Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN FC 2020/09/01 2018-2020 Committee on Finance 39th Session Hawaii County Building 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, Hawaii September 1, 2020 CALL TO The regular meeting of the Committee on Finance was called to order at ORDER: 9:05 a.m. in the Council Chambers, Hilo, by Ms. Maile Medeiros David, Chair. ROLL CALL: Present: Ms. Maile Medeiros David, Chair (via videoconference from Kona) Mr. Aaron S. Y. Chung, Member 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, Vice Chair Ms. Rebecca Villegas, Member (videoconference from Kona) Absent& Excused: Ms. Karen Eoff, Member STATEMENTS The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, FROM THE Statements from the Public on Agenda Items. PUBLIC ON AGENDA ITEMS: (There were none.) CHR. DAVID: Can we just move on with Communications. Communication 10.44, please. COMMUNI- The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, CATIONS: Communications. Comm. 10.44: REPORT OF CHANGE ORDERS AUTHORIZED: JULY 16 —31, 2020 From Finance Director Deanna Sako, dated August 4, 2020, transmitting the above report pursuant to Hawaii County Code Section 2-12.3. FC-39 September 1,2020 Vote on Comm. 10.44: Ms. Villegas moved to close file on Comm. 10.44. Filed Seconded by Mr. Richards and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz, Lee Loy, Poindexter, Richards, Villegas, and Chair David—8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Eoff— 1. Excused: None. CHR. DAVID: Mr. Clerk, Communication 11.36. Comm. 11.36: REPORT OF FUND TRANSFERS AUTHORIZED: JUNE 16—30 AND JULY 1 — 15, 2020 From Controller Kay Oshiro, dated August 4, 2020. Vote on Comm. 11.36: Ms. Villegas moved to close file on Comm. 11.36. Filed Seconded by Mr. Richards and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz, Lee Loy, Poindexter, Richards, Villegas, and Chair David—8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Eoff— 1. Excused: None. CHR. DAVID: Mr. Clerk, Communication 11.37. Comm. 11.37: REPORT OF FUND TRANSFERS AUTHORIZED: JUNE 16—30 AND JULY 16 —31, 2020 From Controller Kay Oshiro, dated August 5, 2020. Vote on Comm. 11.37: Ms. Villegas moved to close file on Comm. 11.37. Filed Seconded by Mr. Richards and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz, Lee Loy, Poindexter, Richards, Villegas, and Chair David—8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Eoff— 1. Excused: None. CHR. DAVID: Mr. Clerk, Communication 1040,please. Page 2 FC-39 September 1,2020 Comm. 1040: REQUESTS A DISCUSSION WITH THE ADMINISTRATION REGARDING HAWAII COUNTY'S BUDGET OUTLOOK From Council Members Susan L. K. Lee Loy and Ashley L. Kierkiewicz, dated August 13, 2020. (Note: Comm. 1040.1, Human Resources Director William V. Brilhante, Jr., transmitting a list of 89-day Contract Hires for the period January 1, 2020 — July 31, 2020, was circulated.) Motion to Close File: Ms. Lee Loy moved to close file on Comm. 1040. Seconded by Ms. Kierkiewicz. CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Ms. Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: Actually, I'm going to let Ms. Kierkiewicz lead the discussion, and then we're going to move into another section in whichI'm hoping Mr. Brilhante can hear me. So I'll let Ms. Kierkiewicz go first, and then I'm going to move in to the 89-day contract hire. CHR. DAVID: Okay, well, that's fine. Ms. Kierkiewicz, go ahead,please. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chair. We've got budget season upon us, and because of the fiscal constraints that we are facing now and for the foreseeable future, I wanted to make sure that we are doing our due diligence as a Council to start taking a look at various pieces of our budget and making sure that we've clearly articulated our outcomes and that we are budgeting our dollars accordingly, and that the public understands every single budgetary decision and where all the dollars are going. So I wanted to have a conversation about 89-day temporary hires and the contract awards, you know, coming from Request for Proposals. So maybe I'll start with Director Brilhante. Director Sako, maybe you want to come forward as well because I think there are some additional pieces of information that you can lend to the conversation. (Note: At this time, Human Resources Director William V. Brilhante, Jr., and Finance Director Deanna Sako, came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Hi, Bill. Thank you for joining us. MR. BRILHANTE: Good morning. William Brilhante, Director, Department of Human Resources. How can I help you? MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. And we really appreciate the quarterly reports from HR(Human Resources) that provide us a list with all the individuals that have an 89-day contracts (see Comm. 1040.1). I'm just trying to better Page 3 FC-39 September 1,2020 understand the deliverables for each of these contract hires. And I'm thinking along the lines of when we have the Real Property Tax Working Group that provides recommendations for various policy directives that Council Members could entertain, are there other deliverables that we can be expecting from some of these contract hires? For example, Stanley Nakasone, Highway Audit Specialist, is there a Highway audit that Council Members can receive at some point in the future? Andy Levin, Hawaii State Legislative Assistant, is there a legislative update, a report that he would be sending to the Council? Or are these spaces where the Council must request that these individuals come to a committee to provide us with an update on what they are working on? MR. BRILHANTE: Ms. Kierkiewicz, may II can respond to that. You know, currently you referenced those two individuals with those contracts, right now both of those contracts, neither of them are currently in effect. They both expired. So when we look at the contract, basically when HR looks at these contracts, we make a determination as to whether or not they comply with the requirements of HRS (Hawai`i Revised Statutes) 76-77, and to make sure that, from a legal standpoint we're not violating any of the HRS Rules and Regulations. And these cases these two contracts, and there are couple more. There's another one of the contract with Ikeda, and there's another contract with Amy Self. You know, when we look at the scope of work that's been that they identified in the contract, they make a determination as to whether or not that work has customarily and historically been performed by civil servants. That's the first type of vetting that we do, and each of these contracts the determination was "no." So then the next step we do is we take it to our Classification and Pay Division, and we say, "Okay,"I ask my staff, "Let's take a look at the scope of work for these contracts. Is there"—if you look at the type of work, the level of work, the complexity of the work, "Is there a similar type class or group of employees that we have that these contracts would be similar to, as far as the salary goes?" And we come up with a determination with a scope for a range of proposed salaries. And as long as the contract meets those two requirements or those two levels of scrutiny, then we send it on to the Corporation Counsel. Corporation Counsel looks to the legality, formal and legality of the contract, and then it gets sent to the Mayor's Office. But that's pretty much the role of HR up and to that point. Then, you know, for all of these contracts you know, as to whether or not—we don't do a determination as to whether or not the individual was effective, if we get the most bang for our buck. You know, that's not a determination we do. We look—again, we look at the scope of work, we look at the proposed salary, and we ensure that it falls within the Rules and Regulations of the HRS. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Director. Deanna, do you want to weigh in on any of that? I mean, I'm just—you know, something that Director Brilhante brought up was the effectiveness of whoever is getting this contract, and should Page 4 FC-39 September 1,2020 they not be effective but continuously brought back. Just trying to understand because dollars are going to be limited going forward. I'm just wanting to make sure that we as a Council and the public can expect reasonable return on investment. MS. SAKO: So, you know, each department head kind of determine what their needs are, and then they're kind of responsible for also ensuring that they the dollars in the budget to do it. So they're kind of trying to make sure the task they need accomplished are accomplished. So each department head is kind of responsible for supervising those positions,just like any other position in their department. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: So setting the vision for those task is something that happens at the change of administration, which we are on the cusp of right now. And just trying to figure out how the Council can be more involved every step of the way, because a lot of this work needs to happening regardless of who the department heads are. You know,just taking a looking at the report that Director Brilhante provided us, some of these contracts are related to sanitization and disinfection. Some of them are marked COVID-19, others aren't. I just want to make sure, Director Sako, that we are going to be able to be reimbursed for some of this work even though it's not marked COVID-19. But it is COVID-19 related, I'm assuming? MS. SAKO: Yeah. So all the sanitization, disinfection assistance, anything related to that is all COVID-19 related, and all will be reimbursed by CARES Act. But those are a good example of things that come up that we didn't know about, when we prepared last year's budget for example,because some of these were hired as early as April. And so these are the types of things that come up. But then again, we also have to ensure we had a funding source. The disinfection assistants and the sanitization assistants are one of those positions that we didn't know we needed when we did the budget. So those are usually what the 89-day contracts are for. They're for things that we don't normally think we're going to need during the year. We could have somebody out on leave that we need the fill the position. We could have something like this that comes up. So those are more the reasons for—but you have to make sure you have money in your budget to be able to pay for it, and in this case we're going to use CARES Act. We thought we were going to use FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) until we got the CARES Act. MS. POINDEXTER: Madam Chair? Do we all have what you have, what was reported? CHR. DAVID: Go ahead. Page 5 FC-39 September 1,2020 MS. POINDEXTER: Oh, I'm sorry. Excuse me, Maile, can I ask Ashley a question? Because she has the document that I can't find. But is it in our ? CHR. DAVID: Yes, go ahead. MS. POINDEXTER: Ashley, do we have what you're looking at, what Mr. Brilhante gave you? MS. LEE LOY: If I could interject? Every quarter Mr. Brilhante provides the communication of all the various 89-day contracts, and so I pulled it from Communication 62.8. I mean, I can have staff run a copy of it. Because it is an 89-day contract hires, from January 2020 to July 31, 2020. MS. POINDEXTER: So you're going to email it to all of us? MS. LEE LOY: It was part of our communications. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: It's a compilation of everything we've received so far. MS. POINDEXTER: Oh, okay. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: And we just threw all that information together. MS. POINDEXTER: So yeah, would be nice to have it. Because I'm in agreement with you, with you know, I know—may I speak? Committee Chair, can I speak really quick on ? CHR. DAVID: Yes. You're addressing who, Ms. Poindexter? MS. POINDEXTER: I was talking with Ashley. But I just wanted to make a statement. I guess I'll let Ashley complete her time, and then CHR. DAVID: Her questioning? MS. POINDEXTER: Yeah. CHR. DAVID: Okay. MS. POINDEXTER: And then I have some questions regarding the contract and what Mr. Brilhante had said about—you know, he made reference to two people, and I want toI think it's good examples, and I want to make a comment on that when Council Member Ashley Kierkiewicz is done. Thank you. CHR. DAVID: Okay, I will make a note. Thank you. Go ahead, Ms. Kierkiewicz. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. And, Ms. Poindexter, I can share this with you afterwards so you have it for reference for your questioning. Just one more Page 6 FC-39 September 1,2020 question about the 89-day contracts that I have. Actually a couple, you know, relating to the contact tracing assistants as well as special projects for water. So I don't know if, Director Brilhante, because you were reviewing these 89-day contracts, if you might be able to provide some insight into some of the work that these individuals are doing. MR. BRILHANTE: I can provide additional information. As far as the contact tracers, Civil Defense has assumed that responsibility from the Department of Health. I think in Oahu and the other jurisdictions, they've been relying on the Department of Health to provide contact tracers for the individuals who come in from the mainland, you know, through air travel, and they trace them through their 14 days of quarantine. So what we did here, on the Big Island, is the Mayor instructed the Department of Civil Defense to assume those responsibilities. So what we did was we hired 89-day staffing to engage, in order for us to be able to perform that contact tracing responsibility. So we pretty much trace all the visitors who come to the Big Island, whether it be through Hilo Airport, Kona Airport, we even have a contact tracer at Waimea Airport. Since the institution of the inter-island 14-day quarantine, we utilize them in that capacity, and they've been doing a really good job. The numbers are incredible, and I think it's been really helpful and effective, you know,just for us to maintain and ensure that the quarantine is being effectuated. As far as with the Department of Supply, I'm not sure exactly what the scope of that work is. You know, with Water, it's somewhat unique because they're semi-autonomous. They go through their board. They get approvals for some of their contracts through their board. You know, I can get that information. I can find that out from my staff, and I can report back to you on that, Ashley. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: So Director, I just want to clarify, because Water is semi-autonomous, you're not reviewing their 89-day contracts? MR. BRILHANTE: Yes and no. So it's not a blanket. No, we don't review, but generally, we see it come through the routing form and the like. Again, we ensure, you know, we do the same analysis, you know, whether or not the type of work that they've identified are, you know, has been historically performed by civil servants, or is the proper exemption been used. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Okay, thank you. Thank you for that. If I could just shift really quickly to the next point on the communication, Contract Awards for Request for Proposals, and I think this is more questioning for Director Sako. But, Deanna, I really appreciate seeing on the County's website; there's the list, everyone, under Finance Department, Professional Service Contract Award that are broken down by fiscal year, which is where I got the information for today's questioning. Page 7 FC-39 September 1,2020 Deanna, can you just provide insight again to some of the documents or visioning behind each of these contract awards? You know, like how are we kind of prioritizing it? Is it our CIP (Capital Improvement Projects)? Is it our CEDS (Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy)? Is it our General Plan? Is it Lava Recovery? A lot of competing priorities. But just wondering at the end of the day, how are we identifying the key things that we need to move forward on? MS. SAKO: So each department pretty much has them laid out in their budget for anything that's part of the normal budget process. So some of things are actually annual things that we put out RFPs for. Some of it might be services. Some of it, you know, might be more goods-related that has some services with it. So all of those things go out. You know, staff provided me with a current RFPs and IFPS (Invitation for Proposals) out there. You know, they range anywhere from signal or streetlight repairs, price-term agreements, to bulk traffic supplies, to tires, to ballot drop boxes, you know, and then there's things like Moho`uli Park outdoor tennis court resurfacing. But ultimately, the construction projects, a lot of them end up being repairs and maintenance. So both Parks and DPW (Department of Public Works), we try to give them a certain amount of the bond money to do R&M (Repair and Maintenance)projects so that our facilities can be well maintained, and that seem mostly likely tends to be where that happens. The other projects, the bigger ones, you know, then we sit down with the Mayor to prioritize construction projects and different things, and how to spend the bond money. Right now there's not a lot of those going on. When there's federal funds involved, we're on it. I mean, our County is very good at going after federal funds, whether it's FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency), or Public Works is very good at getting Federal Highway dollars. They have a lot of projects ready to go, so that when money is available, they can put that out to bid. So it really depends on the funding source as part of it. And then obviously, like a large capacity cesspool closure at Kainaliu, that's one of our more important projects because there's federal mandates to close all of those. Unfortunately, this is one that we missed, and so they're taking care of it now. So definitely if there's like a mandate to do something, those take priority. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Right. Like ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) compliance, and we talked about cesspool closures. MS. SAKO: Right. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: You know, one of the things that you kind of elevated was that we are really good about finding federal dollars, different funding opportunities. And so I think it's interesting that here we have about a$55,000 Page 8 FC-39 September 1,2020 award for a contract to support DEM (Department of Environmental Management) in researching, identifying,pursuing funding opportunities for Wastewater capital projects. I mean, is DEM a special case where they don't have sort of that grant writing capacity? MS. SAKO: I think they don't have time. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Okay. MS. SAKO: Yeah, they have so many projects right now because of the nature of their business. Especially on the Wastewater side, with so many sewer projects, they need their attention all the time. And I think there's some projects that we've been working on for many years. So it's also a very expensive line. I mean, to do wastewater projects, it's not cheap. So any additional help we can find, you know, to fund those projects would be greatly appreciated. They've been fortunate to get the SRF (State Revolving Fund) loans because those interest rates are very low, like half-percent plus the interest charge. So yeah, normally they use that but sometimes those aren't always available. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Sure. I hate to put you on the spot because you're not the Director of Planning but seeing a line item here of$313,000 related to General Plan Comprehensive Review, and I think we're about five years late in kind of updating that document. And so I know that in past fiscal years there have been a number of contract awards related to GP (General Plan). Do you have any insight into this one? I'm going to follow up with Director Yee. MS. SAKO: Not specifically on that one. But I know when they first started the General Plan, you know, budgets has been tight for the last several years, and so we didn't have a lot of money to just say, "Here, take several million and do it." So, they try to break it down into phases. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Okay. MS. SAKO: And so this is the most recent phase, I believe. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Got it. And, you know, I fully support investing and making sure that we've got a quality long-range plan, so just wanting to better to understand all of that. And, you know, I just wanted to elevate a couple of other things that I was able to find in reviewing just the Professional Service Contract awards that have been awarded this year. Every year I'm seeing something around structural engineering for bridge inventory and inspections. And so we've done this twice already this year. I mean, it's annual expense. I just wonder, after all of these inspections of our bridges, are we seeing that audit or assessment somewhere to bring Page 9 FC-39 September 1,2020 transparency around? You know, what sort of CIP projects related to bridges kind of need to happen? MS. SAKO: So, you know, with various bridge collapse across the county, the federal department has kind of made sure that we annually inspect the bridges, so DPW is in charge of the bridges. And so they do—they have a system where they go out and inspect. I'm not sure about if there's a report or what they get in return. Director Yamamoto would be able to answer that. But they definitely do have to monitor and maintain each bridge. And then if it's considered, you know, something could be wrong with it, they have to do repairs and/or close it down so no one would get hurt. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: And then I'm just wondering, you know, as I was going through all the different contractor awards for the various fiscal years, there's talk of an award date, but there's no completion date. Is it possible to kind of add that line to the various contract awards? MS. SAKO: I'm not sure we always know. Every project is different. So let's say we do a survey, they may go out and have it down in a week. Or an appraisal let's say, if we're going property or sell it, then those types of things maybe it takes a month and it's done. Some of the other ones, like structural engineers, I'm not sure. Because the bridge program is ongoing, if it lasts for a year, so we may or may not always know that upfront. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Okay. MS. SAKO: But I can talk to staff about it. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Yeah, I'm just curious. Because, you know, there were a couple lava related projects here, specifically close to $500,000 for an economic recovery plan. I think this body felt we were going to be getting last December and we still haven't, so just kind of curious as to status of stuff. You know, I just want to point out I saw a lot of CIP and work on Wastewater treatment facilities, which is so important. I think it's absolutely foundational that we, reprioritizing that. But I didn't see a lot in here around economic development. You know, I'm pretty sure that Director Ley, R&D (Research and Development), is listening. It's so important that right now we hunker down and figure out how we're going to get our economy moving again, and focusing on, you know, economic diversification strategies, getting people back to work because that's the foundation of our tax base. So, I just want to put it out there. Thanks for being here to answer questions. I really appreciate it. I think at the end of the day we're just trying to get to the logic behind how a lot of these decisions are made. So, thank you. Chair, I appreciate the extra time. I yield. Page 10 FC-39 September 1,2020 CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kierkiewicz. And before we move on, Ms. Poindexter, I believe Ms. Lee Loy wanted to weigh in as the introducers of this before—could your questions wait till she's done, or would your questions follow Ms. Kierkiewicz `s presentation? MS. POINDEXTER: Well, I was wanting to talk on the 89-day contract. So I wanted to talk. CHR. DAVID: Oh, I see. Okay. MS. LEE LOY: Chair, if it's okay, to keep the conversation in context. I don't mind yielding the floor to Ms. Poindexter. CHR. DAVID: Thank you. MS. LEE LOY: Just to kind of keep everybody engaged in the one-thought. CHR. DAVID: Right, because Ms. Kierkiewicz did speak to the 89-day contract, that's why I was asking. So thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. Ms. Poindexter, go ahead. MS. POINDEXTER: Yeah. You know, I just got this list in front of me. But I want to go back to you know, we had good examples that they gave. And I know those people are not—you know, Mr. Brilhante, you said they're no longer under contract, but they kept getting extended. So I'm just kind of curious, is there a clause in the contract that requires a final report from a contractor? MR. BRILHANTE: Good morning, Council Woman Poindexter. In response to your question, generally we live it up to the nature of the contract itself to make a determination as to whether or not there will be a requirement for a final report or a final analysis of what transpired during the contract. In order for these uniqueness with these 89-day contacts is generally the individual is somebody who previously served or has previous ties with either the State or the County. And the reason we use the 89-contract is because that's the maximum-89 days is the maximum amount of time that an individual can be employed with the governmental entity, rather the State or the County, and it doesn't adversely affect their retirement. So what happens is, during the 89 days, their retirement—you know, they're still able to maintain and continue with all their previous retirement benefits. So in that regard, there's no adverse impact on their retirement. The clause is that—however, after the 89 day, the contract has to end, and it has to end and there has to be a separation. So we can't just extend these 89-day contracts. So there has to be a break in service, and then we re-enter a new contract subsequent to that. Page 11 FC-39 September 1,2020 MS. POINDEXTER: Okay, so you can have an 89-day contract. They rest for two weeks, you bring them on for one 89. Then you rest for two weeks, you bring them on an 89. Is that what you're saying? That can happen? MR. BRILHANTE: Generally our office doesn't allow that to happen. In discussions with Corporation Counsel, we only allow for one additional—within that financial manual—financial calendar, we only allow one additional 89-day contract. So you can have one 89-day contract, break in service, and then we afford one more 89-day contract, then that's where it ends. MS. POINDEXTER: And then that's it. So you've never gone beyond after that? You've never done one that goes beyond two times? MR. BRILHANTE: Let me say, to my knowledge, I haven't I hate to use such an inclusive term of"never." So I'll just say, to my knowledge we haven't done that. MS. POINDEXTER: Yeah. So I would like to see a clause in every contract that requires a report. Because you know, the taxpayer—somebody got to hold them accountable because these are taxpayer's money we're using to pay for their services. So I think the taxpayers deserve, you know, a final report on how their money was spent. I would. I mean, I definitely would if I hired somebody under me.x The other thing then, you know, there were things written in the paper about Parks and Rec. and the Ranger Program, that we're going to be hiring them on as employees because we've had for a contract—on contract. Now, they've been on contract. What is the difference? I want to know because they've been on contract for overI'm in office for eight years. Maybe since I got back in, we brought them back on. Six years they've been on contract? And they've had union dues taken out of their checks while they were on contract. MR. BRILHANTE: You know, that's a unique situation. And the reason that program has been operating the way that it has is because that type of work that they're performing the people the employees are performing at—now at Waipi`o Valley Lookout, it's work that's not historically or customarily been performed by County civil servants, so it's not a Civil Service position. The scope of work is not a Civil Service position. So in that case, we can contract. And the statute affords—allows us to provide that type of contract for those type of unique services, and that's why it's been on contract. My understanding, is just recently there's been a request to add those positions to the County coffer. So going forward, we are not going to be able to contract for those type of positions anymore. We're going to have to do a regular recruitment on board for the future employees (inaudible). Page 12 FC-39 September 1,2020 MS. POINDEXTER: Right. And I agree with that, because if it walks like a duck and quacks likes a duck, it's a duck. Because we require them to be there at certain time; we require them to be at a certain location. You know, so they've been operating as employees, plus you guys have taken out union dues from them all those years, too. And they've been in there was a break in service. Because they were there before under another contract, and then there was a break; and when I came into office, and they came back on for years. So I just want to make that clear, because I think some of the comments from the public, they didn't understand what was going on in those positions. So you can understand how confusing this is, yeah, on the contracts, and what type of contracts is on the 89? And then you take a break,you bring them back, and then people are going, "Whoa, what did they do?" MR. BRILHANTE: Ms. Poindexter, the general rule of thumb is if there's a necessity for somebody to perform the specific function and we look at the duration, how long is that person going to be involved? You know, what's the extent of this work? If it's temporary in nature, we try to have the 89-day contract put in place. The reason for that is because in those situations, you know, it's more of an economic advantage to the County. We don't have to pay the sick leave benefits, we don't have to pay retirement, and we don't have make retirement contributions. So if we see a job, say for example the sanitation workers currently under contract for COVID-19, you know, we see the anticipation is we're going utilize them through the end of the year. So we put them on an 89-day contract because that way, you know, maybe pay a little higher, more attractive salary. We are trying to attract a class of worker that maybe he's been laid off from another job, and maybe they still getting some benefits on the side. And so we do like a cost-benefit analysis, when we look at the entirety of the contract, and we look at—again, who are we trying to target? What scope of work or group of workers you're trying to target? And that's where you see the 89-day contract. It's a real—it's a great advantage for us to be able to use the 89-day contract in those type of situations. MS. POINDEXTER: And I agree with you. In those type of situations, definitely. But some of the examples and some of the concerns from the public was the other contracts that were that nobody got a final report on knowing what they did. So that's just—you know, I'm just throwing that out there because that'sI think whatever the next administration or whoever is going to be in charge got to start looking at that because we need to be accountable to our taxpayers, bottom-line. So, thank you. Thank you for allowing me that time. Thank you. I yield, Madam Chair. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Poindexter. Alright, Ms. Lee Loy, go ahead. Page 13 FC-39 September 1,2020 MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Chair. Thank you, both my colleagues, for their input. You know, as Ms. Kierkiewicz said, we were trying to get our arms around the budget because we know the departments are looking at their budgets right now, and then we're going to have a shift in administration. And this particular communication was sparked by Chair Chung's resolution related to the hiring freeze. So both myself and Ms. Kierkiewicz started to think a little bit deeper like, "Hey, we can't just talk about one part of a hiring freeze without truly understanding all the different pieces." And so building off of that, the 89-day contracts yeah, I guess—our constituency is really looking for a scorecard or a report card on what we got, what the return of investment was. If we paid somebody $7,500 for the duration of their contract or per month, whatever it was. We just want to understand what the return on investment is. But more importantly, what information was gleaned during that contract, that we could then turn around and utilize across all of our departments. You know, whether it was an audit for Highways; how we can turn around and take Mr. Nakasone's expertise and knowledge, an institutional knowledge, and apply it across DPW so that we're paving roads in a systematic way. Something else Ms. Kierkiewicz touched upon, is audit their contracts out there. Like our Request for Proposals, what are the priorities? Is it a liability ADA compliance? And then how do we, again, amplify those contracts in a manner so that we are getting more accelerated use of the contract? And so I just wanted to touch upon the next parts of our communication, which was the proposed departmental transfer of funds, and then the follow-up on new positions. So, Deanna, we as a body we see those transfers, and so moving into this last quarter of the year, what is the anticipated goal of transfer of funds? I understand Police and Fire, they have their overtime, those type of things. But we are looking at having to infuse $80 million of our CARES money, and I just want to understand based on our 89-day contracts as it relates to COVID funding and the CARES money, is there some type of prioritization that we're going to be seeing as far as the transfer of funds within the departments to meet those goals? Help me understand that. We just want to see a forecast on what the next quarter will look like. MS. SAKO: I'm not sure I fully understand your question, and it might just be like the terminology. So right now all the CARES related costs are coming out of that budget—appropriation that was passed by Council. So whether it's a Public Works employee or a Parks employee, or Police or Fire, their time is getting charged to that CARES appropriation as is the grants that are going out to the community and the other RFP—all those different grant programs that just went out. So all of that are getting charged to CARES Act. So that—in some cases, that is saving departments money in the current budget. Page 14 FC-39 September 1,2020 We are purposely doing that in some cases. Such as with our lifeguards, so that there will be sufficient funding to continue services at all of our State and County beaches, because the State's budget is very much tight. You know, they are having significant shortfalls in their revenue, so we are doing our best to cover things that they said they wouldn't be able to pay. So my understanding is they're not going to be fully fund Hapuna lifeguard services. They're not going to be able to fully fund EMS (Emergency Medical Services), you know, some of the pay raises and other things. And it changes. I mean, everything is in flux. You know, the State's budget constantly changes. And as each month progresses, as we get into the pandemic, with low GET (General Excise Tax)revenue, with low TAT (Transit Accommodation Tax)revenue, you know, the State's probably going to have to continue to modify their budget. So the way we're doing that, is for positions that are truly doing CARES related work, we're making sure their time is being charged to CARES Act to free up the County dollars to pick up these State share of those expenses. Is that what you mean? MS. LEE LOY: Absolutely. And then, that's where I was going. Like, what is the cost savings, right? Because we are seeing that their salary and wages is being paid by another bucket of money, and then where does that cost savings go? MS. SAKO: Right. So when we get to December, when the CARES money runs out on December 30'', our County budget, hopefully, will look like we're behind on spending. We haven't hit 50 percent of our budget yet, but that's what we want it to look like so that it will carry us through all the way to June 30''. So whoever is elected Mayor, he needs to kind of understand that. That we have a plan to get us all the way through the year, and we're working with each department to kind of make sure that happens. MS. LEE LOY: And thank you for sharing that insight because I think that's where a lot of the angst is coming from. We know we're not going to get the same amount of money by way of TAT (Transit Accommodation Tax) or GE (General Excise), and all we're really going to be relying is our real property tax. But then, we're also looking at salary increases based on Bargaining Unit contracts. So I guess I just want the larger public to understand there is some thought kind of going into holding the line on spending. Just for the larger public, proposed transfer of funds. The Council is going to see it anyway, right? You have to bring it before the Council? MS. SAKO: They will see it, yes. MS. LEE LOY: So there will—go ahead. MS. SAKO: Those proposed transfer of funds are just within a department. So for example, if Solid Waste,just because it was on this report, has extra equipment repairs but they know they have savings in another account, then Page 15 FC-39 September 1,2020 they you know, they want to extend the life of that equipment, they will go ahead with that repair and then transfer the money. But we make sure they have the funds in place before they are authorized to do that repair. MS. LEE LOY: Perfect. And then regarding proposed new positions, Ms. Poindexter just talked about it, right? We had an 89-day. It was a very unique situation. MS. SAKO: That's highly unusual, yes. MS. LEE LOY: Right, highly unusual. But we also had a resolution talking about a hiring freeze. So how are we going to manage the potential for new positions? MS. SAKO: So this last budget that was adopted for the current fiscal year, there were no new positions. The two that came before Council were the Waipi`o rangers, which was highly unusual; and we did ask to change the funding source in one of the parks grant-funded positions because that's also kind of an unusual thing that happened, where that focus got changed by the federal government. So any changes to positions have to come before Council, so you will be well aware. Obviously right now is not the time to be creating new positions. But you never know. With COVID, none of us know what's going to be happening in the future, you know, the next year or two. I mean, we just have no idea how life is changing. So we may decide we need a new position, but that might replace another position. MS. LEE LOY: And I don't know if this is for you, but you just touched upon it. Because we're evolving here, and maybe this might be a question for Mr. Brilhante, you know, it's just your best guess. Are we going to have to look at, for example our Park Caretakers—or our DPW, some of their job descriptions evolving to start to really address some of the real-time work that they're doing right now? MS. SAKO: And I think we are going to have to take a look at that. Especially if nothing happens in Congress and the CARES funds really do run out on December 30'', then each of our positions is going to have to take a look at what they do, you know, whether it's adding job functions in on a regular basis, but then that also means something else might not be able to get done. But HR (Human Resources Department) already has a process in place, that when people do need to alter a job description, they're able to take care of that. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you. Any other input on that, Mr. Brilhante, as far as revising or modifying the descriptions of current Park Caretakers or DPW workers as it relates to, you know, the real-time situation related to COVID? MR. BRILHANTE: Yes, as Ms. Sako alluded to, we do have a regular program, where we go in and we look at the scope of work. We look at the position Page 16 FC-39 September 1,2020 description for the majority of our County employees, and we do an assessment and we evaluate what the current needs are, what the current functions of the positions are, and we also try to ensure that they're in the proper class of when it comes to salary. So as COVID transitions and the requirements and the needs of what we're responding to this pandemic changes, almost daily, we're having to do that. Right now we're fortunate because Finance is very aggressive. They're doing a great job with getting us you know, ensuring that we have access to the CARES money. But if those funds start to diminish or run out at the end of the year, then we're going to have to be creative. There's definitely discussion on the State level regarding possible furloughs moving forward, you know, for State employees. Fortunately, our budget projections have been fairly, how should I say, conservative. And we do an annual budget, so we're in pretty good shape on the County level getting us through this fiscal year. But there's no way to really have a crystal ball and make a determination on how the next fiscal year is going to be. So I think there's going to be additional discussion, there's going to be additional consideration. But going forward, we're on of it. You know, for the most part we have a good relationship. You know, we can talk with to the unions. We can have that discussion. You know, departments heads are in continuous contact with us. And it's been pretty effective, you know, up to date. It's been crazy, don't get me wrong, but I think for the most part everybody's kind of been on the same page. And going forward, we're just hoping for understanding and continued communication to address the problem. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Mr. Brilhante and Deanna. Really that's what this communication was, was just to really open up communication. You know,just to remind my colleagues, every quarter Mr. Brilhante puts this report together, of our 89-day contracts. Deanna, we put the monthly summary together. I think that's where both myself and Ms. Kierkiewicz was kind of looking at, this. We see it kind of come in pieces together, and it took this communication of us compiling all of the communications as it relates to the 89-day contract, the transfer of funds. And so I do, Deanna, thank you so much. Kind of a hot seat right there, but true to form, polished responses. And then, Mr. Brilhante, really, thank you for all your work, really looking at our employees here at the County because they truly are our greatest assets. With that, Chair, I yield. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. Anyone else? MR. RICHARDS: Chair? Richards. CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Mr. Richards. Page 17 FC-39 September 1,2020 MR. RICHARDS: Thank you. Thanks, Deanna. You know me when it comes to numbers and budget. And in reflecting on some comments that were made concerning looking at the big picture, we're now in September. Collections for real property tax, where are we with those? MS. SAKO: We're still waiting for a few lockbox and, not lock-box, but online payments to be processed. However, we are consistent with where we have been in the past as a percentage of our budget, so we're in good shape. We did take into account, you know, eight percent, you know, that wouldn't be able to pay. But by everyone paying on time, and we're very appreciative of that, it's allowing us to help the entities that maybe couldn't all pay on time. So some of the businesses or some of those in the tourism industry that maybe couldn't pay on August 20'', it did allow us to work out payment plans with them so that they can have longer to pay. MR. RICHARDS: So generally speaking, we're on par with previous history. MS. SAKO: We are, yes. MR. RICHARDS: Okay. So we're not facing any major shortfall right now? MS. SAKO: Right now, no. MR. RICHARDS: Okay, great. That's good to hear. Chair, I yield. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Richards. Anyone else in Hilo? MR. CHUNG: Maile? CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Chair Chung. MR. CHUNG: You know, again, Deanna, on a broader scale, I mean, are there any comments you want to make as to what we should be looking out for? What some of the pitfalls are that we might have to anticipate? MS. SAKO: You know, this is a challenge—it's going to be a challenging area. It is already. It's hard because the State budget continues to change and we're not sure what's going to be pushed down to us. It's hard because Congress hasn't decided about HEROES (Higher Education Relief Opportunities for Students Act) or HEALS (Health, Economic Assistance, Liability and Schools Act) or anything else. We're not counting on it. We go with what we know about because that's all we can do right now. But as we plan for next fiscal year, fiscal year 2022, it becomes more challenging because we really don't see the end in sight yet. So when the economy start to stabilize, we'll have better figures. Page 18 FC-39 September 1,2020 But we have a lot of different plans. We're obviously monitoring the figures on all funds right now. So I think the one thing that we can all do is be ready to change and adapt as needed. But we are watching, and departments do know that they need to, you know, really monitor their spending this year. We already have our ERC, or our Expenditure Review Committee, that we've had for a long time now, back from when Bill Takaba was Finance Director. Where, you know, we look at filling, buying equipment, or doing professional services contracts, and travel, which is nonexistent right now. You know, we do look at all of those things, so that has to be a real need. And one thing that committee has done, is it's really made the departments think before they even ask. Because, you know, can I justify it to the committee? So we're already looking at that. Departments are trying to minimize their spending. Really, everybody's focus right now is now on the virus and keeping everyone safe; so because of that, you know, spending is down. We hope to be in good shape at the end of the year so that we can continue to maintain all the services that are required. MR. CHUNG: Alright. Thank you, Deanna. Hey, Bill? Bill, are you still around? MR. BRILHANTE: Yes. MR. CHUNG: Yeah, I have a few questions too, and they relate to these 89-day contracts. You know, I know it's not completely germane to these—our upcoming budget, but I've got to ask. You know how I feel and others feel about some of these 89-day contracts, right? I don't think we've made it a secret. It has raised the hackles of at least three, perhaps even four or more, members of this Council. You know, I see a slew of these things related to COVID, and those are all understandable. But I'm just wondering though, are these positions or these persons who occupy these positions entitled to unemployment benefits after the terminations? MR. BRILHANTE: Well, it's—we've seen instances where some employees previous employees who were on a contract with the County, have submitted requests for unemployment benefits through the State, and that determination, you know, whether it's approved or not approved, has been initially made by the State. But then once it gets to our attention, the County has very proactive and engaging and filing a response or an appeal to that determination,just to kind of offset anything that, you know, it's, again we don't think it's deemed appropriate for the scope of work that they're doing for the County. So we've been pretty proactive with those types of requests for unemployment benefits. MR. CHUNG: Would it violate personnel interest for you to release the information as to who has been, maybe not applied but who has received Page 19 FC-39 September 1,2020 unemployment benefits? And the reason why I ask that, and I think you answered it earlier, that nothing would preclude them from filing for it, and it's out of your hands as it relates to the approval. But you know,we're in a really, really bad situation. People are suffering all over the place, you know,just scrambling for their unemployment benefits. These are people who really deserve it. And I'm not saying that these 89-day contract hires don't deserve it, but if guys are getting paid are retired. are getting paid these 89-day contracts and then filing for unemployment, that's not nice. I mean, and that's not your kuleana. I know that Bill. But we've got to get a better handle on this thing. Are you able to provide us that information, specifically? MR. BRILHANTE: In response, Mr. Chung, that's not information that we at HR track. That's information, I think, that goes to Finance, and I'm sure Ms. Sako can probably provide a better response regarding that. I know my staff has had conversations with Ms. Sako's staff regarding situations. I'm not sure any of them pertains specifically to 89-day contract hires, so I can't say definitively as to whether or not an 89-day contract hire has submitted for unemployment benefits. You know, again, that's not something that our office, our division, our department, tracks, but I'm sure we can get some information to you. And I'm going to defer to Ms. Sako. MR. CHUNG: Well, I'll just leave it at that for now. We can have further discussion either in private or in public. But I thinkI don't think too many people would disagree that these 89-day contacts, unless we have some kind of checks and balances on them, really are susceptible to abuses. You know, there's no way, particularly for the high-end ones, right? You know, I did make comment. And I'm not picking on anybody or anything like that, but we had some 89-day contracts where guys were you know, under two of those contracts, making more than, I would say, 50 percent of our workforce of working all year, without any statement as to the need or measurable outcomes. We had no idea, And it makes it very,very difficult for us to put hands around this thing. I know it's not you or Bill, but I'm just saying that. You know, if you and Bill can put your heads together and kind of figure out a way where we could avoid or address some of my concerns, because if not, we're left to our own imaginations as to what people do under these 89-day contracts. And sometimes my imagination is farther that I'd like it to go. Anyway, I just had to make those comments. We'll have further discussion later on. Thanks, you guys. MR. BRILHANTE: You're welcome. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Chair Chung. Anyone else in Hilo? MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Chair, I have a question. Page 20 FC-39 September 1,2020 CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Go ahead, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Maile. CHR. DAVID: You're welcome. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you for this. You know, just speaking to the original intent, which was to educate the public. That I think it's incredibly important to actually add the documents that we have access to but make it very easy for the public to find it. So I appreciate the Communication 1040.1 that was just handed out amongst the Council. That would be the document that the public would be looking for if they were to look for publicly available documents online later. In looking over this list I mean looking at this, and I'm seeing some double-ups as far as their names, which is showing that every three months some of the people are coming back. I mean, the number of disinfection assistants and sanitization assistants is staggering. I mean, how many—can you give me a number on how many we have right now working for the County, under the 89-day contracts? I mean, I can count. I counted at least 60 in a two-month period. I can keep going. MR. BRILHANTE: Yeah. You know, generally—what we're doing with the sanitation disinfectant is I think we're tasking two departments. Parks and Rec. has 28 or so, I believe. And don't specifically quote me on the numbers. I'm just giving estimation of the last numbers I know. Twenty-eight at Parks and Rec. And their primary responsibility is to go and sanitize all the County parks, facilities, and buildings, So, they're specifically tasked with that. And then on the other hand, we have Department of Public Works. They have sanitation, a specialist as well, and they're primarily tasked with ensuring that all of the County, the general County facilities, a lot of street signal lights, the more broader use. The sidewalks up town and down town Hilo. You know, the areas of more broad use of the public. They're responsible for ensuring that those areas are sanitized on a daily basis. The reason why we're seeing double-ups is because the initial batch of sanitation disinfectants were hired more than 90 days ago. You know, at the start, that was one of the first things that the Mayor instituted was the sanitation disinfectant crew going through countywide. And those 89-day contracts are now expiring, so when they expire, we give them their notice that their contract has expired. We do the separation, you know, they don't work for a day or so, and then we bring them back on for another 89 days. So that's probably some of what you're seeing, is that we're starting to get to that process where we're going into the second 89 days. You know, hopefully that will take us through the end of the year. And it's real fortunate because through Page 21 FC-39 September 1,2020 the 89 days we can do an assessment. You know, "Is this an individual a good worker, not so good of a worker? And then, you know, a determination can be made by the supervisor as to whether or not, yeah,now we want to bring them back on for another 89 days. And that's the benefits of doing it this way. So I think what you're seeing, is you're seeing the second wave of contracts for these particular employees. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, and that falls in line of what you said earlier. And I did check the dates, you're at three months plus, in between different departments hiring the assistants. It's just a staggering amount of them. And then I don't see on here a cost. Do we not share the cost? Is that not a public you know, the 89-day contract award amount? MR. BRILHANTE: You know, under the HRS, we're not allowed to specifically identify a County employee salary. We can give a salary range, but in this case because it's contract, it's not—we don't allow for the specific identification of the salaries. I can give you a general, what would be of what they make. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: If you're not allowed to share itoh yeah, give me a general. What is our general expenditure on disinfection assistants and sanitization assistants? MR. BRILHANTE: You know, I think initially they started at about—they're anywhere between $16 to $20 or so an hour. Again, no benefits, no retirement, no sick leave, no vacation. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: And they're working 40 hours a week? MR. BRILHANTE: That's my understanding. Some may work more, I know with the contact tracers. You know, for Department of Civil Defense, because they're running a seven-day operation, they tend to be qualified for overtime, but that's due to the nature of their responsibilities for them. You know, flights get in at 9:30 at night. They have to get all those names, ensure that proper cellphone numbers are collected and the like, and ensure that individuals themselves are properly quarantined and all that. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I think that the work that they're doing is incredibly important, and I'm not going to argue with you on that part. Just the overall question of the amount and the cost to the County, and this is coming under the CARES funding. And Deanna is shaking her head "yes." You know, which section of the HRS did you quote that this comes from under these 89-day contracts? MR. BRILHANTE: Seventy-six, seventy-seven. Page 22 FC-39 September 1,2020 MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Seventy-six, seventy-seven. I'm going to make that my homework for this evening. Then, follow-up question regarding unemployment. So the County is self-insured, correct, when it comes to unemployment? MS. SAKO: Correct. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: You know, a questioned I've had, and this kind of goes statewide and county. But when we start to see spikes in COVID cases, even amongst our own staff, and from what I understand if a person contacts COVID, or their spouse, or their partner, or their child, or they're a caretaker for someone with COVID, they're actually eligible for unemployment. That's how I read the PUA (Pandemic Unemployment Assistance) and unemployment information on the State website. MS. SAKO: That may be for some businesses, but that doesn't apply to us because there's other federal laws that apply to government and larger organizations. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, so let's say someone did get COVID and they go on leave for two weeks, you know, do the mandatory 14-day quarantine, then what happens with their pay? You know, how does that work at our level, the County level? MS. SAKO: So—go ahead. MR. BRILHANTE: Oh, sorry. As forgenerally, right now, the current policies we have in place is one, we have a County policy,where if an individual is suspected of or had prolonged close contact with an individual who tested positive for CODIV-19, we're affording five days of administrative leave, and the thought process behind that is to have their employee go get tested, and they have the five days to get the results. Under the Federal Emergency Family Leave Act,which was enacted by the Congress couple of months ago, the employee is afforded sick leave—well, administrative leave. I hate to use the term administrative leave. But they're afforded paid leave for up to very similar to the Family Leave Act, up to 12 weeks for the year. Where they can go in they put their request in; you know, it's a—two-thirds of their pay is covered, very similar to the Family Leave Act, by their employer, us, the County, and the remaining one-third will come either out of the sick leave or their vacation leave. And then if there's a you know, anything longer than that and they run out of leave, I mean they run out of the 12-week period of time, then they can use their personal leave, whether it be their personal sick leave or vacation leave. And then at the very end, if it keeps going through that direction, at the very end there's what would be authorized leave without pay. Page 23 FC-39 September 1,2020 MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: And so is that accounted for in our budget or is that going to be an extra expense for us? MS. SAKO: So generally it's accounted for in the budget. What probably wasn't accounted for in the budget is it will determine how many people are out and if we would have hire additional staff to cover those positions. But right now each department is making it work. You know, if someone's out for a couple weeks, then the other staff kind of pitch in to help out, so we're not paying additional on that. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. It just it occurred to me that we have more and more cases popping up. And so as people start to go on leave or as they're getting tested—and unfortunately, I don't know why the test result takes five days. In California, it takes 24 hours, and there are as quick as ten minutes. But we have this five-day hold in which you're stuck in a limbo of waiting for your test results. But obviously, you shouldn't be back at work if you're getting tested if you think you have it. But just looking at that and looking down the line and seeing that this will affect us. You know, I think the Planning Department had a scare, although it was very removed as far as the possibility of even getting COVID , you know, there was a chance. That was the entire department. So when we look at things like that and we look at being self-insured as a County, I was just going to try to touch on how that would affect us. MS. SAKO: Yeah, our employees probably are not going to fall into that unemployment for being out on the sick. They'll fall under this other federal program that Mr. Brilhante was talking about. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: There's a lot of questions too, I mean, amongst everyone, about what happens financially when someone that went out on COVID. Especially if they get it, and then a week later their spouse gets it, and then their children were to get it, you're looking at a very extended period of time for them to be out of work. MS. SAKO: Yeah, but I think those laws apply more to people who are working for private businesses rather than for the County. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Yeah, that's the way I kind of saw it. Just again, so if someone gets it in the County, been out for two weeks, and then let's say their spouse gets it, they're home for a month,what happens? MS. SAKO: The two weeks they're out is covered by the federal leave. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. Page 24 FC-39 September 1,2020 MS. SAKO: And the other two weeks, Mr. Brilhante might have to help me clarify. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: It's good(inaudible). MS. SAKO: Because if they're quarantining from their spouse and they're not together and they just had it, then they may or may not be able to return to work. The other thing we've been doing, is for maybe in that situation where the employee themselves is not sick, but for whatever reason they can't be at work, we're definitely beefing up our work from home type of procedures. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. MS. SAKO: You know, increasing the number of laptops we have available. Not every job can do that, definitely. But for the ones that can, then some are being authorized to work from home. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. Thank you, I appreciate the information. Regarding some of Aaron Chung's questions, I think there is a couple of very specific people that it was driven towards, and we've all had our questions about that. But I appreciate the very political, tactful style of approach for that. Thank you for clarifying the HRS section. I will go look that up. And I appreciate the ability of us to shed light on this for the public. So mahalo for your time. Thank you, Chair. MS. POINDEXTER: Madam Chair? This is Val. I have a follow-up question. CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Yes, go ahead, Ms. Poindexter. Thank you, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. MS. POINDEXTER: Thank you, Madam Chair. And I think Council Chair Aaron Chung brought up a good point, about collecting unemployment. So, Bill, when we hire these contractors, we're providing them with the supplies, right? They're not bringing their own things, right? MR. BRILHANTE: That's correct. We require them to bring their own rubber boots, but we provide all the PPEs, the Personal Protective Equipment. MS. POINDEXTER: Okay. Do you give rubber boots to regular employees too then? No, they bring their own? MR. BRILHANTE: The current employees, my understanding is and depending on the scope of the job itself, we do, in some instances. Page 25 FC-39 September 1,2020 MS. POINDEXTER: Some instances you do provide and some you don't to our regular employees. Because our regular employees a lot of times they buy their own workboots, correct? MR. BRILHANTE: They do, but Collective Bargaining Agreement, or whether it would be UPW (United Public Workers) or HGEA (Hawai`i Government Employees Association), there's generally language in there which specifically identifies the level of equipment that the County has to provide to their employees. MS. POINDEXTER: Okay. But for the contract—because I'm trying to get down to the point where when it goes to the State unemployment—because I've dealt with this before. On certain contracts, when it was written badly enough, that they determined that they should have been employees versus contractors that, you know because we're providing them with the supplies to do the work. We're giving them the hours of operation, and we're telling them where they've got to go, correct? So my point—the point I'm getting to is, when they go to the unemployment and apply for this, they can get unemployment because the State will determine whether or not they should have been regular employees versus the contractor. I've seen in some cases where some organizations, that the State went back and charged them back-taxes for the amount of time they had that person on the contract, that should have been an employee, and the organization had to pay that back. I know that happened before. Has that happened to us before on any of—like, have we experienced any of that yet? MR. BRILHANTE: You know, Ms. Poindexter, I think we've experienced those types of situations, but it's been more as it relates to workers compensation, as to whether or not an employee qualifies for workers compensation if they're a contracted employee. That's generally the scope of what we've had to address that issue. Personally, I haven't had any instances, again, with the 89-day contract, where an employee is applying for unemployment benefits, because they were no longer you know, their 89-day contract expired. So I can't directly answer that question. But again, you know, the situation you described to me has occurred in the workers comp. arena. MS. POINDEXTER: Yeah. MS. VILLEGAS: And I haven't seen it in the unemployment arena. MS. POINDEXTER: Yeah. So that—then I wonder why we're not going the temporary hire versus contract. I don't know. I've got to look into what have we experienced because of that and some things that we've not done right, and contracts that would end up costing us more money in the long-run. But that's Page 26 FC-39 September 1,2020 where I was going with that. Because I know that when we provide you know, there's aI think there's a place online you can look; you know, what is a contractor versus an employee? You know, that's how the State will determine whether or not they should have been an employee versus a contractor. So, that's all I'm getting at. Because I've experienced some organizations having to pay back, and I just don't want the County to be in that situation, as well. And like you said the work comp., already they're addressing that, and hopefully you guys are looking into it, so I appreciate that. Okay, I yield at this time, Madam Chair. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Poindexter. Anyone else in Hilo? No? Alright, before we end this one, I have just one question. Thank you for that list on Communication 1040.1. And maybe this is a question for—Mr. Brilhante, on the very top of that list there's two positions, one office assistant and not exactly the very top, second from the top—and drafting assistant. Does that mean that there's two 89-day contracts for one person? Two different positions? MR. BRILHANTE: Ms. David, thanks. You know, that's a contract. What happened is, again that's another situation where the individual was brought on an 89-day contract and they were specifically performing the task of an office assistant. They were doing more internal work for the Department of DEM (Department of Environmental Management). That 89-day time-period expired, so we separated the services of that employee. And this time when DEM brought that employee back, they brought her back to specifically amend and redraft some of DEM's Rules and Regulations. And what makes this individual unique is that she was previously with the Office of Corporation Counsel; and she was the attorney for DEM during her tenure with Corporation Counsel, so she has a keen working knowledge of what their requirements are, what their rules are. And I think she's been very effective for them, is my understanding. And that's the justification for her name being listed twice. CHR. DAVID: Twice, I see. But there's only one 89-day contract? MR. BRILHANTE: Correct. CHR. DAVID: Okay. MR. BRILHANTE: With the County, we cannot have one employee, and I think I just had this discussion with Mr. Richards last week, is the employee cannot be in two separate contracts, generally, with the County for employment. CHR. DAVID: Okay. No, no, I was just wondering because there is two—same person with two different—listed in two different positions. So thank you very much for that explanation. MR. BRILHANTE: Thank you. Page 27 FC-39 September 1,2020 CHR. DAVID: And also, Director Sako and Mr. Brilhante, thank you for your explanation and taking the time to review all of the questions from the Council Members today, and I appreciate your patience. Other than that, all those in favor of filing Communication 1040, please say "aye." Vote on Comm. 1040: The motion to close file on Comm. 1040 was carried by Filed the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz, Lee Loy, Poindexter, Richards, Villegas, and Chair David—8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Eoff— 1. Excused: None. CHR. DAVID: Mr. Clerk, can we this is going to be really quick, can we move on to Resolution 710-20, please? ORDER OF The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, RESOLUTIONS: Order of Resolutions. Res. 710-20: AUTHORIZES THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TO ENTER INTO NEGOTIATIONS FOR THE ACQUISITION OF LAND OR A CONSERVATION EASEMENT FOR ALL OR A PORTION OF THE PROPERTY IDENTIFIED AS TAX MAP KEY: 9-5-010:026 IN THE AHUPUA`A OF KAWALA, DISTRICT OF KAT, PURSUANT TO CHAPTER2, ARTICLE 42, HAWAII COUNTY CODE 1983 (2016 EDITION, AS AMENDED) The County seeks to acquire the Manaka`a Fishing Village Property in whole or conservation easement to conserve precious cultural, natural, and agricultural resources. The parcel was listed as the number one highest priority for purchase in the 2019 Annual Report of the Public Access, Open Space, and Natural Resources Preservation Commission. Reference: Comm. 1035 Intr. by: Ms. David Motion to Approve: Ms. Lee Loy moved to recommend adoption of Res. 710-20. Seconded by Ms. Villegas. CHR. DAVID: Then I would actually like someone to entertain a motion to postpone this matter to the call of the Chair. Briefly, it's due to the request of the parties to postpone this resolution until they advise us to proceed. So, would someone be so kind? Page 28 FC-39 September 1,2020 Vote on Motion to Ms. Lee Loy moved to postpone Res. 710-20 to the call Postpone: of the Chair. Seconded by Mr. Richards and carried by (Approved) following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz, Lee Loy, Poindexter, Richards, Villegas, and Chair David—8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Eoff— 1. Excused: None. CHR. DAVID: Mr. Clerk, the last item on the agenda, Resolution 715-20. Res. 715-20: AUTHORIZES THE GRANT OF EASEMENT FOR UTILITY PURPOSES AT KOHOLALELE, DISTRICT OF HAMAKUA, COUNTY AND STATE OF HAWAII, TAX MAP KEYS: 4-2-005:001 (POR.), AND 4-2-005:005 (POR.) TO HAWAII ELECTRIC LIGHT COMPANY, INC. The Hawaii Electric Light Company seeks to increase its interest from a Revocable Rights of Entry Agreement to a grant of easement in exchange for a payment of$26,300 to continue maintenance of the utility poles and lines providing service to its customers. Reference: Comm. 1042 Intr. by: Ms. David (B/R) Vote on Res. 715-20: Ms. Poindexter moved to recommend adoption of (Approved) Res. 715-20. Seconded by Mr. Richards and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz, Lee Loy, Poindexter, Richards, Villegas, and Chair David—8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Eoff— 1. Excused: None. BILLS FOR The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, ORDINANCES: Bills for Ordinances. (There were none.) CHR. DAVID: Council Members, may I have a motion to adjourn? Page 29