefit the entire
State all because they keep walking back to a lot of families took advantage of the
tax incentive. So, why not use that same mechanism to repair and replace. Just a
thought. Just something we could submit as a legislative package.
Page 35
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
We've heard some possible work-around solutions where if they took this
possible incentive for repair and replace that they could get expedited permitting
or maybe permitting and inspection either before or after. I mean, I think there
are tools here, but to make the adjustment in this manner really doesn't capture
what the Building Division and specifically what Gary is speaking of. Just a
thought. Because, it's really hard to listen to the electrical supervisor and Fire
really not be in support of this pathway, but offering solutions and suggestions for
maybe other avenues that we can explore. Chair, I yield.
ACTING CHR. EOFF: Okay, thank you. Ms. Kierkiewicz, did you want to
comment?
MR. RICHARDS: Chair? Richards.
ACTING CHR. EOFF: Oh, Mr. Richards. And I see Mr. Chung is back, so I'm
going to relinquish the chair back to Chair Chung. But, Mr. Richards, you have
the floor.
Relinquish Chair: At this time, Acting Chair Eoff relinquished the chair to
Chair Chung.
MR. RICHARDS: Thanks, Chair, both of you. Matt, I hear what you are trying
to get done here. We're talking about replacement and fixing something. And
though I appreciate what Public Works is talking about, I think I heard Fire say
that if you are going to replace something, you have to bring it up to the code of
now, not when it was installed, if that's what I heard, which I don't think is
appropriate because that means anytime something breaks, you're going to have
to reconfigure the whole thing. We all live here on the islands. We know there's
a lot of old buildings out there that have weathered many storms and earthquakes
and all sorts of stuff.
And so, I'm not against safety; that's not what I'm trying to say. But I think, to
Matt's point, we're talking about repairing something that has already been
permitted. And if we had—and this kind of falls in tune with some of my
amendments coming forth where part of the concern is the permitting process.
Fine. You want me to pull a permit? Okay. As long as you're sure that I'll have
this permit in five days or three days, whatever is reasonable for repair permitting.
Maybe that's a way we can talk about it. But the problem is we're getting stuck
in this, and it's a procedural stuff. Nobody wants to void safety, and I got that.
But by the same token, there's a practicality side.
And, Sue, to your point about incentivizing, I hear that, but we're talking about
fixing something. And if we're going to—if you've dealt with enough electricity
stuff, you want to be sure you know what you're doing. And so, I mean, you're
going to have someone that's going to be working on it that is reasonable. And I
Page 36
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
think it's reasonable to expect having a licensed contractor, whatever the case
may be. But I understand what, Matt, you're trying to do is to make it reasonable
and legal to fix something broken that actually helps us going forward, and I
support that.
Aside from all the other conversations, because I hear the concerns coming
forward, but it's not reasonable to, the moment you touch it, to bring it up to
current code because that's not reasonable. And to not fix it because I can't get a
building permit is also not reasonable. So, I don't think we're going to get a real
good answer on this, but I support what you're trying to do, Matt; I'm just trying
to figure how to get it done. And this was the process that's actually a part of my
conversation on my other amendment. We talked about if the permit's not
approved by a certain time, it's considered approved or something like that going
forward. So, I don't know. Anyway, I want to listen to other people talk. I yield.
CHR. CHUNG: Val?
MS. POINDEXTER: Yeah, I just want to ditto what Council Member Richards
said—it's the easiest instead of repeating all of that—because this is a repair
versus a new build or installation. And especially now in these economic times,
people need their solar panels repaired, and that is important too. Safety is of
utmost importance as well. So, that's where the struggle is, yeah. But again, this
is a repair. In fact, when you build a house and then you're going to go repair
something—we'll get those other things later. So, I'm agreeing with what
Council Member Richards said and still a little concerned with what the Fire
Department said as well.
So, I don't know how we can massage this and move this forward, but there
should be a way to do something, to do it, because nothing is always perfect. We
know that anything we pass is not perfect, and there's unintended consequences.
But what is the best thing that we can do for our public and the safety of our
public as well? So, thanks. Thank you, Chair.
CHR. CHUNG: Matt.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I guess, to sum it all up, I heard the Fire
Department's concerns, and I respectfully disagree with some of the concerns that
were presented not all. And I know from my work again on the roof that we do
comply with a lot of clearance issues, vent pipe issues, making sure the
commercial installations have a walkable walkway between rows of panels. I
mean, there's a lot of requirements. It's not easy to comply with all of those
requirements. But in some cases, and in this case specifically where I'm taking
out this very specific sentence—removal and replacement of same location, same
equipment, same typeI just feel sometimes that government needs to get out of
the way. It's that simple.
Page 37
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
There is homeowner insurance on the solar system. As soon as you get a PV
system, people usually go and insure it immediately because it adds to the value
of their home. So, their systems are insured. If someone falls off the roof doing
the work they could be pressure washing, they could be cleaning panels, they
could be doing anything—if they fall off the roof, they're covered by their
homeowner's insurance or their own insurance as a contractor.
A lot of the equipment being replaced is exactly the same. And it almost has to be
or else it doesn't actually fit. You can't put a 400-watt panel in a 200-watt panel
place. They're not the same size. They don't fit on the rails. So, that's not going
to happen. And if it does, you're going to see it from a mile away because it's
ugly.
I understand your concerns, Neal, and I appreciate it. But I think, in this case,
we're just creating another step that keeps people from keeping their systems
working and keeping their HELCO (Hawai`i Electric Light Company, Inc.) bills
from being jumped and just a myriad of other aspects that I think we just need to
remove ourselves from and allow for more of a streamlined process in this case.
And again, I've heard your concerns. I've talked to different members. I come
from the field. I've seen this with my own eyes. And speaking to the guy in
Kona, he's not seeing a lot of these permits come in. That doesn't mean the
work's not happening. And you're not seeing anything crazy happening in Kona
as far as systems failing or blowing up or a house is burning down. It's not really
the reality. It's good to talk about it. It's nice to hear the comments, but I think
reality is that the work is being done safely regardless of a permit or not. And I
think this is just an unnecessary step we've created.
And again, our purpose is to streamline sometimescreate, amend, delete
legislation where not needed. So, I'm wanting to streamline it so that the public
can do things at an easier task and rate without having County involvement. It
also creates less work for us. And we talk about inspection times and permitting
times. If we're creating one unnecessary step, then we're increasing [sic] our
ability to respond to the public. And while we may not agree that it's
unnecessary, I'm just streamlining again.
So, I appreciate everyone listening. I appreciate the discussion. I do hear your
concerns, and I did think about it, and I sat on this for about a week and I mowed
over it. I slept on it, yeah. But in this case, I feel like what I've submitted is
proper, and I hope that the Council can stand by it. And I don't want to belabor
this because this is just one tiny aspect, and I've been cognizant of that from the
beginning. I don't want to belabor this process. So, I'd like to move forward and
see how the Council votes and then we'll go from there.
Page 38
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
MR. TANAKA: I'd like to address your comments of speaking to my Kona
inspector. I think that, yeah, maybe we're not seeing the permits happening or
coming in and the work is happening, but he will steadfastly say that safety is an
issue. And it seems, I'm not sure if that's what you're implying, but that's what
he said and that's not the case. He is adamant that safety is the issue.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Safety is an issue. In this case, I don't feel
like we're creating a safety issue. That may be my opinion. It may be a reality; it
may not be. But yeah. So, I don't want anyone to get the feeling that what we're
doing is not safe, but I do think sometimes government needs to remove itself
from certain aspects of public runnings.
CHR. CHUNG: Neal?
MR. TANAKA: Yes?
CHR. CHUNG: What part of the building or electrical permit process addresses
or ensures the safety of the installation? What are you guys reviewing exactly
when it comes down to replacement?
MR. TANAKA: Essentially, what's being installed and how it's being installed.
I'd like to speak to Chief Perreira's comment about bringing that whole thing up
to code. There are some triggers or systems or work when something needs to
come up to code. And the replacement of a panel,that needs to have a discussion
for sure because it is our belief that an electrical permit in our new proposed one-
permit system should not take long and it should move on forward right through
to address those comments.
But to address your question, we're reviewing to ensure that this replacement
panel is actually the one that's being replaced, and we're inspecting it for the
grounding and bonding, as Gary mentioned, is critical to the safety.
CHR. CHUNG: I'm just kind of wondering, though. You used the word
"ensuring,"but if we take this provision out and just leave it up to the contractors
and then it's on them really already, yeah. It's not us. I did talk to you and
Robyn about that case, right, that Cooley versus Sun Investment and all that stuff
like that. Anyway, I'll talk later on. Go ahead, Val.
MS. POINDEXTER: I definitely want to support this because if it goes
through—see, Bill 179 with all amendments, whatever it is, it's still a working
document. You still can come back and still work through some of the issues,
correct? Right? Your head is nodding yes, so he's saying yes.
MR. TANAKA: I mean, as Council Members, you have every right to create an
ordinance (inaudible).
Page 39
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
MS. POINDEXTER: Right. Because, I have an issue when every time
something happens and then we've got to bring it up to code. I mean, I've dealt
with the Building Department with a lot of issues in our old buildings where they
want sprinkler systems in Honoka`a town. So, I know what, Matt, you're talking
about and the hardships that sometimes we've got to deal with because of
government. And this isI agree that there should be a permit on anything that's
a new installation, definitely. But on this repair stuff, that's where I definitely
want to support you and the people who own those systems to make sure they can
have it working.
I'm sure you could continue to work on something that may be comfortable with
DPW or the electrical inspectors. I'm seeingI forgot your first name—Gary. I
see Gary nodding his head yes. And I know Matt. Matt will definitely follow
through and listen to what the discussion was and definitely make it best for all
parties involved and consider the safety issues. I'm sure he'll work also with the
Fire Department in solving some of their concerns as well. We're not going to be
able to solve everything because nothing is ever absolute, right, in anything we
do. So, I'm going to support you, Matt, on this one. Thank you. Thank you,
Chair.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay, anyone else? Kona, anybody else? Okay.
MS. DAVID: Chair?
CHR. CHUNG: Yeah?
MS. DAVID: Hi. Maile.
CHR. CHUNG: Yeah, go ahead, Maile.
MS. DAVID: Okay,just listening to the department's position on this, it is all
about safety on the department's side and Fire's side, but I'm also hearing that
there is a possibility, or option at least, in either fine-tuning this. Because, I really
think that there is a point to what Ms. Poindexter is saying, that if it's the existing
system and you're just replacing. Now, if you can't find the same thing to replace
it with, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, I want to confirm that if you have to, I mean, if
your existing system cannot be replaced with what you already have, then you're
saying that, yes, a new permit would have to be applied for. Is that correct?
Chair Chung, can I ask Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder?
CHR. CHUNG: Yes, please.
Page 40
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: The wording that's being removed is a
permit is required to replace equipment that is of the same location and of the
same type. To me, we remove that, we're removing something that I think is very
easy to understand as far as what's being removed.
MS. DAVID: Exactly.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Say, if you put the same thing back in the
same place. I could've created an exemption. That was one thing I did think
about. Yet by creating an exemption, you're creating a double up in the code
where you have to see what is permitted and what is exempted from a permit,
which is actually redundant. And so, what in reality I did was I reduced
redundancy in our code and removed that section where we're calling for a permit
to basically repair and replace, an R&R. After that, I mean, no matter
regardless of that code section, that language being there or not, it only refers to
same location, same type.
MS. DAVID: Same type and location. Okay. And I thank you for that. And I
really think that this is something that is important because what you speak of
with people having to get permits for every possible change that they have to
make is pretty much what people are very concerned about in this day and age.
But I think this can be worked on further like the engineer from Hilo suggested.
But for now, I think if this change is going to create a lot of pushback that the
department is concerned with, I believe we will be hearing about it very quickly.
And I assume that you would be agreeable in working with some sort of
continued effort suggested by the engineer in Hilo. And like Ms. Poindexter said,
this is a living and breathing document. In comparison to what we're up against, I
think this one is pretty much something that can be considered at this time. So,
thank you for the explanation and your amendment. I yield. Thanks.
CHR. CHUNG: Go ahead, Ashley.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chair. And, Matt, thank you. I appreciate
your efforts to streamline process and peel back some layers of bureaucracy
because you're right. So many times government just gets in the way of our
people being able to move forward. I am concerned when I hear folks like Gary
and Neal and Chief Perreira talk about not being in agreement with this. But Gary
did bring up a potential work-around, and I don't know if that was addressed by
Mr. Tanaka or if that's something that you would be amenable to. It's something
after the fact. Neal, is it that you guys just need to have something on record as to
the kind of work that is occurring?
MR. TANAKA: It's just a matter of understanding the scope. One panel, two
panels, five panels, seven panels of the same type in the same location, there is
Page 41
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
impact one way or another. But taking that language away leaves that ambiguous.
The exemption language might be somewhere we can start talking about limiting
the number of panels or something like that. But taking away language saying
same location and same type leaves it ambiguous. Now, someone's asking,
"What do I do with same location, same type?" So, maybe we can work with that
to fix that a little bit better but then I think that really needs to be thought through.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: And then, Chair, if I could ask Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder a
question. You mentioned it taking some time to get permits, so I'm just
wondering what does that window of time look like in the current process?
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I think if you're going to think about the
time process, I think a lot of times we in the County think of what our time is, but
we don't think about the private aspect of that time. So, if this was to be done,
paperwork to be pulled with the County, we see our processing time. But what
you don't see is the company has to pay someone to go to the house, do the work,
and that could be as easy as a half-hour; it could be more like a four-to six-hour
replacement. And if it's a real mess, then you could be looking at a whole day.
But on the back end of that—
MS.
hatMS. KIERKIEWICZ: Is that all residential, or is that a mix of residential and
commercial?
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Could be either or.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Oh, okay.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: But I think what is important is the company
has to leave a ladder and a rope for the inspector so they can get on the roof.
There's time involved there. And then when they're done, the company has to go
back and pick up the ladder and the rope from the house because our inspectors
don't bring ladders with them. Although we do have ladder racks on every truck,
we don't actually bring ladders or provide ladders for our inspectors. So, there's a
lot of time involved beyond just what we see in our little square bubble, which is
how much time it takes to pull a permit. The company itself, the industry has to
comply with everything that we create on the back end to have that inspection, to
get the permit pulled. And it's prohibitive. So, if we want to talk about the
permitting time, it's probably quick. I mean, what would it be?
MR. TANAKA: It's quick.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Three days, five days
MR. TANAKA: At most.
Page 42
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Seven days?
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Oh, here I was thinking you were waiting months.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: No, you're not going to get months, but
think about I think you need to see the whole picture. So, the whole picture is
customer finds out finally the equipment's not working, which can be a month or
two. And then they're going to call someone to do the work. Then that person's
going to call to get a permit and file the paperwork, then send the workers to fix.
If you look at that whole timeline, you begin to see that it's, to me, it's steps. It's
government creating steps. And again, I understand what was brought up. I have
a different opinion, and 1-just to answer your question, there's a lot of time
involved beyond what we see on our County side.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Absolutely. The back-end stuff. All right. Well,
Mr. Tanaka, I'm just wondering if there's a way for you to work with
Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder and find this happy medium so that we can be efficient
in the private-sector work and also within government. I mean, do you think you
need more time beyond today to come up with a workable solution? I mean, we
are on second and final reading for Bill 179, and there are other amendments we
have to consider. I also want to be respectful of the departments. Fire has
weighed in. We've got Public Works. Electrical's here as well. And I know that
in the interest of time, I don't know if you would consider a bill specific to this
matter after you've had time to kind of vet through some of the language with the
departments, but I'd like all of us to kind of walk out of here in agreement and
feeling good about the decisions we're making.
MR. TANAKA: I think that we've stated our case.
CHR. CHUNG: Yeah, I think he did say no.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. I yield.
CHR. CHUNG: Mr. Richards, real quickly please.
MR. RICHARDS: Yeah. I don't want to lose sight of the fact that we're here to
get 179 because we have a timeline that we have to get that through. And these
amendments are important. I don't want to lose sight of that. And so, I'm
mindful of that going forward. In fact, I've had conversations with Public Works
about tweaking what I'm trying to get done while not losing sight of the big
picture here. So, I will be probably working on a future bill to address some of
my needs. Thanks, Chair, I yield.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay. Anyone else? Kona? Anyone? Yeah. Well, I think,
Robyn and Neal, you guys both know how I feel about the whole building permit
Page 43
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
process and everything. Every day in my house, I've been living there like
16 years, and there's like two or three things that really irk me, and they're all
because of Building Code stuff. And like every day I've got to deal with this
thing. I'm thinking like, "What the hell. Why didn't-7 But it is what it is.
To me,just the beauty of this is that it takes the County out of the equation. It's
all on the contractor. So if, for example, the house burns down or if somebody
loses their life and they find out that the equipment that was replaced was not in
the same location or of the same type as that which they had installed earlier, then
it's on them. We're out. No liability on our part already.
And I don't like the idea that we're going to use the building permit process as a
subterfuge or a way of getting, now, code compliance on the back end, yeah. I
mean, I'm not saying that this is what you guys are looking at, but it was kind of
implied. And there has to be something to be said for guys who were in
compliance before. So, anyway, I'm going to be supporting this thing. It seems
like a common sense thing. And really, it makes life easier for you guys in my
opinion. So, anyway, we have a motion to amend with 989.31. And you guys
can work things out later on, maybe tweak it later on if you guys want. Let's do it
by roll call because we have guys in Kona.
Vote on Motion to The motion to amend Bill 179, Draft 2, with the contents of
Amend: Comm. 989.31 was carried by the following roll call vote:
(Approved)
Ayes: Council Members David, Eoff,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Poindexter, Richards,
Villegas, and Chair Chung–7.
Noes: Council Members Kierkiewicz and Lee Loy –2.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay. What's next?
MR. HENRICKS: Mr. Chair, the rules say that a bill or resolution up for final
reading that is amended on the floor shall not be acted upon at the time of the
floor amendment. Final action on such an amended bill or resolution shall not be
taken until the next regular meeting.
Page 44
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
Vote on Motion to Ms. Poindexter moved to suspend Council Rule 24 to
Suspend Council waive the holdover for the substantive amendment of
Rules: Bill 179, Draft 2. Seconded by Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder
(Approved) and carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members David, Eoff,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz, Lee Loy,
Poindexter, Richards, and Chair Chung—8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Villegas — 1.
Excused: None.
CHR. CHUNG: Motion carried. Now what?
MR. HENRICKS: You may carry on.
CHR. CHUNG: What's next?
Motion to Amend: Mr. Richards moved to amend Bill 179, Draft 2, with the
contents of Comm. 989.32. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy.
CHR. CHUNG: Quickly tell us what this thing is all about, what it does.
MR. RICHARDS: Okay, Chair. Thanks. It's all about agriculture. And I've met
with Public Works about this. It has two facets. First of all, under the
communication before you, C101.3.2 concerning barbed-wire and razor-wire
fences. A little bit of housekeeping on this. It, for some reason, talks about cattle
and pigs but not horses and other livestock. And so what I did was, on this one, is
make it encompassing of livestock in general. In conversations with Public
Works, they are comfortable with what this is going to do.
Additionally on here, I have worked on talking about basically greenhouses,
horticulture greenhouses. It has to do with going through the process of the
greenhouses and the use of rigid versus non-rigid plastic sheets for covering on
them. And then the further we got into it, this gets a little contorted. So, it has to
do with declaration of compliance for an ag (agriculture) exemption under HRS
(Hawai`i Revised Statutes) Section 46-88, which allows for no building permits
for greenhouses under 20,000 square feet provided there's no plumbing and
electrical work going on. And, Mr. Tanaka, did I characterize that correctly?
Okay, thank you.
And so in working with Public Works about this,we're running into permitting
issues and trying to get things built and coming forward. And like I said, this is
all about agriculture. What I wanted to do, first of all, is have a quick
conversation on this, Neal. And you and I have discussed this at great length.
Page 45
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
And, Robyn, thanks so much for your guys' time repeatedly on this. It's my
understanding there was a concern, and what I wanted to do under C101.2 was
include "rigid or non-rigid plastic sheets." And it has to do with the roofing on
these greenhouses. In the conversations with Mr. Tanaka, the use of the rigid
sheets for roofing is allowable under the ag exemption.
So, the further we got into it, what we were running up into was the declaration of
compliance—and here's where the paradox runs that under this 46-88, you are
exempt to finding a building permit so long as you get signatures signed off from
Planning, Engineering, and Fire. So if we're exempting the need of a building
permit, why do we have to get all of these signatures? And this was a
conversation that I realized is going to be a lot deeper, and so
CHR. CHUNG: Wait. What are we talking about? 989.32?
MR. RICHARDS: What we're talking about is 989.32, horticulture buildings.
CHR. CHUNG: Yeah.
MR. RICHARDS: And so, as I understand, Neal, we're allowed rigid roofing on
the horticulture buildings with the ag exemption, correct?
MR. TANAKA: Neal Tanaka, Acting Deputy Building Chief. Yes, Tim, 46-88
does allow for that exemption.
MR. RICHARDS: So, Chair, what I'm trying to do is rush through this real
quick. So, what I realized is this conversation is a lot deeper, and that's why I
said, "coming forth." So, what I want to do is actually replace 989.32—hang on a
second, I've got to find it; is it 35?withdraw 989.32 and replace it with 989.35,
which essentially drops the horticulture building portion right now and just
focuses on the barbed wire.
CHR. CHUNG: Where is 35 anyway?
MR. RICHARDS: It just came in as a floor amendment.
CHR. CHUNG: Oh, here. There we go.
MR. RICHARDS: So what we're doing here, Chair, is, like I said, this is going to
be stuff that I'm going to be working on with Building going forward. What I'm
going to do,just for today in the interest of making sure that we get 179 going
forward, is to withdraw 989.32 and move to amend 179, Draft 2, as amended,
with the contents of 989.35, specifically as it relates to the barbed wire fence.
MS. LEE LOY: Second.
Page 46
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
Withdraw Motion Mr. Richards withdrew his motion to amend Bill 179,
to Amend: Draft 2, with the contents of Comm. 989.32.
CHR. CHUNG: I'm just kind of curious. Why didn't we just do that at the
beginning?
MR. RICHARDS: Because, I needed to talk about this whole building process
first.
CHR. CHUNG: Oh, okay. All right. Okay.
MR. RICHARDS: And we have to do
MR. HENRICKS: Before we proceed
CHR. CHUNG: What do we have to do? Tell me.
MR. HENRICKS: Are you withdrawing your motion that's on the ?
MR. RICHARDS: I did.
MR. HENRICKS: Well, do you recognize the withdrawal of the motion?
CHR. CHUNG: I recognize it.
MR. HENRICKS: Okay, so now we're just back to Bill 179, Draft 2, as
amended, on the floor.
CHR. CHUNG: And now you're going to come in with 989.35.
Motion to Amend: Mr. Richards moved to amend Bill 179, Draft 2, with the
contents of Comm. 989.35. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay, now go ahead.
MR. RICHARDS: Okay, now I'll go ahead. So,what this has is the content of
the barbed wire. And again, this is more housekeeping, straightening out what we
can use barbed wire for, which is livestock.
CHR. CHUNG: Right. And, Neal, do you guys have any problem with this
amendment?
MR. TANAKA: No, we don't have any.
CHR. CHUNG: None whatsoever, right?
Page 47
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
MR. TANAKA: Yeah. Our only concern was that barbed-wire residential areas,
however, because it's specific in our code already that the barbed wire is for
premises using pasturing; pasturing being an ag-use zoning issue. We have no
issue with this.
CHR. CHUNG: None, right? Robyn? Anybody? Roy, you look like you want
to say something. Okay. All right, then. Anyone else want to weigh in on this?
If not, we have a motion on the floor. Let's do it by a roll call vote. Oh, I see
Ms. Villegas over there. All those in favor, say "aye."
Vote on Motion to The motion to amend Bill 179, Draft 2, with the contents of
Amend: Comm. 989.35 was carried by the following roll call vote:
(Approved)
Ayes: Council Members David, Eoff,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz,
Lee Loy, Poindexter, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair Chung—9.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
CHR. CHUNG: Motion carried.
Vote on Motion to Ms. Poindexter moved to suspend Council Rule 24 to
Suspend Council waive the holdover for the substantive amendment of
Rules: Bill 179, Draft 2. Seconded by Mr. Richards and carried
(Approved) by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members David, Eoff,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz,
Lee Loy, Poindexter, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair Chung—9.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
CHR. CHUNG: Motion carried. Next.
Motion to Amend: Ms. Poindexter moved to amend Bill 179, Draft 2,with the
contents of Comm. 989.34. Seconded by
Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder.
MS. POINDEXTER: The public had reviewedI guess it was I met that
deadline, and they reviewed the amendments that I previously had on. And this
989.34 is the new amendment. It's because I had an opportunity to speak with
Page 48
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
Neal and Robyn yesterday to go over some of their concerns in some areas that I
redid. So, the majority of the meat in the one that the public had is basically the
same, but I'll go over it.
At the last meeting in Kona, when I came back with the amendments that were
we took some other things out and put that in. Neal and Robyn thought that I
would have left in the permitting section because they thought that it was good to
leave it in. So, anyway. So, with this new amendment, I put in the permitting
section again too. So, let's start with Section 5-3-2, the first one: It's just
renumbering because we put in 5-3-2 will be the factory-built housing. So, we're
just renumbering 5-3-3, relocation of buildings. The second one, again, is
renumbering because we added that factory-built housing. And then if you go to
the next page, same thing again; renumbered because of that addition.
So, when we look at Section 5-3-2, the factory-built housing, when we spoke in
Kona, Robyn brought up the word"manufacture"that may be read differently
because it didn't have a definition. And that word"manufacture" means maybe
the windows or something that may be manufactured in China or wherever. So,
what we did is we cleared that up by putting—if you see Item (c)—"For the
purposes of this section, `manufacture' means the process of making, fabricating,
constructing, forming, or assembling a FBH (factory-built housing) at a place
other than the building site." So, that would basically take care of the concerns of
the windows so it makes it clear that it's not that type of—that"manufacture"
doesn't mean where the doorknob was manufactured or the window was
manufactured.
Okay, on the next one, then we move to L101.2, building official. So, I think in
our discussion, we allI don't know if it was Council Chair Chung that brought
it up or somebody brought it up: "Who is the building official?" So then, we put
that"means the director of the department of public works or the director's
authorized representative." So, we made that clear for that definition.
And then, we went to L101.3. So, this amendment just clarifies that
manufacturing does not apply to the manufacturing of products, and that's what
we talked about in that definition—let me just make sure I'm on the rightoh,
wait, oh, okay. I'm sorry. L101.3. Okay, so that is the original language was
"No person shall install," and that's where now we're changing the language
because "install" is after the walls are closed up and the building gets to the site of
where it's going to be placed. So, that was some concern because the permit, it
should be clear that it should be done when it's manufactured because that will
trigger the inspection. That permit will trigger that inspection because it says the
definition of"installation" means the assembly of factory-built homes on site and
the process of affixing the FBH to the land. So, "manufacture" is different. So,
that's why we changed that portion.
Page 49
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
Now, on that L101.3—okay, so, in our conversation, Neal had stated, but they
feel that already is included. And my argument to that was there was no harm to
reiterate 5-3-2 because a lot of times, people will look at just Appendix L versus
going through just the bill itself. And then it's an easier way for the user who
may just be focusing on FBH. So, there's no harm in that repetition being in there
in Appendix L.
And then we went to L101.5, the insignia of approval. So, Neal and Robyn both
said we need that I crossed off the "any governmental or inspectional agency
approved" for the outside. They felt that should be left in because that gives the
opportunity for somebody there outside of our County that is approved by the
building official to have that insignia of approval. So, what I did was take the
put that back in and leave it as is.
CHR. CHUNG: Which one? Where? What are you talking ?
MS. POINDEXTER: We're on L101.5, insignia of approval, on (b). So, if you
see that, it says "any governmental or inspectional agency approved." On the
other one, it was crossed off. So, they wanted me to take that. So, we left that as
is.
And then we went to L101.6, performance of building, electrical, and plumbing
work. And then there is (b)(1) where they wanted me to they said, "Find out the
correct term from the construction contractor." So, I put the correct term in there
when I spoke to some of the end users, and they gave me the correct term. So,
that is—wait, 10 1.6, let me just follow thisso, the correct terms were "building
contractor" and "licensed supervising electrician," and then it goes on from there.
Then we discussed—let's see, they were okay with the rest.
And then L101.7 on inspections. The inspections, their concern was making sure
that we can enforce outside. And I think that was Council Chair Chung's and
Kaneali`i-KI einfelder's suggestion to make sure that that gets cleared. So now
and we heard it even from Jason at HPM (HPM Building Supply). They want to
make sure everything is fair so that what is done outside, and then making sure
that it's done in this County but also we're able to do it from people who are
manufacturing outside of our County and even our country. So, that's why—and
that change was made.
Then we go tooh, the manufacturer's label. This is where yesterday Neal felt
that we weren't clear on the "outside"versus "outside of this County" and then
"this County." So, we worked on language together and then I was going to send
it to LRB (Legislative Research Branch) to help me get it straightened. And then
what I did was look at the previous sections and try to follow the same format on
outside and then next(inaudible) would be in this County. So, that followed that
format. I sent that to Neal and Robyn. I think, Robyn, you sent me something
Page 50
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
last night at 7:30. It was all lumped into a paragraph, kind of similar to what we
were trying to work out. But if we wanted to make it real clear like we did in the
previous sections, I thought, one, how will we deal with it on the outside, and then
how do we deal with it in-county. So, that too is there.
And then I just want to say that there are a lot of testimony saying, "We want
affordable housing." Definitely we want affordable housing, and I think
everybody wants that. What is affordable may not be affordable. Some people
are confusing it with low-income housing because a lot of our homeless people or
other people cannot even afford affordable housing.
And contractors, the end users that I talked with—and I'm glad that, at the very
first Committee meeting, Council Member Lee Loy assured us that let's go ahead
and pass this because the end users will have time to comment on this up until this
meeting. And so since that time, I swear, every day including weekends. And if
you've ever worked with Joe Belisario or Gilbert Aguinaldo and some others, I'm
telling you they I've got to thank them because even on the weekend on a
Sunday—and I remember asking Joe something. He said, "Oh, okay, so looks
like I'm working on Sunday." I said, "Sorry."
So, I wanted to make sure that we did have the end user's voice at the table
because—and thank you for that, Council Member Lee Loy, assuring us that we
could take their comments. Because the one thing that I felt really bad about is
that, yes, I got elected to represent the constituents. Is this my skillset or my
profession, building homes? No. I don't think any of us on this Council has built
a home from start to finish. So, for us to make this big decision, we needed the
end users at the table because we're making a decision that is going to affect their
profession and their livelihood.
And the most important thing, I think above all of that, we're going to affect the
health and safety of the people who are moving into those homes. That's why the
permitting and inspection is critical to a new build because we're putting people
in the homes that we need to ensure that are safe. Is it going to cost more to get a
building inspector at the site? I would hope not because this Administration has
always talked about supporting affordable housing. So, we need to make sure that
is our priority and our Building Department's priority to get out there and to make
sure that we do the inspections on time and not delay any projects because it
doesn't cost them any money.
Now, if they were to get a third parry that they have to do the inspection,
somebody's got to pay for that. Right? It's going to be handed down to the
person who's going to buy that house. So, we already the taxpayer's already
paying for the building inspector. And we've got this new computer program that
we're saying that Bill 179 and this beautiful framework—and I've got to say
mahalo toI mean, Neal, Robyn, and especially Leslie from our LRB have
Page 51
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
worked tirelessly. And Neal said you guys didn't sleep last night, so I'm going to
believe you. Because, we needed this new framework to make it better for the
public. They don't see that yet because they're not tying this to the technology
that we're going to be trying to use to make it better for them, which will
streamline things and be able to free up some of our inspectors to be able to get
there to make those inspections so that we put out safe housing.
One Puna resident said she referred to some substandard subdivisions or ruralI
don't know—substandard subdivisions in Puna. So, addressing this now is
ensuring the safety for the families who will be living in those homes and our
County's commitment to not do another project, that we will start looking at
substandard housing now versus substandard subdivisions. So, we want to not I
don't want to move in that direction. And that's why this was important.
So, this document and these amendments are from our end users. It didn't give
them everything they wanted because if we gave Joe Belisario everything he
wanted, we would say postpone this right now. It was a compromise that we can
move some things forward so that we have the opportunity to continue to work on
it, like with Matt's bill or Matt's amendment, and even if there's going to be other
future amendments. So, we have an opportunity there. But this will ensure our
commitment as a County that we want the safety first for our people.
So, I just want to read one thing and then, Chair, thank you for allowing me to just
take a little time. But I just want to read a quote, and I think we all received this
testimony. It said, "Thank you for voting on Bill 179, requiring the same
stringent inspection procedures as do traditional on-site and job-site building
construction. May I add that as in all jobs that are in the nature of fitting and
assembling many different parts of a final product, safety has been and will
continue to be the primary concern. And unless safety is practiced by way of
proper training and monitored by way of close inspections, there can be no
positive and effective enforcement of safety." So,the key word here is "safety."
So, for those who had testified about I'm trying to get rid of opportunity for
affordable housing, no. We're still working on that. And I think there's an
opportunity that this amendment will bring the end users together and be able to
start a dialogue with everyone, with each other. Because right now, some of them
that I talked to I know, and Joe Belisario touched on that,people are afraid to
come forward. Seriously. Some,just small potatoes. The end users who are the
small potatoes.
So, I'm fighting for those underdogs because I really believe that we can make
this work. We still can have affordable housing, and it'd be safe for our people.
So, I'll yield at this time. Thank you, Chair.
CHR. CHUNG: Anyone? Ms. Lee Loy, go ahead.
Page 52
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Ms. Poindexter. I'm glad you walked back to what
Bill 179 was with the framework. It was the framework to standup intergov
(intergovernmental)to get to the one-permit system. And really, it's just like
building a house. You've got to start with the foundation so that we can pour in
what we need. And some of that really has gotten muddied with just one specific
section, which is the factory built, which I just want to call a"cabinet" in this
large framework of a house.
Speaking specifically to your amendment 34, you strike out, at the top of page 3,
an exception for manufactured homes for HUD (United States Department of
Housing and Urban Development). I just kind of want to understand what was
the impetus behind striking out that particular exception.
MS. POINDEXTER: Because I think HUD already has that, we don't need that
exception. Because, my conversation with Darryl Oliveira was that in certain
instances, HUD will the Federal government will trump that. And, Neal, can
you talk about that too?
MR. TANAKA: Neal Tanaka, Acting Deputy Building Chief. I saw this
amendment, and I saw this striking out of the exception, which is a problem
because what it's doing now is saying that manufactured homes—well, let me
take a step back. Manufactured homes, there's a clear delineation between and
definition of a manufactured home and a modular factory-built home. And that
exception clarifies that and defined that the HUD regulations, which are important
and something that we do not enforce, needed to be complied with at least at the
HUD level.
MS. POINDEXTER: Okay, so the Hawaii County Construction Code shall
regulate the manufacturing and installation of the factory-built home due to its
unique environment and housing challenges. And it is important that the FBH
home builder follow the same processes and standards that a traditional home
builder must follow, correct?
MR. TANAKA: I'm sorry. Can you repeat that?
MS. POINDEXTER: So, the Hawaii County Construction Code because I
think we went through this.
MR. TANAKA: We didn't.
MS. POINDEXTER: Yeah. I mean, this is the first one sent to you, remember,
with my notes? And then when we went to discussion, we talked about—you
have this whole document and I have the this is the one that we had reviewed,
Page 53
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
and it had my red notes. And then my blue are the areas of concern that you guys
had. So, when—and my notes. So, you didn't bring that up as a concern when
you saw my justification on it?
MR. TANAKA: No, I did bring up, but I brought up—when you first brought
that upI'm not sure what you're referring to right now, I'm sorry, Val.
MS. POINDEXTER: Yeah. I'm looking at the document that I sent you guys
and that I was working with you guys on.
MR. TANAKA: What communication is that?
MS. POINDEXTER: This one wasno, it was when I was developing that
amendment. And then, remember the first one I sent you and Robyn, I sent you
guys where had my red things for justification on there. You know the red notes,
remember, that we went over? You didn't bring it?
(Note: At this time, Acting Building Chief Robyn Matsumoto,
Department of Public Works, came forward to address the members of the
Council.)
MS. MATSUMOTO: Good morning. Robyn Matsumoto, Acting Building Chief.
No, I have those notes that you had, but we didn't discuss this particular section in
the code because I don't have any notes written about it.
MS. POINDEXTER: Oh, okay, because then I thought it was okay with you guys
because I put it in my notes and then we asked which ones should we—which
ones you guys have concerns with and that's the ones I put in blue. So, if you see,
it's on there in red, but what I put the justification was
MR. TANAKA: So, is this the document that came out right before
Communication 989.33?
MS. POINDEXTER: No. This one here came out in our first conversation a
week ago.
MR. TANAKA: Right before the—for when you submitted 33.
MS. POINDEXTER: It was on a Monday. We had a yeah, because I had to
submit something by Tuesday. Either we talked on Tuesday or—Monday or
Tuesday; I can look on my phone records. But we spoke last week, and this is
what you got last week. I have the email too.
Page 54
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
MR. TANAKA: I think we made the conversation that we would review what
you sent to us. And being that you had that deadline of Tuesday, we would give
you as much comments as we could but we needed to continue to look through
the document.
MS. POINDEXTER: Yeah, and then we talked. And then when we talked, I put
it all in blue and then I read each one to you to see if I got it right. You guys
remember when I read this, I said, "Is this what you're saying," and then you
would say yes because I wrote it down, the notes. And I just made sure. I said,
"You said this," and "yes." But that was never a concern. So, that's why I
thought you didn't have a concern.
CHR. CHUNG: Val?
MS. POINDEXTER: Yeah?
CHR. CHUNG: I apologize for interrupting, and all of you guys. I'm just going
to ask this question, okay, and you decide whatever you want because it is your
amendment. Is it at all possible, inasmuch as we just got this today, this morning,
like three minutes before the meeting started, yeah, to just pass this 179, Draft 2,
as amended ?
MS. POINDEXTER: No.
CHR. CHUNG: Well, I just wanted to ask, right?
MS. POINDEXTER: Right.
CHR. CHUNG: And then you come up with this amendment later on because it's
really difficult, yeah.
MS. POINDEXTER: I'm saying this was with you guys for a week. The only
thing that changed from my—or I can put back on the floor—I can withdraw this
one and put back my Communication 989.33, which is basically the same thing,
but only thing the manufacture stuff and all is different. That, the public has had
that for a week, and every Council Member. So, everybody had that already. So,
if we want to go that route, I don't mind withdrawing this one and then putting
back my 989.34 and voting on that with what the public had and with what
everybody else had because it's basically almost the same thing. Right, Robyn?
It's basically almost the same thing.
MR. TANAKA: It's not, Val. It's not.
MS. POINDEXTER: Okay, what is not the same thing? The only thing
Page 55
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
MR. TANAKA: We've had the conversations, and I appreciate the conversations.
Absolutely. I'm sorry to interrupt you, but there's a lot of misrepresentations in
saying that DPW is agreeing with you, and "Neal said, `I agree with you."' We
expressed our concerns with you.
MS. POINDEXTER: Right.
MR. TANAKA: Absolutely.
MS. POINDEXTER: And you wanted me to change some things, and I did. I did
what you asked me to, okay. I did what you asked me to. I gave you the
document and my stuff in red for you guys to review. And then I tried to, even
this week, get ahold of you. I left you a message. You never called me back. I
left you a message at your Kona office. I even had to text Robyn saying, "Neal
hasn't returned my call from a couple of days ago."
MR. TANAKA: Val, Robyn and I called you both together.
MS. POINDEXTER: Yes. Yesterday. Yesterday, after I left you a message
several days ago because I knew this was coming up. So, that's why I rushed and
I had to have these new amendments done because you came up with these
concerns. So, I addressed your concerns. I read it back to you. You told me what
I should write; I did it. And now we're saying "not." So, I can do either one, but
I'm going to try for one of those amendments because I made a commitment to
the end users.
MS. EOFF: Mr. Chair?
CHR. CHUNG: Yeah, Karen, go ahead.
MS. EOFF: I'm sorry. I have to ask Ms. Poindexter a question because it seems
like right now the point becoming a problem was that you crossed out an
exception regarding HUD. Well, that's also crossed out in .33. So, I don't see
how that would be any help to us right now. I think if the rest of your
amendments are not met with any problems or if they're acceptable, then why
don't you just put back that—don't cross that one out, that exception regarding
the HUD reference. Because, it seems to me the rest of 989.34 has been cleaned
up and seems acceptable; except for that stickling point is that crossing out of the
exception. Did you have a ?
MS. POINDEXTER: Yeah, the reason for that is clear. Because if the FBH
people are going to use this exception, then manufactured homes manufactured
and certified in accordance with the Manufactured Home Construction and Safety
Standards as promulgated by the United States Department of Housing and Urban
Development. Foundation, exterior stairs, additions, and accessories shall comply
Page 56
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
with Article 1, Adoption of the International Building Code. It gives an exception
to that. So if they go and use that, then they have that advantage of the
manufactured as according to what HUD is saying. But us in our Construction
Code, we say we shall regulate the manufacturing and installation of the FBH due
to its unique environment and housing challenges. So, I don't want them
choosing to use the option of what HUD is saying versus what we're saying,
which is our stricter code.
MS. EOFF: So, it would be in conflict?
MS. POINDEXTER: Well, they could choose that. Then that means they could
choose the HUD stuff, the HUD way of doing it but then they'll get away with
stuff. And so, that's the whole safety issue and all that. We have construction
codes that we regulate.
MS. LEE LOY: Chair? And maybe I can help
MS. EOFF: Okay, let me
CHR. CHUNG: Wait, hold on.
MS. EOFF: Sorry.
CHR. CHUNG: You still have the floor.
MS. POINDEXTER: Yeah. So, I'd like to hear what Council Member Lee Loy
has to say.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay, go ahead.
MS. LEE LOY: Thank you. Keeping the end user in mind, that particular section
with HUD standards far exceeds Hawaii County standards. And so if a factory-
built manufacturing was to choose the HUD standards, their requirement meets
snow loads and wind loads and a whole bunch of things that really don't apply
here. So, I'm a little confused at the representation being made that striking out
this particular section would allow someone to circumvent a process. Because,
the HUD standards are Federal guidelines that have to be followed. And if they
don't follow it, they don't get to use the exception. There is no picking and
choosing. And
MS. POINDEXTER: Okay. So
MS. LEE LOY: If I may finish. This is one area in which during the lava
recovery and we were looking for housing options, the opportunity to provide
modular housing—and I'm going to check with Roy on this this option was
Page 57
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
explored in the event of an emergency in which our island got run over by a
hurricane. HUD would be able to ship over these modular homes built to the
HUD standard and provide housing immediately. So, I am—Val, I'm concerned
because if we do this, we eject out a housing option that we may need at some
point.
MS. POINDEXTER: Okay. Can I respond, Chair?
CHR. CHUNG: Go ahead.
MS. POINDEXTER: And I'm in agreement with you, Council Member Lee Loy,
and you make a good point too. Part of that was me just trying to make sure that
the traditional homebuilder was equivalent to it, which may not happen at this
point. But I see what you're saying, and I know what happened in Puna with
Gilbert Aguinaldo and HPM and how that happened quickly, and that was
through some of the HUD guidelines and all. So, I understand where you're
coming from. So, I'm willing to un-strike that if,Neal, that's what you want me
to do because you asked me to un-strike one of the areas, which I did. So, I didn't
realize that you had an issue with this section until now. But I'm willing to take
that off. Is that okay?
MR. TANAKA: We definitely need to do that, but I think that's one of the other
issues that we need to further discuss on this amendment. I think what we're
finding in this amendment is that it's limiting. We're talking about end users and
fairness and all of these questions or comments about affordability. Let me ask
you who the end user for factory-built housing is.
MS. POINDEXTER: End users are all of the people the draftsmen, architects,
the construction, the builders, the electricians, all the little potatoes that—those
are the end users. Because, in a letter from HPM, it stated that they were working
with you guys for two years to develop the processes and procedures necessary to
effectively implement the FBH provision of the currently adopted Building Code.
So, they were working on that so they could make Appendix L work with you.
The problem there was you guys never brought the end users to the table. And
that's where this opportunity—and I'm glad we have that opportunity, like
Council Member Lee Loy had stated early on in the Committee, that we have that
opportunity to talk with the end users up until today. And that's what we did.
And so, that's why a lot of these amendments that don't do anything and prevent
any factory the FBHs to be built, doesn't cost them anything more to get
inspected. It's just basically the safety issues and concerns that these builders
and—what's the quote I read from one of the testimonies you received as well,
and all of them talked about the safety? A lot of them talked about equality and
fairness across the board because if they've got to go in for permitting and forget
the inspection.
Page 58
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
And a lot of these people are willing to build smaller homes or studios or anything
that make it affordable for everyone. So, it's not just the FBH is making it
affordable, but our builders are wanting to make it affordable as well, but they
need the level playing field. We've heard that all the way across the board. So,
that's what these amendments bring forward, the level playing field. And we did
what HPM wanted. They wanted to make sure outside-, in-county, that is in there
so that it's fair for what's built for in-county, that people who are building from
outside comply and conform with whatever we have. And that's what we talked
about yesterday as well in some of the language.
MR. TANAKA: I think that we've made it clear that the Building Division is not
sacrificing safety. That is our goal. That is what we do. And I think the end
user the end "end user" in factory-built housing is the homeowner and the
application of building a home and placing it on their property. Bill 179 is an
effort to streamline permitting processes for a homeowner to apply for a house.
My concerns with this amendment, specific to factory-built housing, we're
tampering with something. I mean, you just made the mention that HPM has been
working with us for the past two years. HPM has been working with us within
the confines of Appendix L as it was written. They're not trying to modify it
whatsoever. Val, you're the only one that's modifying it.
MS. POINDEXTER: Okay. Now, my turn to interrupt you a little bit.
MR. TANAKA: That's fine.
MS. POINDEXTER: Okay. Bill 179 made provisions to help them skirt or make
shortcuts to not have the inspections that's needed that they need. Because when
I talked to Jason three weeks ago, no, two weeks ago, he said, "Well, Val" oh, it
was before the Kona meeting—"we build it over and over and over again. Why
would we need to get it inspected?" Oh, well. I said, "Well, my husband was
building units over and over and over, and he had to get it inspected. And guess
what? A lot of times, the building inspectors would find things that needed to be
corrected for the health and safety of the person that's going to occupy that unit."
MS. LEE LOY: Val, real quick. Karen?
MS. EOFF: Ms. Lee Loy?
MS. LEE LOY: Chair Chung has left the room. If you could please assume the
chair.
MS. EOFF: Okay. Thank you.
Relinquish Chair: At this time, Acting Chair Eoff assumed the chair.
Page 59
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
MS. LEE LOY: Sorry, Val, go ahead.
MS. POINDEXTER: So, all I'm saying is it needs to be done because there are
times when some prefab walls or something are brought on and they find
something wrong with it; whether the nails are not the right size, whether the
straps were not on, whether things were put or it was the walls were crowned.
There were problems. And if we give an exception to that, the end user that
you're talking about is the one that's going to suffer. The end user will suffer.
So, it doesn't cost them anything. I asked Jason that: "How much will it cost you
to get it inspected?" "Oh, time." "No need time. You know why? The County is
committing to affordable housing. So, our County will be made available to you
because we've committed to affordable housing." And that's what we need to do.
And we have the program that is going to help us streamline this. We have this
framework. We're going to have the people available to make sure wherever
they're manufacturing the home, that it's inspected and done well for the safety of
the end user, which is the homeowner, then. So, Council Chair Karen Eoff, Vice
Chair, I'll yield at this time.
ACTING CHR. EOFF: Okay, thank you. And I can't tell who was going to
speak next but—
MS.
utMS. LEE LOY: I just was probing Ms. Poindexter on her amendments because I
wanted to understand why she was making these changes. So, if I could still have
a little bit of latitude, Ms. Eoff?
ACTING CHR. EOFF: Okay, yeah, you can have the floor.
MS. LEE LOY: Thank you. And so, if I heard you correctly, Val, the HUD
exception, we want to keep it in. It just gives us extra tools in our toolbelt in the
event of an emergency. Regarding Section 5-3-2, there's a provision of(a) No
person shall perform any work I'm sorry. Let me slow down a little bit. No
person shall perform any of the following work or cause or permit the same to be
done in a new factory-built housing in the County—and we have a capital "C"
here. And so, I just wanted to understand because we had that conversation about
capital "C" or small "c."
MS. POINDEXTER: Capital "C" is "in our County." Capital "C" means "here."
MS. LEE LOY: Okay, so, factory built can be manufactured without a permit
somewhere else? I'm just trying to apply it. You understand what I'm saying,
right?
MS. POINDEXTER: Right. So, in the other areas, it talks about what they've
got to comply with before it gets here, right?
Page 60
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
MS. LEE LOY: I'm going to leave it to our Building experts to kind of ruminate
on that. Further down in that same section, you mention "(c) For the purposes of
this section, `manufacture' . . . ." How did you come up with that definition?
And I ask because I know that there are specific definitions in our IRC, which is
our International Residential Code, and our IBC (International Building Code).
And so, part of the struggle—and we have people here who administer the
permits—is this vernacular. We keep talking about its shared common language.
And what 179 did specifically is really hammer through the definitions. So,
"permit" means something consistent within this larger framework of
Construction Code to fit into our intergov system. And I just want to understand
that because it's those little nuances that will then lead to the loopholes that we
hear about.
And so, I just wanted to understand because if there's a way to refine that to walk
it back to an existing code in which our AHJs (authorities having jurisdiction)
have to comply with. And this is one thing I've learned over the last two years:
They have a duty to their license to follow these codes. And I don't want to put
them in a place where they would have to make a judgement call because then
that speaks to some of the ambiguity that people keep having with the building
permit process. I see you nodding. I think we're working towards it, and we're
getting to a hybrid. So
MS. POINDEXTER: If I may answer on that section?
MS. LEE LOY: Yeah.
MS. POINDEXTER: That's why we put in the word "manufacturer." Because it
will clarify it versus just"installing/erecting"because "installing" is after the fact;
"manufacturing" is during that process. So, that makes it clear. So that's why
and that's what—when we were talking in Kona, Robyn brought that up, what is
"manufacture." And so, that's when we said let's come up with something, and
that's what, when I sent it to—and I've got to go look at the email; went to Leslie
or how we got that. Because, I know that Joe Belisario chimed in.
Gilbert Aguinaldo chimed in. I had a drafting person chime in. All the, what I
call the "end users" as well, yeah, that never chimed in. So, this was good.
And
MS. LEE LOY: Because, the same will—you said further down in your
definition of"factory built," L101.2, you give a definition for"building official."
And again, we're talking about shared common language.
MS. POINDEXTER: Right. And the "building official"was the question that
even we had, the Council: "What is the building official?" and "Who is the
Page 61
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
building official?" And that's when we came up with this definition and then we
brought it—Neal and Robyn again went through all of this. That wasn't a
concern. Unless now things are—now you guys are changing your mind.
MS. LEE LOY: And I guess—like you said, I'm asking you to explain your
amendment. So, I just want to understand
MS. POINDEXTER: Okay, yeah. So, that's what I said. The "building official,"
you guys asked to put something in place to understand who is the building
official. So, the "building official"means "the director of the department of
public works or the director's authorized representative." So, that would be the
building official so that we use that common building official throughout the
document.
MS. LEE LOY: That's not the way I see it, but that's your explanation and that's
fine because I know there's specific meanings and definitions to these things. But
that's your explanation, and that's all I'm asking for.
MS. POINDEXTER: Yeah, and that's the amendment.
MS. LEE LOY: And then on the next one, L101.6, under(b)(1), you took out
"county" and put in "state": "Under the supervision of a licensed building
contractor, licensed supervising electrician, or master plumber, respectively, of
the state . . . ."
MS. POINDEXTER: Right. The state in which the factory is located.
MS. LEE LOY: And what was your rationale behind that?
MS. POINDEXTER: Because then it's not just the County because the County
you see how we had the small "c," "county"? We now want to say in the "state,"
versus the "county," meaning just whatever county. The state
MS. LEE LOY: Because, I heard concerns that we wanted to keep jobs local.
And so when I read it this way, it's for the State. But then the question becomes,
"What happens to Canadian or China built?" Right? So
MS. POINDEXTER: Right, andoh, go ahead.
MS. LEE LOY: And again, Val, I'm just trying to understand your amendments
because I'm seeing a lot of areas in which it needs more work. I'll let others ask
the Building Department, but based on my understanding of Bill 179, the
framework, the vernacular, the definitions, folding in all of this I'm seeing
hiccups with this amendment because it actually creates loopholes. I don't know
how else to plainly put it because, one, my biggest concern is the ejecting of the
Page 62
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
housing for HUD, that exemption. We need it. The mixed messages between the
definitions that are already housed in our various international construction codes.
And my largest concern really is I thought we were going to try and keep
everything local, keep our people working, keep our boys and girls pounding nails
when they can while still providing affordable housing. And when I read this one,
we actually kicked the door wide open for international factory built.
MS. POINDEXTER: Can I answer that? Isn't licensing occurring at the State
level, and isn't that State law?
MS. LEE LOY: It is, but our State law doesn't apply to Canada. It doesn't apply
to China.
MS. POINDEXTER: Right. And I have all of that taken care of when you read
where we have—what we went through yesterday with Neal and Robyn, L101.8,
manufacturer's label, where for each and every FBH manufactured outside of this
County shall have a manufacturer's label on a metal plate showing the
manufacturer's name, serial number, and building manufacture date, design load
criteria, and inspection stamp by a governmental or inspectional agency approved
by the building official shall securely be fastened on the FBH.
Now, another place where ". . . every FBH manufactured outside of this County
shall be inspected by a governmental or inspectional agency approved by the
building official in conformance with the quality assurance standards approved by
the building official and in compliance with County of Hawaii codes and
regulations." So, that one there is under the inspections as well.
MS. LEE LOY: So, that's a third-parry inspection, or we're going to send our
inspectors to Canada and China?
MS. POINDEXTER: No. That is whoever is approved by the building official.
And I would think the Administration is not foolish enough to be paying
somebody to go to Canada or to go to Japan or to go to, you know
MR. CHUNG: China.
MS. POINDEXTER: China; that they are smart enough to make sure. They want
to send Gary that's why. Gary's wanting to travel the world. But that is the
building official, who we trust, right, our Director who the Mayor appoints and
who the Director can appoint to be that building official in his place or whoever
he selects as that representative to make that call on who—approval on who that
governmental or inspectional agency will be. So in another—out of our County,
whether it be in another county, another state, or another country.
Page 63
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Val. I'm going to use the words of my friend over
here—Mr. Richards. This one's not ready for primetime. And, Val, if you want
to work on a hybrid, we've discussed some areas that can be refined, if you want
to do that right now. I think I've seen a few more lights on. I have notes all over
your amendment.34, and I'm hoping my staff is listening. Because, the one
amendment we moved in last time was "County"with a capital "C," and I don't
see that change either.
MS. POINDEXTER: Where don't you see the capital "CT'
MS. LEE LOY: Remember when we talked at our last meeting, we moved it in,
right? And part of the reason why myself, Mr. Richards, Ms. Kierkiewicz, and
Chair Chung is because this capital "C" had a specific definition and
MS. POINDEXTER: Right. When you wrote Bill 179, you should have found
that because that was just—
MS.
ustMS. LEE LOY: No, this was on your amendment.
MS. POINDEXTER: Right. But there was aI'm following what you guys had.
I had to change even a small "c"to a capital "C" in one of thein Bill 179.
MS. LEE LOY: Yeah, but that changed the definition of who, and I'll just leave
it there. I've asked my questions about .34. I think I've placed enough on the
table as far as why I have concerns with .34. Because if we are talking about end
users and we're talking about providing housing, these amendments actually strap
some bureaucratic red tape all over what could be an option. So, I yield at this
time.
Relinquish Chair: At this time, Acting Chair Eoff relinquished the chair to
Chair Chung.
CHR. CHUNG: Matt.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Ashley was first.
CHR. CHUNG: Oh, I'm sorry. Ashley, go ahead.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: That's fine. Thanks, Chair. NealI don't know if this is
a question for Neal or for Val. So, in crafting this definition of"building
official,"when you look at the existing definitions in the code, it says "authority
having jurisdiction." That and "building official"have the same meaning. So, I
was just wondering why we needed to create a new definition when we could
have used existing language in the code if you meant the same exact thing.
Page 64
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
MR. TANAKA: I can briefly answer that.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Okay.
MR. TANAKA: So, Appendix L was part of the Chapter 5 Building Code as it
stands today. And "building official" is used within that language. Bill 179,
"authority having jurisdiction" is the vernacular that's consistent throughout the
other NFPA (National Fire Protection Association) codes as well. And so, there
was no intention to address Appendix L at the time of 179 for "building official."
And I think that we spoke about that last time where, to clearly say who the
building official was or what the intent of"building official"was, I believe that's
why that's in there.
Now, using the "authority having jurisdiction" language. Now, could it have been
changed to "authority having jurisdiction" language? I think that would be
consistent as well.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Yeah, I'm just looking to streamline.
MR. TANAKA: Again, we didn't draft, yeah.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Okay, right. And so, the other question I have is related to
something Council Member Lee Loy mentioned a bit earlier. When we looked at
L101.6, and(b)(1) to be exact, in your opinion does that protect our local market?
I mean,just a couple of weeks ago, the City and County of Honolulu purchased
$18 million worth of modular housing, factory-built homes from a Canadian firm.
And so, I just want to make sure that any tinkering we're doing to this appendix
protects our local contractors and carpenters and companies. Do you think that
these changes do that? Is there fairness and equity?
MR. TANAKA: Specific to 101.6, that is definitely independent of local talent
versus out-of-state talent, right. This requires that out of state be licensed
contractors, licensed supervising electricians, and master plumbers from that state
should they have that requirement for contractors. In our State of Hawaii, we are
clear on who can and cannot do work specific to L101.6. To answer your
question, "Does that protect our local guys," it ensures at least that there is local
or there is equivalent installation should this requirement be made.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: And do you think that this gives any unfair advantage to
entities that are outside of this State? Do any changes to any part of this appendix
give a country an unfair advantage?
MR. TANAKA: That's where it's limiting, and I made that statement a little bit
earlier. L101.6 I don't think there's any unfair advantage provided that the State
has a licensing law for contractors. But I think part of that is it's implied that
Page 65
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
we're not looking in trying to qualify these factories independently one at a time,
right. I think we are trying to qualify them and their inspection processes. And
their governmental HUD agency is there qualifying them as well and what
standards they have to go by.
When you asked me the question is it fair for, or unfair for out of state, I think the
requirement to have third-parry inspections or governmental agencies outside of
the County is a requirement for at least compliance to building codes, right.
That's an industry standard with regards to third-parry inspections. But is it fair
that our guys don't have to—can't have that opportunity for a third-parry
inspection when we're qualifying who those third-parry inspectors are? That's
not fair.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thanks for clarifying. Chair, I yield.
CHR. CHUNG: Val, you had ?
MS. POINDEXTER: Yeah. And I just wanted to say that's where Neal and I had
disagreed about the third parry. Because like a testifier had stated today, the
County needs to take that responsibility; I've got to go find who said that. The
building inspection, that's our duty to make sure that we're not giving it to third
parties on-island where people just sign off and say, "I get one third parry
person." "Okay, I'll come. Just sign off. I didn't inspect, but we'll just sign off
because we're good friends. I know you guys do these builds over and over."
That's the danger. And that's why I told Neal that part I wouldn't budge on,
putting a third parry for our County.
We need to do it because of the outside. We talked about that in the Kona
discussion. How do we ensure that people from China or wherever will be able to
meet our code, and how do we hold them accountable? So, that's why we put in
that"outside the County."
Now the other thing, Neal, you did tell me is when I talked about what exactly
Council Member Kierkiewicz said about protecting our jobs, our local, and blah,
blah, blah, you stated that if the homes or manufactured homes are cheaper,
people have the right to get that. It's not about just protecting our local workers.
Remember that conversation yesterday? Remember when I tried to say what
Council Member Kierkiewicz said about protecting the jobs and making sure that
outside people, foreign countries don't come here, set up shop, and/or have a third
person come here and bring all the stuff in from China or Canada or wherever?
And your statement was we need to make sure that is available to our people as
well. Main thing that they are following the code, and the quality is there. And
that's why we put that language in there.
Page 66
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
MR. TANAKA: Yeah, it's open commerce, right, whether it is from out of state,
local, Canada, or wherever it is, China. But we would qualify whoever is trying
to propose to do the work when it comes to industry-standard guidelines. We've
had conversations with third-parry inspectors who are in the industry, and they'd
indicated that"As authority having jurisdiction, you can tell us what we need to
do with regards to inspection." When it comes to, I don't know, you mentioned
"material." We have strict guidelines on material and what can be used when it
comes to being listed or tested for standards as outlined in ICC (International
Code Council). And so, all of that is evaluated prior to construction. I don't
know if it was more of a statement or a question or a validation of my statement.
MS. POINDEXTER: I was just trying to make a statement that I had that same
concern that Council Member Kierkiewicz had stated, and it was more than just
that. So, thank you. I'll yield at this time, Madam Chair. Oh, you're back.
CHR. CHUNG: Yeah. Only got one-woman man over here. Okay, anyone else?
Anybody in Kona? Oh, right here; Matt, go ahead. Sorry.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Just on a totally different note. Can we take,
like, a half-an-hour recess to go eat lunch and go think about this amendment and
just take a break? Is that okay? Are we okay with that?
CHR. CHUNG: How far are ?
MS. POINDEXTER: Council Chair, can I just say maybe we can table this
because I'm having something else drafted right now to remove the striking on
the HUD thing. And I don't know if you want to take
CHR. CHUNG: Why don't we table then?
Vote on Motion to Ms. Poindexter moved to table Bill 179, Draft 2, as
Table: amended. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy and carried by the
(Approved) following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members David, Eoff,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz,
Lee Loy, Poindexter, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair Chung—9.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
CHR. CHUNG: Motion carried. So, let's go to the top of our agenda.
Page 67
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
Return to Order The Chair directed the Council to return to the order of business.
of Business:
COMMUNI- The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business,
CATIONS: Communications.
(There were none.)
ORDER OF The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business, Order of
RESOLUTIONS: Resolutions.
(Note: Items in this category were taken up previously, out of order.)
Res. 681-20: REQUESTS THE HAWAII COUNTY CORPORATION COUNSEL TO JOIN
(Draft 2) LEGAL ACTION, CITY & COUNTY 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
Reference: Comm. 994.2
Intr. by: Ms. Villegas and
Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder
Approve: AWEEMC-16
(Note: Comm. 994.3, from Council Member Rebecca Villegas dated August 5,
2020, transmitting additional information relating to Resolution 681-20, Draft 2,
was circulated.)
Motion to Approve: Ms. Villegas moved to adopt Res. 681-20, Draft 2, and
Agriculture, Water, Energy, and Environmental
Management Committee Report No. 16. Seconded by
Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder.
CHR. CHUNG: Go ahead, Rebecca.
MS. VILLEGAS: All right. Thanks, everyone. I was able to share with the
Council today a presentation and a PowerPoint format that was shared with
myself and the Administration in the latter part of last year. It goes through and
provides facts and copies of the documents and the statements, which prove that
these members of these different petroleum companies knew what they were
doing when they were doing it, how they were doing it and then conspired to
create a marketing campaign to disclaim it and to defame scientists and activists
and people who were paying attention to this issue.
Page 68
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
I'm really hoping for the continued support of my colleagues on the Council.
Myself, I'm facing a lot of interesting experiences lately related to this topic. And
so I'm asking for your continued support and encouraging our Administration to
pursue signing on for pro bono representation in this case; will not require our
Corp. (Corporation) Counsel or to hire outside legal representation in order to
pursue a potential—and it may take some time. This is a big case. This is a big
topic. But the evidence here I feel behooves us to participate in this issue and to
provide an opportunity for the constituents of this County to access resources that
would help mitigate the—at minimum, we're looking at, like, close to half-a-
billion dollars in costs for our County just to move our infrastructure away from
the coastline. And that does not include airports and harbors and hurricanes.
And the damage, we're very fortunate not so long ago,just about two weeks ago
or maybe it was just one week ago, to not get impacted directly by another major
hurricane. And I don't know that we'll always be that fortunate. The science is
there proving how this all ties together. So, I ask for your continued support on
this resolution, and I also hope for the support of our Administration in joining
onto this climate litigation. With that, I yield.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay. Ms. Poindexter.
MS. POINDEXTER: Oh, sorry.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay. Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Rebecca, you're on the right track. We
introduced this together, and I know you did a lot of the pre-work, and I
appreciate you letting me jump onto this bandwagon because I do support this. If
you open the communication that you provided to us, which we actually sat down
with the Mayor and discussed in our meeting last year, and you read the first
page, in 1965 they addressed that they knew there was a problem and that climate
change is real and that we're adding to the problem. You go on to 1985, they're
saying the same thing in knowing that the fossil fuel industry is, for lack of a
better word, hurting the environment.
MS. VILLEGAS: When you say "they," are you referring to the American
Petroleum Institute?
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: No. The next one is from the presentation.
I'm sorry. "1978: Presentation by scientist J. F. Black to the Exxon Corporate
Management Committee." "There is general scientific agreement that the most
likely manner in which mankind is influencing the global climate is through
carbon dioxide release from the burning of fossil fuels." This report really opened
my eyes to what was going on and how long there's been knowledge. And it
Page 69
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
really doesn't surprise me. It reminds me of cigarettes, Roundup, and everything
else in the world that's been deemed safe and great for mankind until someone
finally realizes it's not.
And not too long ago, I think Aaron Chung brought up the opioid lawsuit that we
joined into. And this resolution is asking for the County to join into this lawsuit
against the petroleum industry. And I think it's important that we voice our
ability to the County from our seat that we voice that we do want to participate in
this because it is important to us. And we also stand to be affected more so than
anybody else due to our position in the Pacific Ocean and our coastlines and
everything else that makes us unique, but it also makes us very vulnerable to
climate change.
We've seen the results of climate change. We're seeing increased storms. I think
the erosion of the highway in your district around Alii Drive due to, I think that
was, a sinkhole of some kind. That is a direct effect of climate change. And I
think it's important that we understand that. I don't know that there's a lot of
opposition to this. But if there's anyone out there who is thinking that this is just
another nonsense lawsuit, there is some truth to this. It just requires that people
look into it and do their homework and find something as easy as well as given to
us, which is now available as Communication—let me read it so you can find it—
Communication
tCommunication 994.3. Very explanatory document of why this is important, how
long the information has been out, and why this lawsuit makes sense and why the
County should be willing to jump on this lawsuit, especially given that Honolulu
county already has. So, I ask for everyone's continued support. Rebecca, you're
doing a great job, and mahalo for putting this forward and letting me be part of it.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay, anyone else? Okay, there being none, roll call vote,
Mr. Clerk.
Vote on Res. 681-20: The motion to adopt Res. 681-20, Draft 2, and Agriculture,
Draft 2 Water, Energy, and Environmental Management
(Adopted) Committee Report No. 16 was carried by the following roll
call vote:
Ayes: Council Members David, Eoff,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz,
Lee Loy, Poindexter, Villegas,
and Chair Chung–8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Richards – 1.
Excused: None.
CHR. CHUNG: The motion is carried. Okay, let's go to that last bill, Bill 181.
Page 70
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
BILLS FOR The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business, Bills for
ORDINANCES Ordinances (First Reading).
(FIRST READING):
(Note: All items in this category were taken up previously, out of order.)
ORDER OF The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business, Order of
THE DAY the Day (Second or Final Reading).
(SECOND OR
FINAL READING): (Note: Items in this category were taken up previously, out of order.)
Bill 181: AMENDS ORDINANCE NO. 20-45, AS AMENDED, THE OPERATING
BUDGET FOR THE COUNTY OF HAWAII FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING
JUNE 30, 2021
Appropriates revenues in the Recreation Miscellaneous Contributions account
($2,000); and appropriates the same to the United States Tennis Association
Facility Recovery Grant—Private account to be used toward cleaning and
sanitation expenses in preparation for the reopening of the Ho`olulu Complex
tennis courts.
Reference: Comm. 1001
Intr. by: Ms. David (B/R)
First Reading: July 22, 2020
Motion to Approve: Ms. David moved to pass Bill 181 on second and final
reading. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy.
CHR. CHUNG: Any discussion?
MS. DAVID: I just ask for your continued support. Chair, thank you.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay. Anyone else? There being none, all those in favor say
Ic aye.
Vote on Bill 181: The motion to pass Bill 181 on second and final reading
(Adopted) was carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members David, Eoff,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz,
Lee Loy, Poindexter, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair Chung—9.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
Page 71
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
CHR. CHUNG: Motion carried. Let's take a five-minute recess. We will come
back at 1:46.
Recess: At 1:41 p.m., the Chair called for a recess.
Reconvene: The meeting reconvened at 1:46 p.m.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay, we're back on the record, and can I have a motion to take
Bill 179, Draft 2, as amended, off the table?
Vote on Motion to Ms. Poindexter moved to remove Bill 179, Draft 2, as
Remove from amended, from the table. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy and
Table: carried by the following voice vote:
(Approved)
Ayes: Council Members David, Eoff, Kierkiewicz,
Lee Loy, Poindexter, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair Chung—8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder— 1.
Excused: None.
CHR. CHUNG: Motion carried. Okay, continue. Where were we?
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Chair, if I could just ask, for the record, Public Works
Building Deputy Chief what their position on this particular communication is?
Because, I know that you've been working in partnership with Council
Member Poindexter to provide language, but that doesn't necessarily mean you do
or don't support the intent of these changes. So, I was just wondering if you
could weigh in.
(Note: At this time, Acting Building Chief Robyn Matsumoto,
Department of Public Works, came forward to address the members of the
Council.)
MS. MATSUMOTO: Good afternoon. My name is Robyn Matsumoto, Acting
Building Chief. We really appreciate Val trying to coordinate the effort between
all these different users and unions and factories, but when it comes down to it,
the Administration and DPW, we don't support the amendment. Like we said at
the last time, we want to sit down with all of them, have the opportunity for
everybody to weigh in and also for us to do more research with other factories
outside of the County. So, we don't support this amendment. We're hoping to
stay status quo with the current draft and whatever other amendments we
approved and then continue to work on
Page 72
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: And so tinkering it, as what's been done, will do what? I
mean, what do you foresee?
MS. MATSUMOTO: We're just concerned because, like we said, on Oahu,
right, they're using the same framework to do the one with Canada.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: So, City and County of Honolulu have the exact same
Appendix I
MS. MATSUMOTO: I believe so, yeah.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: That is currently in our code. Okay.
MS. MATSUMOTO: So, I don't know if tinkering it to what level is going to
eliminate other opportunities for us. I mean, I'm all for keeping work local,
whether it be with the union contractors or HPM, but we also want to make sure
it's, like you said, fair and equitable for everyone. I don't believe we can exclude
anybody from outside of the State.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: And then talk to me a little bit about the inspections piece.
MS. MATSUMOTO: Regarding the inspection
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Changes to it.
MS. MATSUMOTO: For off-island, Val agreed to put back in "third parry." But
regarding factories within the County, I understand the need to ensure that it's
inspected safely, but it doesn't create a fair playing field for local County
factories.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: So it would be harder for manufacturers here.
MS. MATSUMOTO: It may be harder. It's kind of hard to say, but it gives them
that opportunity. So like, say for example, HPM, I mean there's other companies,
I'm sure, but like for HPM, they should be given the option whether to use
County inspections or to use the third-parry agencies that we approve so that it's
fair for them in caparison to the other outside factories that wouldn't use us
because it's not cost effective, and we need to stay on-island to do our own
inspections.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Sure. Okay. I was just curious, for the record, to see or to
understand what your position was, and I'm hopingI saw Roy Takemoto in here
earlier, and he's got decades of experience as a planner and with codes. And so I
was just wondering if he could weigh in as well.
Page 73
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
MS. MATSUMOTO: Yeah. I mean, it's not like we're going to let a factory just
go off and start constructing without looking in the factory or watching them do
the work. I mean, we're not going to let them run wild. I mean, we are very
concerned about the safety of all the people who buy these products. It could be
my relative. I told HPM, "Don't tell my mom regarding the pricing point because
she might decide to move to Hilo." I mean, anybody could buy this, whether it be
from them or some other company. And even with tiny homes, that's another
great opportunity that this Bill 179 is bringing to the table.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Right. We need all of those different products on the
market to give people options.
MS. MATSUMOTO: Right.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Okay, thank you. I appreciate that.
CHR. CHUNG: Val, go ahead.
MS. POINDEXTER: Okay. Yeah, we talked about that Honolulu project and
Canada and all of that. But then when I read, you know, you look at that
West Loch project in Honolulu, it consisted of 58 studio units, two model types,
which was 298 square feet and 293 square feet. The cost of the project, I guess in
the paper it said 18 million for the structure and site work alone, which didn't
include any of the costs of the land because Honolulu actually is the developer
and landowner. So when I did the math, and I may be wrong, but when you do,
each unit came out to 310,000. And that didn't include even getting it over there
with the plumbing, setting up, all that stuff. So when we talk about affordable
housing, sometimes affordable isn't really affordable.
So, I just wanted to make that point about the Honolulu one because I know a lot
of some people were referring to "look at what Honolulu did." But that wasn't
affordable; and using their Appendix L. So, it's not always as easy as you make it
sound. And we're going to be—I think we can set the bar for all of our counties
in the State. We're going to be the first again. And it's not the first time that
we'll be leading it. So, I like the idea of making sure that we've addressed all
these issues and making it fair and especially making it safe. Thank you. I yield
at this time, Chair.
CHR. CHUNG: Thank you. Ms. Lee Loy.
MS. LEE LOY: Chair, thank you. And I just want to clarify one point in which
Ms. Poindexter brings up. Affordable on Oahu is different from affordable here.
What people forget to speak about is the AMI(Area Median Income). The
average medium income that Hawaii County has to meet for affordable is
$20,000 lower than other municipals. So while we're talking about price point, I
Page 74
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
think we also need to talk about apples with apples because what is attainable at
affordable rates here is substantively lower than other counties. I just wanted to
raise that issue. Because, those are the things that have to get taken into
consideration when we talk about attainable housing. What's attainable here,
based on our average income, compared to other municipals is not the same.
Chair, I yield.
CHR. CHUNG: I just saw Roy coming in. Roy, you wanted to say anything or
not? Up to you. You were waiting so patiently over here I figured I'd give you
an opportunity.
(Note: At this time, Managing Director Roy Takemoto came forward to
address the members of the Council.)
MR. TAKEMOTO: Roy Takemoto, Managing Director. No, thanks for the
opportunity, Chair. Just in principle, affordable housing, factory-built housing is
just one very important different product that would help us achieve at a lower
price point than anything available today. And the way they can do that is by
standardizing the manufacturing process, being able to build, if they want, 24/7
within a weatherproof environment. The 24/7 aspect, if you require the inspection
by County, boy that's a lot of OT (overtime) on our part if we have to inspect
every one. Plus, the third-party inspection kind of levels the field between local
factories and off-island factories.
As far as balancing the public's safety, there are provisions in the standard
Appendix L that provides for the pre-approval of the plans, the third-party
inspection. And we added the provision about the builder being a licensed
contractor. The insignia process is very important because it uniquely identifies
the module-built and the standards to which it was built to. And those provisions
are standard wherever the International Building Code applies. And I think that
uniformity is a very important piece so that our local factories can compete
elsewhere as well as we can have confidence in the products that we can place our
insignia requirements upon that we can accept in this County. So, thank you for
the opportunity.
MS. POINDEXTER: Chair, I have a question for Roy.
CHR. CHUNG: Go ahead.
MS. POINDEXTER: So, Roy, for those traditional home builders who want to do
affordable housing, are you in agreement that you can give them a third-parry
inspector as well?
MR. TAKEMOTO: Yeah, we can look at that option.
Page 75
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
MS. POINDEXTER: You can look at that option later? Okay. So then what we
can do, then, is we can pass this, and we can talk about like how we talked about
Council Member Kaneali`i-KI einfelder's thing. I don't mind working with you
guys to figure out a way to make it fair for the traditional builder as well as the
FBH people if we're going to talk about third-parry inspection locally where we
have already third-parry, the inspectors for out of county and out of state and out
of country, which is the only way to do it because there is no other way. Right?
You've got to do that.
So, on the County level right now, we can use, as is, our County building
inspectors, and you and I can work on some type of amendment after this thing
goes through. Are you okay with that?
MR. TAKEMOTO: Yeah. But I want to make one clear distinction.
MS. POINDEXTER: Yes.
MR. TAKEMOTO: The third-parry inspection for factory built is within a
factory. When they have to go—when they place the module on the site, our guys
have to inspect.
MS. POINDEXTER: Right. But the walls are closed by that point.
MR. TAKEMOTO: Right.
MS. POINDEXTER: The walls are closed at that point. And this is where I have
a problem because I have heard firsthand, even from my husband, about straps
being missed or the nails being wrong or things happened. So, I don't agree that
"at the site." That's why when it says, "when it's installed,"that means after the
fact, after the walls are closed. So, I don't mind working with you on this so that
we make it fair all around because we have traditional home builders that want to
do affordable housing and have that opportunity. And if we're saying that we are
truly invested in affordable housing and committed to it, then we need to start
working with more than just FBHs. We need to start working with our traditional
home builders. So, I appreciate you coming up, and I appreciate your willingness
to work with me further on this. Thank you.
CHR. CHUNG: Anyone else? Kona? Anybody? Just say yes or no.
MS. EOFF: That was a no.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay. Anyone else over here? Yeah, go ahead, Matt.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I'm just a quick process question. Are we
discussing the communication still?
Page 76
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
CHR. CHUNG: Yes.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Or are we talking about the whole bill?
CHR. CHUNG: No.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: And this is 989.34, yes?
CHR. CHUNG: Yes.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Not.33?
CHR. CHUNG: .34.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. Thank you. I've been reading
Honolulu's Building Code, and it is almost word for word of what was submitted.
Some of the changes that were brought forward, I like the conversation, but I
agree with Val on that. It was a lot of people for that matter. Even guys who are
for Appendix L do think inspections should happen. And there's a question of
liability. There's a question of safety. If we don't inspect before the drywall goes
up, then you can't inspect the work that was done. You have no idea. That's
been something that I've dealt with before in the past. And then we go and
rough-in our pipes and we have to call for a courtesy inspection before we're done
because our permit is different from the home permit that is being built.
And so, I like the idea of the inspections. I don't know who wouldn't. Even
talking to HPM, they're okay with inspections. So, having the inspections before
the walls are closed is, to me, very important. And to me, there's not a huge delay
in time. It requires coordination. It requires thought. But there's no cost to have
an inspection. Correct?
MR. TANAKA: Correct. I mean, it's just our guys' time. Matt, I think that we
discussed that at the last meeting.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: We did.
MR. TANAKA: That's why Draft 2 has that inspection language in there. I think
there's some misrepresentation that we think, or is being represented that we
don't want inspections. That's not the case.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: The first draft did not include inspections.
MR. TANAKA: Well, the first draft was Appendix L, word for word as it always
had been.
Page 77
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Yeah, which is the same in Honolulu. I'm
reading Honolulu's, and I'm reading ours, going "Okay. So, what was submitted
was exactly the same."
MR. TANAKA: That's correct. And so, Draft 2 was when we went to the
backroom to come to a negotiation with regards to what we thought was
appropriate. And that's where the inspection language is in there in Draft 2.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: This is good. I think it's good.
MR. TANAKA: I just wanted to clear the air that there was some
misrepresentation that we do not think that inspections are required.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I'm glad
MR. TANAKA: Thank you.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: That you share our point of view. As far as
the outsourcing work to anywhere in the State or out of state, I don't feel that this
is doing that. I think there may need to be some language adjustment there. But
I've heard us before say, "Let's just pass it and get it done, then we can come
revisit it later"very frequently, but in this case I can sense some hesitation to do
that.
How is this benefiting somebody from out of state? Where in here would do that?
I know Asley asked the same question, but I don't think you actually answered
the question. Where in this, by any of this wording, does it say that someone
from out of state or within our State would have more ability to do work than our
local contractors?
MR. TANAKA: It's just the matter of affording the opportunities that an out of
state can, or to our local guys, right, whether it's third-party inspections as
approved by us. I mean, that's essentially it. There is no advantage except that
we can't require a permit for outside guys, right, outside work.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: No because that would make zero sense for
us to try and go inspect or permit work that's not done here. Yeah. So, I'm not
seeing that in this document at all.
MR. TANAKA: That's what 5-3-2 says, right. Anything in this County requires
a permit, which is fine.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Yup. I think that's important too. I'm
listening to everyone's conversation. I think if you just go section by section,
yeah, this can be a little confusing because it's balancing. But if you go from the
Page 78
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
beginning to the end of this document, there are definitions added in to cover
what's being covered later on. If you just pick one section and read it, it may not
make sense. But if you read the document as a whole, it actually does make
sense. I've just been listening to the discussion, and I have my own opinions. I
yield for right now. Thank you for clarifying that. Thank you.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay. Val, I know you have your other one ready, but—
MS.
utMS. POINDEXTER: I think it's being numbered right now.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay. And it's going to be almost the same as this one, except
just a slight change, right?
MS. POINDEXTER: The strikeout, yeah.
CHR. CHUNG: Let me ask you a question. I'm really on the fence on this thing.
I'm going to draw your attention to that section that relates to 5-3-2, okay.
Factory-built housing. That's within the body of the Construction Code itself.
It's a new thing that you added, right, it seems; it's all underscored that's why.
MS. POINDEXTER: Oh, yeah, right here.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay. So, look at that and then just keep that in the back of
your mind, yeah—and then L101.5, insignia of approval. Okay. And then
L101.7, inspections. And then finally, L101.8, manufacturer's label. Now, if you
could just explain to me because, you see, if I had drafted this thing, I would have
drafted it differently. I would have put what County things done in the County
we're required to do, and things outside. I would have kept on going along that
line. I'm just saying how, you know, now that I look at it, yeah. I would have
probably put all of those things. So, they're kind of scattered.
If you look at inspections, for example, 10 1.7, it talks about each and every FHB
[sic] manufactured outside of this County. And then you look at 101.5, and it
says, FHB [sic], well, I guess it covers both of them, yeah, on that one. But for
5-3-2, the one in the body of the code, it only relates to—where does it say
yeah, in the County, but it doesn't relate to outside of the County. And then
101.8, relating to manufacturer's label, talks about manufactured outside of this
County. So, maybe if you can just capsulize
MS. POINDEXTER: I'll explain that to you.
CHR. CHUNG: Yeah,just in a nutshell tell me what are the differences between
something manufactured in the County and something manufactured outside of
the
Page 79
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
MS. POINDEXTER: Okay.
CHR. CHUNG: Wait, hold it. Is it outside of the—?
MS. POINDEXTER: Yeah. So, I think your question is on Section 5-3-2,
factory-built housing, why I'm not addressing the permitting stuff"outside of
County," and I'm doing "in the County." It's because we don't have jurisdiction
on the permitting—calls the permit the same—obtaining a permit for this work
and all from the authority having jurisdiction, we don't have—and, Neal, do you
want to chime in on that, on the "outside"?
CHR. CHUNG: Well, I know that's what he said the last time.
MS. POINDEXTER: Yeah.
CHR. CHUNG: I disagreed, though.
MS. POINDEXTER: Okay. I'm agreeing with him, and that's what I went for,
yeah.
CHR. CHUNG: Because I'm thinking, hey, if they want to do business over
there, they've got to follow our rules.
MS. POINDEXTER: Yeah, it does say that they've got to follow our County
CHR. CHUNG: But we'll take the Building'sso, again, if you could capsulize
just so that I can understand what's the difference between what an FHB [sic]
built in the County has to go through and what one built outside of the County. It
has to be real simple so Ibecause they're all scattered all over the place, yeah.
MS. POINDEXTER: They basically have to do the same thing. They have to
comply and conform to our Building Code. You know that section where we
talked about conforming and complying?
CHR. CHUNG: But I thought you said that they said
MS. POINDEXTER: No, that's what we agreed to, that conforming. That's that
language we worked on yesterday, that we had to put"conforming" and—let me
get it. Hang on.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay. Then, that being the case, why can't we just make all of
these things, whether built in the County or outside of the County or wherever,
same requirements?
Page 80
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
MS. POINDEXTER: Because they cannot. I mean, the outside of the County, we
cannot say that they have to go get a building permit and they've got to do all of
this stuff. We've got to the building official will choose the third parry to be
able to make sure that when they build that home, that when they send it here, it
conforms with the rules and regs (regulations) of our County. Correct, Neal?
CHR. CHUNG: But didn't you say earlier—and I'm not trying to argue. As I
said, I'm really on the fence. But you said earlier that you heard from people that
when they close those things up, you don't know what is in the rough-in and
everything like that.
MS. POINDEXTER: That's the building official that—because we don't have
somebody onsite outside of our County. And they said to us, on that last
discussion that we had in Kona, that they cannot require them to do certain things.
However, they can make sure that the inspection is done by somebody that they
give the authority to, to make sure it meets all of the codes for Hawaii County.
CHR. CHUNG: I have no problem noI just thought you said we don't have
the authority.
MS. POINDEXTER: No, but the—we're giving the authority to the—here, I'll
read that part to you.
CHR. CHUNG: Yeah, so if we—even if—that's why—couldn't—
MS.
hycouldn'tMS. POINDEXTER: Why do we need to give authority to somebody else if we
have our own building inspectors here on the island?
CHR. CHUNG: Yeah, so but they all have to adhere to the same standards?
Our County standards?
MS. POINDEXTER: Yes.
CHR. CHUNG: But it's just there is another person out there.
MS. POINDEXTER: Yeah because we don't have a building inspector out there.
Correct, Neal? Yeah.
CHR. CHUNG: So, I just want to make sure that we're not giving an easier ride
to guys outside of our County than in our County because that would be
ridiculous. Right?
MS. POINDEXTER: Yeah.
Page 81
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
CHR. CHUNG: I just want to make that's all—if it's fair. Because that's what
we're looking for, right, fair.
MS. POINDEXTER: Right.
CHR. CHUNG: If it's fair, I've got no problem with this. But if we're giving
these guys an easier break, we've got to get our heads examined, right?
MS. POINDEXTER: Yeah. So, especially in the manufacturer's label where it
says that"outside of this County," it says that the—here, on inspections: Each
FHB [sic] manufactured outside this County shall be inspected by a governmental
or inspectional agency approved by the building official in conformance with the
quality assurance standards approved by the building official
CHR. CHUNG: Where are you looking now?
MS. POINDEXTER: L101.7 on inspections. Because that's the one we had that
heavy discussion in Kona, and you brought up if it's done in China, how do we
ensure that it's meeting our standards? So, it's in conformance with the quality
assurance standards approved by the building official and in compliance with
County of Hawaii codes and regulations.
CHR. CHUNG: That's in (b)?
MS. POINDEXTER: That's in (a). That's for the out of state, outside of this
County.
CHR. CHUNG: Oh, okay.
MS. POINDEXTER: Yeah.
CHR. CHUNG: All right. So, that's for the outside, right?
MS. POINDEXTER: Right. So then, it makes it strict for them, too, because
they've got to comply with everything that our County has to comply with.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay. And at what point do they get the building permit?
MS. POINDEXTER: Who? The outside?
CHR. CHUNG: Yeah.
MS. POINDEXTER: I don't know what—depending on how their process is on
the building permits then. Because like on Maui, it's different from Honolulu, all
theirI think Kauai is different as well. So, everybody has their
Page 82
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
CHR. CHUNG: No, well, why don't I just—
MS.
ustMS. POINDEXTER: Oh, okay. Go ahead.
CHR. CHUNG: At what point do these guys ? Because, they don't have to get
a building permit while they're manufacturing it there somewhere else outside of
the State or outside of our County, right? Or do they need?
MR. TANAKA: As mentioned, our code, Bill 179, in the body of the code,
requires anything that's being built or installed requires a building permit.
CHR. CHUNG: So they've got to get a building permit then.
MR. TANAKA: So, a building permit is required to install that house.
CHR. CHUNG: To install it.
MR. TANAKA: Install it.
CHR. CHUNG: I thought you said build it too.
MR. TANAKA: Build and install in the County. So, yes, to answer your
question, they do not need a building permit to build
CHR. CHUNG: To build it there
MR. TANAKA: Outside.
CHR. CHUNG: Because it has to be built and installed. You've got to use those
two
MR. TANAKA: Correct.
CHR. CHUNG: Things together. `Build" and "install,"together.
MR. TANAKA: To get that thing on your house,you need to build and install.
CHR. CHUNG: So, at some point, they're going to have to get a building permit,
right?
MR. TANAKA: At some point, someone's going to get an end user.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay, but not up there.
MR. TANAKA: Right.
Page 83
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
CHR. CHUNG: Okay. I can see this thing both ways. I just—what's your
feeling? Does this giveI mean, okay, as a person who works on this kind of
stuff all the time, does this arrangement here give an unfair advantage to a non-
County FHB [sic] builder? That's all. And if you tell me it doesn't give an unfair
advantage, then I will vote yes. If you say it does because there's more hoops that
people have got to go through if it's built in-county, then that's kind of crazy.
MR. TANAKA: The language as it's written for out of county does not need a
building permit to build.
CHR. CHUNG: What's that again?
MR. TANAKA: Out of county does not need a building permit to build at the
factory.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay. All right.
MR. TANAKA: As it's written now, the factory built needs a building permit in
the factory.
CHR. CHUNG: So, there is
MR. TANAKA: In-county. Yes, there is a disadvantage.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay, let's say it's built in-county, okay. They've got to get the
building permit when they put it together. When they're putting it together or
when they ?
MR. TANAKA: Yes. That's what this is. Yes.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay. What about when they now put it and go vertical? They
have to get another building permit?
MR. TANAKA: That's what it says.
CHR. CHUNG: That's not fair. The other guys don't have to get a building
why don't you just make those other guys get building permits too?
MR. TANAKA: We cannot.
CHR. CHUNG: How come?
MR. TANAKA: It's not in our jurisdiction.
Page 84
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
CHR. CHUNG: Tell them if they want to do business over here, they've got to
get building permits. How simple. Right? Got to be fair. I mean, we're talking
about fairness on this thing. And that's why I wasn't too sure what was going on
because everything was all over the place. But now that you say if we do it on
County, they've got to get two building permits, and the guys outside only get one
building permit; hey, wait a minute, man.
MS. POINDEXTER: You don't know that.
CHR. CHUNG: See, I don't know that, but that's what he's saying.
MS. POINDEXTER: No.
CHR. CHUNG: Why don't you respond and tell me why he's wrong.
MS. POINDEXTER: So, Neal, what is the process for Maui County?
MR. TANAKA: I'm sorry, I cannot speak to Maui County's process.
MS. POINDEXTER: Right. So, he cannot speak to the other counties on how
they've got to get their building permits. It's depending on what county they're
coming from. We have no jurisdiction over that. We have jurisdiction over ours
to make sure that what we're producing is safe. So, that's what—and you know,
the other counties may look at us as the leader in this and do what we're doing.
So, again, there probably are permitting requirements, but right now, Neal does
not know what those permitting requirements are.
CHR. CHUNG: From your standpoint as the administration, the person who's
administering this, your position is that you need two building permits under this?
Okay. So, what's going to happen is because remember the last time, I said
we've got three considerations. Right? We want to be fair. We want to get our
guys working over here on this island. But we also have got to advance the low-
income housing. Yeah, affordable housing. Again, maybe it might be a
misnomer, whatever. But those are the three considerations, and those are the
three things we have to balance.
I'm willing to kind of back off somewhat from the affordability thing even if
that's really important to us. But if what you're saying is correct in terms of how
you guys are going to administer this, what's going to happen is this: We're not
going to have people working on this island for factory built. They're going to go
off island. They're going to come from Honolulu or wherever else. Based on
that, I cannot support. Okay. Anyway, Ms. Poindexter, youoh, Matt, go ahead.
Page 85
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: We were talking about HPM, yeah, factory-
built housing. They're the only ones poised to do factory-built housing on our
island right now, period.
MR. TANAKA: We were approached by a tiny homes manufacturer last year.
HPM, yes, is one of those that are poised to do this as well, yes.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: HPM isn't athey're not a contractor.
MR. TANAKA: Not that I'm aware of.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Well, how are they going to build a house
without being a contractor?
MR. TANAKA: We've been working with HPM to require that contractor
requirement.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: So, the contractor working for HPM pulls
the permit.
MR. TANAKA: Yes.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: They pull a permit to build a home like
anybody else. Correct? Is there an interesting literal definition between factory
built, manufactured, installed? Are there any definitions that we should be aware
of as we have this discussion when it comes to modular or manufactured homes?
Is there something that we need to know that's not in this document?
MR. TANAKA: Factory-built housing is the umbrella terminology of which
Appendix L is written. I mentioned earlier that there is a cleared definition for
"manufactured home,"formerly known as a"mobile home." And that's regulated
per HUD guidelines. Modular factory-built homes, different. And those are
subject to IBC, IRC local jurisdictional requirements.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: So, the exception for manufactured homes
versus factory-built homes. Sorry, one more time,just so we can be clear. This is
interesting.
MR. TANAKA: "Factory-built homes" is the umbrella for offsite.
"Manufactured homes,"there's a clear definition, formerly known as a"mobile
home,"regulated by HUD. "Modular factory-built home" is different and subject
to IBC, IRC local jurisdiction.
Page 86
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. What would the homes be considered
if HPM built a home tomorrow? Or the one they have on that lot in Shipman?
MR. TANAKA: They're representing as "modular home."
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: That's a modular home. So, FBH umbrella;
manufacture, modular underneath. Correct?
MR. TANAKA: FBH umbrella; manufactured and then modular.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Underneath manufactured. Side by side,
yeah. Okay. So, umbrella over the top, factory-built housing. Boom.
Underneath comes manufactured and modular.
MR. TANAKA: Right.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Being built bysorry, it's disturbing when
someone does that. When it's built by HPM, this would be considered modular.
MR. TANAKA: That is represented by HPM.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: And where in here does this talk about
modular homes?
MR. TANAKA: The exemption of manufactured focuses on modular homes.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: So, everything that is built by HPM will
come under the exception of manufactured homes. So, exception of—boom,
they're out. So, this paragraph right here, it gives them the exception? The one
that was getting deleted but then is going to get added back in, and the purpose.
Just want to be clear.
MR. TANAKA: No. They're not representing, at least to us, that they're a
manufactured home.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: But modularsorry, modular,
manufactured, separate things?
MR. TANAKA: Yes.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: But you just said modular
MR. TANAKA: Falls within Appendix L.
Page 87
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Falls within Appendix L. We don't have a
definition of"modular home" in here.
MR. TANAKA: That is correct.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Why?
MR. TANAKA: We had no intention of touching Appendix L at this time.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. Factory-built homes, manufactured,
modular. The homes we're really discussing are going to be modular homes.
That's the only people right now poised to do business in this County with a type
of pre-built home is a modular home so we'll consider it, except we don't even
define it in what we consider factory-built house or factory-built housing. Is that
right?
MR. TANAKA: Falling under the umbrella of factory-built housing. But to
answer your question, that is right. We do not have a definition of"modular."
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: And what's on the table right now, I mean,
this huge discussion is basically talking to HPM, talking to the unions.
Everyone's wanting to have a say and make a fair balanced assessment of
Appendix L so everyone feels heard. Correct? And we did really rush this in and
didn't give a lot of time to the community to come in and have a say. Why? I
don't know. Because, we knew this was going to be controversial, except we put
it in last minute and gave people seven days to talk about it. And then while in
discussion up here, they can have input. But here we are.
But of everything we just talked about, we know who's involved. It's obvious,
okay. We all have the same emails in our inboxes. We don't even discuss
modular homes in here. No mention of it. Except we know where this is going.
Am I missing something? Am I crazy or what? I don't think that makes this
wrong. What Val put forward is okay. I think we should discuss it. But it does
mean that we missed something in Bill 179, I can tell you that. If we're
discussing what is considered a modular home and we don't even define what
modular home is, unless I'm wrong, then why isn't it in Bill 179?
MS. MATSUMOTO: Matt, can I speak to that?
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Yeah.
MS. MATSUMOTO: Going back, right, we built Bill 179 to encompass all the
codes. We didn't intend to touch any of these additional appendices that are a
part of the traditional building installation code. So, we didn't even go through
reviewing it. I mean, it wasn't part of anything we worked with LRB. It was just
Page 88
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
another section that got added in. So to ask us why didn't we do it, that was never
our goal. I mean, when it came up here at Committee, that's the first time we
understood that now there's going to be some criticism regarding that code
section that was put in years ago. So, I mean, it's not that we overlooked it. We
didn't intend for it to be something that came up as a topic for this bill. We're
looking at any of those types of changes is going to be brought up when we do the
November bill.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I understand that. Thank you for clarifying
that. That is important to know. But we did touch it. We touched it two weeks
ago; this came up. Or maybe, what, the first reading this came up, yeah, where
you could already see Appendix L was being discussed. I mean, I was getting
emails a month ago: "What's wrong with Appendix LT' "What are you guys
doing?" It was in our code from 2012. We discussed that. I think we adopted it
in 2008. It was put into our code in 2012, and away we went. It matches with
everyone else as far as other counties in our State. And yet as soon as we touched
it, we saw that it was becoming an issue when we started talking about it. And we
still made no move to really clarify what the differences are between modular,
manufactured, and factory built. I don't know, I mean, did anyone else here catch
that we don't know what modular homes are? That it's not being discussed in this
bill?
MS. MATSUMOTO: And that's why we don't support Val's floor amendment.
We want to go ahead and work on it outside of this bill. So we, I mean, that's
why we only answer her questions. We didn't go through and make any
additional changes.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: But I would say that when this bill was
drafted, as soon as we noticed that this was becoming an issue, then whether or
not we agree with Val's amendment, the modular home aspect does need to be
addressed if we draw a clear distinction between manufactured, modular.
MS. MATSUMOTO: Yeah. And our position was to look at this outside. So,
that's why—as you noticed, we didn't submit any floor amendments for this.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Well, there was a want to just get this
through, like we talked about, and focus on the administrative code
consolidations, what it was being called, so that we could have a framework to be
built upon. But as soon as you open anything up like that, it does become open to
amendments. That is the way this process works, and we know that. So, here we
are. And different things have come up since then, which is our duty and
responsibility as legislators. So, those are being discussed.
But, I mean, beyond all that, if no amendment had happened but we can clearly
define that modular and manufactured are two separate things, I'm surprised it
Page 89
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
didn't catch anybody's attention just from looking at it right now. Because, we're
having this huge discussion; except the parties involved, they're not even
mentioned in this, which worries me. Because if it's considered "modular home"
and we're not talking about it in this document, and the parties are coming in to
discuss this and we're not going to discuss it until November, it just seems off.
We're supposed to do our job of putting things together correctly.
I've been chastised before for doing things that don't make sense or for being
deficient, and then to come to find out maybe not so deficient but just, you know,
it needs to be reworded. But here we are, and we don't even discuss it, really kind
of a key aspect of what—
MS.
hatMS. MATSUMOTO: And definitely it's something we'll look into when we do,
you know, either November or if we do a side ordinance before then.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. I like that. That should even be
outside of any amendment at all. That should just be, yeah, well, it would be
sorry, yeah. Okay, I've got to think about that. Thank you. I yield.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay, anybody else? Val, you have that other thing. You
wanted to replace it with a
MS. POINDEXTER: I've got to ask the Clerk. I don't know if it's numbered yet.
Okay. Because, I have it in front of me. They were numbering it about
20 minutes ago.
CHR. CHUNG: While we're waiting, I mean, Val, can't you just make it where
outside guys have to get a building permit too?
MS. POINDEXTER: We cannot.
CHR. CHUNG: Why? It's what they say. You can do anything you want.
MS. POINDEXTER: No because we don't have jurisdiction that's legal. And
that's where the concern is, yeah. Where iswho—what attorney worked with
them on this? Because that's the question. Danny Patel is not here, and he's
supposed to be the person. I can ask him, Danny Patel, the question, but they
don't have him here.
CHR. CHUNG: If you put it in there, what's the harm in putting it in there?
MS. POINDEXTER: Because, we cannot put that in there and require that of
them. That is my understanding from the legal terms and what Neal stated. And
if Danny Patel comes up, we can ask him how much has he worked on this or if
that can be put in.
Page 90
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
CHR. CHUNG: I'm just trying to find a way of making it fair. I mean, that's
what we're talking about, right? Fairness.
MS. POINDEXTER: Right. Because we cannot—certain things on the outside,
we do not have jurisdiction over; they said that before.
MS. EOFF: Mr. Chair? This is Karen. Can I ask a question?
CHR. CHUNG: Yeah, go ahead, Karen.
MS. EOFF: I think if we understand that we cannot give a building permit for
something that's being built out of our jurisdiction but that's why I think Val
tried to craft this amendment to at least require the inspection. And at that point,
wherever it's being manufactured, it would have to meet with our code
requirements, and that would be a chance to have that securely done so that when
it gets here, then, yeah, it would need a building permit on site. But here, if we
have to have—and I think your question was, well, is it fair, then, that in the
manufacturing stage here, it would still need some type of a permit and an
inspection?
But since we can do that and since it seems like even with the current state—what
we had read in the newspaper, even HPM was maybe going to be able to
manufacture two of these homes a week. I mean, seems like it would be a simple
enough permit to acquire. It would probably be really quick because they are
standardized. And then it would probably—I don't think it's going to add cost.
And it might add a little time on everybody's part, but I think that's all she's
asking for in this amendment, is to take that time and look at it, the inspection—or
the permit triggers the inspection. So, that just happens. Then you go forward,
and everybody's on a fair playing field.
CHR. CHUNG: Well, then why don't we allow those factory-built homes on this
island to go through that same process too if we're talking about an even playing
field?
MS. EOFF: Because, they need to be inspected at the factory to make sure that all
of the code requirements are met before they close up the walls and bring them to
the site.
CHR. CHUNG: You're talking about built in the County or outside of the
County?
MS. EOFF: Well, both. We're trying to make it so anything coming in here is
safe and inspected.
Page 91
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
CHR. CHUNG: Right. Again, I'm only going with what the department is telling
me, right: One needs a building permit; the other one doesn't need. So, if we
can't get those guys outside to get a building permit, then why don't we just
obviate the necessity in factory-built homes or whatever they may be called for
those built in our County? I'm just thinking out loud.
MS. EOFF: What I can understand is that we just want everything to be
inspected, and pulling the permit triggers the inspection over here. I might be
wrong in my limited understanding, but that's why I think the purpose for this
amendment is from what I've heard.
CHR. CHUNG: Where's the new communication?
MS. POINDEXTER: Lenny is just having it numbered. Apparently, they gave it
to me and so I thought that it was my copy.
CHR. CHUNG: Oh. But that shouldn't take too long, right?
MR. HENRICKS: (Inaudible.)
MS. POINDEXTER: Oh, no, no, yeah. The last thing I said that Chair Chung
was just going to move ahead.
MR. HENRICKS: Right.
MS. POINDEXTER: So, I was just kind of concerned.
MR. HENRICKS: That's why I gave it to you to decide.
MS. POINDEXTER: Yeah. Okay. Got it.
CHR. CHUNG: How long about?
MR. HENRICKS: (Inaudible) six minutes.
CHR. CHUNG: Oh. Okay, yeah, go ahead, Matt.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: If someone in another county, another state,
another country builds factory-built housing, manufactured homes, modular
homes, whatever these may be defined as, they would have to go through some
kind of permitting process in their own county, yes? Or their own state? I mean,
by right. They cannot just go build crap and then send it across the ocean to us.
Right?
MR. TANAKA: I don't know.
Page 92
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Well, okay, we can say we don't know. I
would, I mean, assuming makes an ass out of you and me, but I'd be surprised if
anywhere in the world you can build factory-built housing and ship it to
somebody else without having a permit or some kind of an inspection or anything;
just makes zero sense. Yeah, I would even go as far as to say they can't do that.
And if they did, they're liable down the line if something happens. That's their
butt. So, with that in mind, having a huge discussion about whether or not
another state or county can do this without having a permit and then getting a leg
up on us because we require a permit here makes zero sense.
MS. LEE LOY: Matthew?
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I'm sorry, that's just, you know. If you have
a good answer for that, I'd like to hear it. I mean, this is your bill, so I'd like to
hear what you've got.
MS. LEE LOY: First of all, I am loving the way everybody's catching up real
fast because it took me a long time. So, through my research and studies of
factory built, modular outside of the State, some jurisdictions do require and
others don't. That's just how they work. In addition to those that require
inspections from a licensed contractor or a licensed plumber, their threshold to
maintain their technical license is at a lower standard than what we set as a bar
here in Hawaii or the State.
So, for you to be an electrician here, you have to go through the licensing process
and upkeep with your educational credits. That particular standard is not the same
in other jurisdictions. So, when we're asking for someone to inspect an
electrician's work outside of our jurisdiction, they're going to inspect to those
licensing standards.
So, you're on point with all of your questions. But we're back to how do we
make it fair for whoever is doing business here, that we're providing a good work
product that is inspected to our code and that the end user, a homeowner, gets
something safe and habitable.
What Chair Chung is saying is, how come they may or may not pull a permit
outside of our jurisdiction but we're making them pull two: A shell permit when
they start the manufacturing, in which it's inspected, and then a second permit to
go put it on their lot. So, the way some of these amendments are working, we're
actually requiring two permits here when someplace else doesn't require it. And
so, it strikes at the heart of fairness. That's what my research has come up with
over all of this time.
And so, I'm trying really hard to lift all of that up, but we need the framework
first so that we can lift those things up. Part of the reason behind this framework
Page 93
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
is because we have a drop-dead deadline to move in our electrical and plumbing
codes that were adopted by the State Building Code Council. And soon
thereafter, we have to do the model codes.
So, that point between doing de facto—and we know what de facto looks like
going de facto, moving in our electrical and plumbing codes, and then having to
take that next step, there will be that window of opportunity to then ensure that all
of our construction codes are in one place, that we're crosswalking back and forth
the language: what"factory built" means, what"modular" means, what
"manufacture" means. And that's why I hear everybody loud and clear.
We're going to have to take this back up really quick. If not—if we lose Bill 179,
we lose the framework; we go back to de facto codes. We go back to working in
silos in which our construction codes are housed in Chapters 5, 9, and 17. We
lose tiny homes as an option. We lose the air conditioning and the exemption for
pulling an air conditioning permit. So
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Sorry. Sorry, I still have the floor. I
appreciate what you said, but we're not talking about killing Bill 179. We're
talking about an amendment to it. Correct?
MS. LEE LOY: Right. And so
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. So, let's not—
MS.
otMS. LEE LOY: Muddy the water.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Yeah.
MS. LEE LOY: Okay. But to answer your question, right, if it's required
depends on which municipal you're asking.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, so,just so I can follow up on that.
So, here we're going to require whatever contractor HPM chooses to pull a permit
for the—explain this process to me so I can understand it, so everyone watching
can understand.
MR. TANAKA: That's what this is proposing. Right? HPM has a contractor,
would pull a factory-built housing permit and build it. We would inspect it. Then
when it's done, the homeowner would pull a permit to install it. And they would
probably need another contractor at that point or do an owner-builder.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: That's what I understood from the
beginning. That was the process from the beginning. Before any amendments or
anything, that was my first discussion with HPM. I remember thinking that's a
Page 94
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
disadvantage because anyone from out of state can build one of these, ship it in,
and they're done. Drop it on a foundation. There's no foundation or permit or
anything else required.
MR. TANAKA: There is a foundation permit.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: For a unit coming in from out of state, out of
county. So, the only extra permit included is possibly because we do or don't
know—can neither confirm nor deny that any other county or state has to actually
pull a permit before they build a home.
MR. TANAKA: Correct.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Which I find it to be incredibly flagrant on
their behalf. But for us, I mean, it sounds like we are enforcing safety at a good
level in our County. And this is good that we provide requirements for
permitting, safety inspections, and everything else included in building a home
here to keep our end user safe. So, right now, factory-built housing, they pull a
permit; we go and inspect the work, and then the homeowner needs to pull a
permit when that house is delivered to their lot and put onto a foundation of some
sort. Correct?
MR. TANAKA: That's what this is proposing, correct.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: And that permit that the homeowner has to
pull is for what exactly?
MR. TANAKA: Foundation, electrical connections, plumbing connections,
wastewater, planning, setbacks.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: So, normal. Those are all normal permitting
requirements, and there will be some cost in that. But there would be cost for that
one way or another, whether it's not a factory built or a custom home. Correct?
MR. TANAKA: Correct.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. So, the argument then is, and really
is what I'm seeing it come down to is just that we're creating a step here in our
own County that forces a little bit more safety and coordination on behalf of
anyone building a home here versus someone from out of state.
If I was to compare a custom home, normal home, whatever it may be, a package
home you build versus a factory-built housing home and I put them side by side
on two different lots, pretty much all the same steps. So, when I think "fair,"
Page 95
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
that's what I think of as fair. And the affordable housing aspect kicks in when
they can say, "We can build a home on a lot in ideal conditions faster and easier
and have it delivered to your site than anybody else. Therefore, a lower cost."
MR. TANAKA: Say that again. You said package home versus
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: You go buy a package home. Two-
bedroom, three-bedroom, whatever it might be. You go build it at the site.
MR. TANAKA: Right. You get a building permit for that.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: You'll get a building permit for that and go
through all the same steps.
MR. TANAKA: Right.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: The steps are almost the same for both.
They're almost exactly the same right now. But under FBH, you can build a
home offsite, complete and done. And there's different aspects of that being
discussed: permitting, inspections. It's all in this Appendix L that we're looking
to amend. Have the home delivered but you still have to have foundation,
grounding, electrical connections the same stuff you had to have for a normal
house anyway.
So, if there was a contention between builders who are building off at the site and
builders who are building at HPM, then there's not much of a difference between
the two besides FBH can be built offsite in ideal conditions, which I think is a
great—that is a leg up. But they have to deal with the delivery and everything
else. So, there's not a huge distinction here between factory built and custom
built besides where the home is being built. Sorry, it takes me a little while, but
I'll figure it out.
CHR. CHUNG: Where is that communication?
MS. DAVID: Chair Chung?
CHR. CHUNG: Yeah? Maile, go ahead.
MS. DAVID: Hi. Thank you. Very interesting conversations but I seem to
recall—if we're going back, I want to talk about the comparison made by
Chair Chung about making it fair and equitable with respect to factory-built
homes outside, in fact outside the State. And I think I seem to recall that I had
asked a question similar because my concern was I was under the impression that
the factory-built homes that we're talking about were specific to factory-built
Page 96
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
homes being built here in-county. And that's what HPM was planning to do
because their estimate was about two their factory could probably pump out
about two houses in a week or a month, I'm not sure.
But in Ms. Poindexter's amendments that we're looking at, not the new one that's
coming, I asked the question, then how do we make sure that homes built outside
meets our standards as far as permitting, etcetera? And I was told that they have
an even stricter, for factory-built homes outside, they have a stricter standard.
And so, it's not like—I don't think we can make it fair in that way because I think
Mr. Tanaka said that they're on a different standard level than us. But it's
comparable to ours because we have to make sure about that.
So, with Ms. Lee Loy's question or statement, the factory-built, manufactured
home manufactured outside the County would need to bear the approval issued by
any governmental or inspectional agency approved by the building official. And
that building official is the director of Public Works. So, we get to choose
director of the Department of Public Works or its authorized representative. So,
we get to choose, I guess, the inspectional agency that's comparable to what we
are expecting, I would assume. And that is already in this amendment and has not
been changed except for the capitalization of the word "County."
So, to me, I think that issue about equitable, why not make—if factory-built
homes outside don't have to get a permit, then why don't we just follow the same
for the in-county ones? But I think this actually explains why: Because, they
have a different standard that I think our department should be making sure that
they follow. So, that was only my comment regarding your question about
equitable and who needs to get a building permit and who doesn't. I think we
have the upper hand as far as factory-built homes here because getting the permit
would cut—for factory-built homes here, would just probably—we'd have to
make an appointment for the guy to come out and inspect it. You pull a permit
like you normally do and then you get an inspector from Public Works to go out
and inspect it.
That's all I wanted to say as far as the equitable—it's two different things, in my
mind, and we cannot make it conform to each other because it's two totally
separate processes and procedures. All right. That's all. I didn't have a question.
I just needed to clarify that in my mind and say that. Thank you. I yield.
CHR. CHUNG: Neal, is that a correct statement when they say that outside
jurisdictions have stricter standards? Cannot be correct, right? Because, there's
so many other jurisdictions out there, right? Okay. I mean, I don't know where
Maile got that from, and it might have been a credible source but I just wanted to
make sure because there's just so many different places: China and places on the
Mainland. Go ahead.
Page 97
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
MS. POINDEXTER: So, I have the new communication. I'm wondering if we're
ready to move forward on my new communication. So, what I'm going to have to
do is, Jon, withdraw Communication 989.34. Is that correct?
CHR. CHUNG: Yes, correct.
MR. HENRICKS: So, you would be withdrawing your motion to amend with
989.34 and then Chair would recognize, and that would make the main motion
back on the floor again.
MS. POINDEXTER: Okay.
CHR. CHUNG: Yeah, I recognize that.
MS. POINDEXTER: So, I will withdraw Communication 989.34.
Withdraw Motion Ms. Poindexter withdrew her motion to amend Bill 179,
to Amend: Draft 2, with the contents of Comm. 989.34.
Motion to Amend: Ms. Poindexter moved to amend Bill 179, Draft 2,with the
contents of Comm. 989.36. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy.
CHR. CHUNG: I'm assuming that you addressed the concerns that Ms. Lee Loy
raised, and you looked it over. It looks all right to you? Because this is my
thought already: We talked about this thing over and over and over. Okay. I
think everybody has kind of made up their mind. I don't want to go too much
further on this. Okay? I gave my spiel, but, you know, we'll leave it at that.
MS. POINDEXTER: Yeah. So, the exception is put back in on page 3.
CHR. CHUNG: Yeah. Okay. And then that addresses your concerns?
MS. LEE LOY: Yes. I still think there's other areas that's deficient in it, but we
are
CHR. CHUNG: Well, but the change that she made addressed
MS. LEE LOY: Right. Yes.
CHR. CHUNG: Yeah. Okay.
MS. LEE LOY: Thank you.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay. I mean, anybody else want to talk? If they're going to
talk,just talk really short already because I think we know where, you know,
Page 98
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
everybody talked about this thing. And maybe we have differences of opinion.
That's fine, but I think we're ready to vote. Okay? Anybody in Kona? Okay,
let's vote. Let's do it by a roll call vote on this amendment.
Vote on Motion to The motion to amend Bill 179, Draft 2, with the contents of
Amend: Comm. 989.36 was carried by the following roll call vote:
(Approved)
Ayes: Council Members David, Eoff,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Poindexter,
and Villegas —5.
Noes: Council Members Kierkiewicz,
Lee Loy, Richards, and Chair Chung—4.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay. So, let's go back to the main motion now. Right?
Bill 179, Draft 2, as amended. Any further discussion on that one? Okay,
anybody in Kona?
MS. EOFF: Mr. Chair?
CHR. CHUNG: Yes?
MS. EOFF: I just wanted to comment that I know we got a little off track getting
into some of the nitty-gritty where this bill basically did come to us as a major
structural overhaul to combine the three
MR. HENRICKS: I'm sorry. I apologize.
CHR. CHUNG: What?
MR. HENRICKS: We're at that point where we have to holdover the bill unless
there's
CHR. CHUNG: Yeah, yeah.
MS. EOFF: Oh, I'm sorry.
Page 99
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
Vote on Motion to Ms. Poindexter moved to suspend Council Rule 24 to
Suspend Council waive the holdover for the substantive amendment of
Rules: Bill 179, Draft 2. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy and carried by
(Approved) the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members David, Eoff,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz,
Lee Loy, Poindexter, Richards,
Villegas, and Chair Chung–9.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
CHR. CHUNG: Motion carried.
MR. HENRICKS: Sorry to cut everyone off like that.
CHR. CHUNG: Yeah. Okay. So, now, who was talking?
MS. POINDEXTER: Karen.
CHR. CHUNG: Oh yeah, Karen, yeah.
MS. EOFF: Sorry, I just(inaudible)really quick, but I just wanted to remind us
that we dida lot of work went into this bill. I really want to thank the authors
and all the people that worked on it, all the input we had. And I believe that with
the amendment that we just passed, it's going to be okay. It does level a lot of
playing fields that makes things safe and fair. It gives assurance of inspection and
factory seals that allows this opportunity to have options like factory-built homes
to become maybe a mode for providing another option in affordability. And I
really hope that we will continue to work on it.
I know, like I said, this was supposed to just be the major structural change, but
we had to get into some of these points, which was our job. But now, I think we
have some time to really look at the Building Code section of it and keep working
with Administration to come up with any other changes going forward that may
be needed. But, yeah, I just wanted to acknowledge all of the hours of work that
went into drafting before it even came to the Council.
I know the technical difficulties were immense, and I can understand why some of
the nitty-gritty details that we now are discussing—and there's probably more that
we haven't even discussed but why they were kind of, not really overlooked but
it just wasn't the focus. So, I think the structure, the opportunity to make this
Page 100
Hawaii County Council-48 August 5,2020
compatible with the new technology we have for processing, hopefully we can get
a lot of good out of this. So, thank you and I'll be supporting Bill 179, as
amended.
CHR. CHUNG: Okay. Roll call vote.
MR. HENRICKS: Okay. Just before we do that, I just want to make clear for the
record, since there were several amendments, that Bill 179, Draft 2, was amended
by the contents of Communications 989.31, 989.35, and 989.36. And that is
where we are right now on second and final reading. The motion is to pass
Bill 179, Draft 2, as amended with the previous amendments in the just mentioned
communications.
Vote on Bill 179: The motion to pass Bill 179, Draft 2, as amended to
Draft 3 Draft 3, on second and final reading was carried by the
(Adopted) following roll call vote:
Ayes: Council Members David, Eoff,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz,
Lee Loy, Poindexter, Richards,
Villegas, and Chair Chung—9.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
REPORTS: The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business, Reports.
(There were none.)
REFERRALS FOR The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business, Referrals
EXECUTIVE for Executive Session.
SESSION:
(There were none.)
OTHER The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business, Other
BUSINESS: Business.
(There were none.)
ANNOUNCE- The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business,
MENTS: Announcements.
(There were none.)
Page 101
Hawai`i County Council-48 August 5,2020
CHR. CHUNG: We've come to the end of our agenda. I want to make just one
announcement. We're just a few days away from the election. And as
Pastor Tomita said, God brought us all together, right? And in many regards, I
believe that. I think we've really had a trying year and a half, very difficult. And
I think all of you pass with flying colors, in my estimation. So, I wish all of you
the best this week. I know Ashley doesn't have a race, nor does Maile.
Ms. Poindexter and Ms. Eoff, of course, don't have to go through the rigors of
this kind of campaign anymore. But I really do wish all of you the best on
Saturday. Yeah.
ADJOURN- There being no further business, at 3:03 p.m., Ms. Lee Loy moved to adjourn the
MENT: meeting. Seconded by Mr. Richards and carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members David, Eoff,
Kaneali'i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz,
Lee Loy, Poindexter, Richards,
Villegas, and Chair Chung— 9.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
CHR. CHUNG: Motion carried.
Council Approval: SEP 1 6 2020
CO K
JH/dg
Page 102