Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN PC 2021/01/05 2020-2022Committee on Planning l't Session Hawaii County Building 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, Hawai i January 5, 2021 CALL TO The regular meeting of the Committee on Planning was called to order at ORDER: 12:29 p.m., in the Council Chambers, Hilo, by Ms. Ashley L. Kierkiewicz, Chair. ROLL CALL: Present: Ms. Ashley L. Kierkiewicz, Chair Ms. Rebecca Villegas, Vice Chair (via videoconference from Kona) Mr. Aaron S. Y. Chung, Member Ms. Maile Medeiros David, Member (via videoconference from Kona)(came in later) Mr. Holeka Goro Inaba, Member (via videoconference from Kona) Mr. Matt Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Member Ms. Heather L. Kimball, Member Ms. Susan L. K. Lee Loy, Member Mr. Herbert M. "Tim" Richards, III, Member (came in later) 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: The following individuals registered to speak and came forward when called by the Chair: Tiffany Hunt: Cory Harden: Diane Blancett-Maddock Janice Palma-Glennie: David Blancett-Maddock: Steve Hirakami: Sidney Fuke: Comm. 44, in opposition. Bill 5 (Comm. 17); and Comm. 44, in opposition. Comm. 44, in opposition. Bill 5 (Comm. 17), and Comm. 44, in opposition. Comm. 44, in opposition. Comm. 44, in support. Comm. 44, in support. Stephen Bell: Comm. 44, in opposition. PC -1 January 5, 2021 Wayne De Luz: Comm. 44, in opposition. Peter Eising: Comm. 44, in opposition. Joel Cooperson: Comm. 44, in opposition. Ken Van Bergen: Comm. 44, in support. Tom Bierlein: Comm. 44, comment. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thanks so much for your testimony. At this time, I will be closing public testimony and moving on to business of the day. Mr. Clerk, if we could start with Bill 5, please? 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: BILLS FOR The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, ORDINANCES: Bills for Ordinances. Bill 5: AMENDS CHAPTER 25, ARTICLE 2, DIVISION 6, OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE 1983 (2016 EDITION, AS AMENDED), RELATING TO USE PERMITS The Windward and Leeward planning commissions forward favorable recommendations for this amendment to the Zoning Code, which would decrease the applicable planning commission's time to approve or deny an application for a Use Permit from 90 to 60 days, and also clarify certain procedural matters. Reference: Comm. 17 Intr. by: Ms. Kierkiewicz (B/R) and Comm. 17.1: From former Planning Director Michael Yee, dated December 1, 2020, transmitting the draft transcript from the Leeward Planning Commission's October 15, 2020, meeting. ; and Comm. 17.2: From former Planning Director Michael Yee, dated December 1, 2020, transmitting the draft transcript from the Windward Planning Commission's November 5, 2020, meeting. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Can I have a motion to forward Bill 5 to the Council with a positive recommendation? Motion to Approve: Ms. Lee Loy moved to recommend passage of Bill 5 on first reading. Seconded by Mr. Richards. Page 2 PC -1 January 5, 2021 CHR KIERKIEWICZ: I had a correspondence with the Planning Department this morning. There is a companion measure to amendments to Chapter 25 that are coming before the Council at our next committee meeting. And so there has been a request put forth by the department to postpone this measure to the next committee meeting so that we can have a full discussion with all of the context and details related to amendments to Chapter 25. I know that Deputy Director Jeff Darrow is heading over from the Planning Department as we speak, but if there are no questions or issues, I would like to entertain a motion to postpone. Motion to Postpone: Ms. Lee Loy moved to postpone Bill 5 to January 19, 2021. Seconded by Mr. Richards. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Deputy Director Darrow, I've explained to my colleagues that we have another item related to amendments to Chapter 25 coming before this body at the next committee meeting and that in order to have a robust and comprehensive discussion about these amendments, it would be best to take up both measures at the same time. Do you have anything else to add? Okay. Any discussion on the motion before us? MS. LEE LOY: Chair, if I may? CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Yes please, go ahead. MS. LEE LOY: Yeah, you know, everybody knows I'm a firm believer of good information. It helps us make good decisions, and if we're not complete with this application, I'll be supporting the motion to postpone this matter to our next committee meeting. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Anyone in Kona? MR. INABA: Chair, this is Holeka. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Aloha. MR. INABA: I just have a question. I did get a chance to read through this yesterday and I called the Planning Department. Could you just share what exactly, I mean, just a summary of why we're postponing this? CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Mr. Darrow, do you want to come forward and elaborate? Page 3 PC -1 January 5, 2021 MR. INABA: Thank you. (Note: At this time, Deputy Planning Director Jeff Darrow came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. DARROW: Aloha, Chair and members of the Hawaii County Council. Jeff Darrow with the Planning Department. The main reason that we're asking for the continuance is that originally when these two bills we had two bills that were relating to use permits that were together that went forward before the commission. And during the process, one of them got delayed because of a request to make some changes. So one finished and was sent up to Council. The other one is now with Council. And so we think it would be more appropriate to address them both at the same time. One is relating to some minor changes, housekeeping changes for the use permit overall; and the other one is having to do with specific use permit requirements for medical facilities; chiropractic, massage, and acupuncture. So it would be beneficial to approach them together. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Deputy Darrow. MR. DARROW: Thank you. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Mr. Inaba, any other questions? MR. INABA: Mahalo, I yield. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Anyone else in Kona? How about in Hilo? Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder? MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Well, thank you for being here Jeff. Is Zendo here today? CHR KIERKIEWICZ: He's participating via Zoom. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Oh, he's here via Zoom? CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Yes. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, thank you. Page 4 PC -1 January 5, 2021 CHR KIERKIEWICZ: No problem. Any other questions or comments related to the motion to postpone Bill 5 to January 19'h committee meeting? Seeing none, we have a motion on the floor, all in favor please say "aye." Vote on Motion The motion to postpone Bill 5 to January 19, 2021, to Postpone: was carried by the following voice vote. (Approved) Ayes: Committee Members Chung, David, Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas, and Chair Kierkiewicz — 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Motion carries. Bill 5 is postponed to January 19' Thank you. Mr. Clerk, moving on to the next measure, Bill 6 please? Bill 6: AMENDS ORDINANCE NO. 10-32 WHICH RECLASSIFIED LANDS BY CHANGING THE DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION FROM SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL — 1,000 SQUARE FEET (RS -7.5) AND MULTIPLE -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL — 1,000 SQUARE FEET (RM -1) TO MULTIPLE -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL — 1,500 SQUARE FEET (RM -1.5) AT KUKUAU 1sT, SOUTH HILO, HAWAII, COVERED BY TAX MAP KEYS: 2-4-025:048,053 AND 080 (Abblicant: Ikaika Ohana: formerly Giambaolo "Paul" Boschetti) (Area: 5.5 Acres) The Windward Planning Commission forwards its favorable recommendation for this amendment, which would allow revisions or time extensions to five conditions to the existing change of zone ordinance. The new applicant proposes to build a 64 -unit affordable housing development with a community center and garden, laundry facilities, and a 116 -stall parking lot, to be located on Kapiolani Street across from the Police Department's Hilo Headquarters. Reference: Comm. 18 Intr. by: Ms. Kierkiewicz (B/R) ; and Comm. 18.1: From former Planning Director Michael Yee, dated December 1, 2020, transmitting the draft transcript from the Windward Planning Commission's November 5, 2020, meeting. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Can I have a motion to forward Bill 6 to the Council with a positive recommendation? Motion to Approve: Ms. Lee Loy moved to recommend passage of Bill 6 on first reading. Seconded by Mr. Richards. Page 5 PC -1 January 5, 2021 CHR KIERKIEWICZ: I believe that we have representatives for the applicant and landowner on Zoom. If we could enter them into the meeting room? And I invite them to provide a summary of the matter before us. We also have Deputy Director Jeff Darrow and Planner Christian Kay here to answer questions and provide more information. (Note: At this time, Carlsmith Ball Attorney Katherine Garson and Representative for Ikaika Ohana James Rock came forward via Zoom to address the members of the Committee.) MS. GARSON: Good afternoon, Katherine Garson from Carlsmith Ball. I represent the property owner, Paul Boschetti. And also on the Zoom meeting is James Rock. He's here for the applicant, Ikaika Ohana, there he is. Just real briefly, I know you all have a very busy day today. So, the amendment is essentially a time -extension request. So for a five-year extension of the construction period. And also a revision to the parking requirements. The former project was a 100 -unit multi -family market -rate complex. Ikaika Ohana is proposing a one -hundred percent affordable housing 64 -unit complex. And Mr. Rock can give you more information about the project. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Ms. Garson. Aloha Mr. Rock, do you hear me? MR. ROCK: I can hear you, can you hear me okay? CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Yes, perfect. If you could please provide an overview of the request that is before us? MR. ROCK: Sure, not a problem. In general, as Katherine mentioned the project is a 64 -unit affordable housing project, and we're very excited about this opportunity for the community. Part of our development process is to go through and request a zoning amendment so that we have the additional time required, so that the plans for our project can be submitted through the Planning Department for planning approval and some other considerations that we have in support of affordable housing. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. And I would just like to note that both the Planning Department and Commission had a favorable recommendation for this project. At this time, I want to open it up to questions or comments from my colleagues. Ms. Lee Loy. Page 6 PC -1 January 5, 2021 MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Chair. This question is for the applicant or the applicant's representative. And, you know, I ask this of all matters that come before the Council that you folks have read and agree to the Conditions of Approval. MR. ROCK: Katherine, if I may? MS. GARSON: Yes. MR. ROCK: We have read the conditions. There's one item just as a matter of clarity regarding the parking ratio requirements. If approved and if the project moves forward as the affordable project as it's described, I just want to make it clear that for the total parking requirements on site, it would be 1.5 parking stalls per residential unit. Just the language that appeared in the bill, it appears that it would be additional parking would be 1.5 stalls per resident. So I didn't want it to be interpreted as an additive. So if the County Code requires 1.25 and this additional language says 1.5, that's a grand total of 2.75. That was not the intent. However, if the Planning Department can, they can also confirm that the overall intent for the total parking requirement is 1.5 for the affordable project. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Mr. Rock. Deputy Darrow, would you be so kind as to clarify for the record? MR. DARROW: Thank you, Chair Kierkiewicz. Yes, we confirm that the project, if built as an affordable rental housing project, the only requirements for parking will be the 1.5 parking stalls per multiple family dwelling units. Thank you. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Mr. Darrow. Mr. Rock is that sufficient clarification for you? MR. ROCK: It is, and thank you both. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Ms. Lee Loy, you have the floor. MS. LEE LOY: Yes, thank you. And thank you for clarifying for the record. I don't have any other questions. I will be supporting this application. Ms. Garson, you know, thisI have to put it out there. Affordable housing is something that is very critical for us, so we'll definitely be watching this particular project, and seeing, you know, how you folks achieve this at a hundred percent affordable. I'm really excited about and just some of the nuances that you guys moved through. How much infrastructure was there, just so much, and if that can Page 7 PC -1 January 5, 2021 become a model in the future on where we can continue to put affordable housing units. So Chair, with that I yield. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. Mr. Darrow did you have any further comments? MR. DARROW: If I could just to elaborate a bit. There's been some changes to our conditions to be able to help promote affordable housing or affordable rental projects. And if I can refer to our Condition M, which is our Fair Share condition. You'll see the added language that if the project is built as an affordable housing project that the Fair Share requirements are waived. As well as Condition O, which also waives the Impact Fee Ordinance. If there is one that's ever implemented, that if this is an affordable housing or an affordable rental project, that that particular condition will be waived. Again, in an effort to try to promote affordable housing projects. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you so much, Deputy Director. I appreciate that. Any other questions or comments? Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder? MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Ma'am. My questions are regarding Condition J, which was deleted out of Bill No. 6 which is in front of us. I read through the minutes for your Planning Commission meetings. So there's some discussions, actually fairly robust discussions about what that meant. And in the end it looked like it was a DPW (Department of Public Works) requirement that they look over the plans and come back with whether there's any lighting. And there was some discussion about whether that was a traffic signalization lighting or whether it was street lighting. But what was the outcome of that and why is it deleted out of the bill? MR. DARROW: The police had submitted comment regarding their concerns. The applicant had requested that this condition be deleted. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: The police didn't like the parking situation because they didn't want it to overflow into their parking area, correct? MR. DARROW: Yeah, as well as the request to delete this particular condition for the traffic safely requirements. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. Page 8 PC -1 January 5, 2021 MR. DARROW: But yeah, their concern over the parking was that if there wasn't added parking, that there would be an opportunity or a situation where vehicles may end up parking on Kapi`olani Street or within their parking lot which they didn't want to see happen. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, but Condition J was the lighting? MR. DARROW: Well, yeah. And this is a standard condition that Planning always puts in by request from comments from the Department of Public Works. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. MR. DARROW: We had recommended that this not be deleted. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I noticed, but it has been deleted, so I'm asking. MR. DARROW: So the Planning Commission had approved the deletion of the condition. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: So it was not favorably forwarded, but then you favorably recommended deletion of it? MR. DARROW: Again, as you had mentioned that in review after this project is approved, it will still need to go before the Department of Public Works. Regardless if this condition is deleted, they will still be required to have to go through those reviews by the Department of Public Works. This isn't signalization, or you know, it's just basically traffic lighting. It's safety requirements. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: It could even mean street markings as well, too, correct? MR. DARROW: Yeah, so, I think there was the concern that this could turn into a channelization or signalization, but the reality is this mainly refers to traffic lighting or safety issues. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: That's what I got too, it was a public safety requirement, that's why it's in the DPW MR. DARROW: Yeah, moving forward even though this is deleted, I don't think that that's going to stop the requirement from happening at Public Works. Page 9 PC -1 January 5, 2021 MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: This is something that you always do but you're stepping away from that because we don't think that it will negatively affect us later? MR. DARROW: I'm not sure. I mean the Commission voted to allow the deletion. And with a recommendation from the Director not to delete it. And you know, our message was that even with the deletion, there's a good chance the applicant will still be required to do those improvements. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Public safety requirements, yeah. Not my district but it did catch my eye. MR. DARROW: And it's right in front of the Police Station, right? MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: It is. I'm not thinking people will be illegally parking on the side of the road near the police station. Probably not the best call. But basic requirements like lighting. Not signalization, but lighting I think are good things to stand by, especially in some of the light of the recent resolutions we've passed regarding public safety and complete streets. Second question, SHPD (State Historic Preservation Division), Historical Structure Site 25547. Does that fall in the construction area? I'm just looking at the map. It's pretty close to where this is going to be built. Has that been touched on? It's in the documentation for this. MR. DARROW: If I could bring up Planner Christian Kay. He actually worked on this application. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Yes, thank you. (Note: At this time, Planner V Christian Kay came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. KAY: Thank you, Council Member. Christian Kay, Planning Department. We, over the last couple of weeks received a letter from SHPD after the Planning Commission hearing indicating that there would be no historical properties impacted, no historical impact. So that's not somethingI think was made available to you as it came in after the hearing and after we transmitted all of the communications to you. But that I believe was in December. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, so the site that's listed in here, 25547 does not fall into the area that's going to be turned into a parking lot? MR. KAY: Right, what they determined is there would be no impact in historic resources or structures. Page 10 PC -1 January 5, 2021 MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, because there was something found there, yeah? There's a series of walls and a channel and something that may have comprised a structure at some point. Yeah, SSFM (property management) looked into it. So did SHPD. MR. KAY: Correct. Yeah, and if I recall correctly, it either wasn't on that property or it was where they were proposing to build wasn't going to be near or impacting that site and it was confirmed by SHPD by letter after the hearing. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, thank you for that. Just want to get that on the record, because they look very close as far as just gaging from the two different maps that I had of the property that's going to be developed and the SHPD assessment, they're very close to each other so I'm glad to hear you say that. MR. KAY: Thank you. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, that's all my questions. Thank you, Chair. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. Ms. Kimball. MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Chair. Just a couple of quick questions. Since you brought it up, Mr. Darrow. The Fair Share exemption and the impact fees. That will only apply if the whole project is affordable or only to the units within the project, whatever the outcome may be, that are listed as affordable? MR. DARROW: This is a change that's been happening over the past year, I would say with the Planning Department. And again, in an effort to try to promote affordable housing and affordable rentals. They've looked at, you know, the purpose or the point is to try to make affordable housing more affordable. Whenever you have additional costs on those developments it just makes it less affordable. And so in an effort what the Planning Department is proposing is the affordable units, whether it's the 20 percent or beyond we would look at not requiring the Fair Share fees for those particular units. MS. KIMBALL: But the market rate ones, those fees will be collected. MR. DARROW: Yes. MS. KIMBALL: Great, thank you. And then I wasn't clear on why Item F was stricken regarding the drainage easement. Is that just no longer necessary? Page 11 PC -1 January 5, 2021 MR. KAY: Thank you, Council Member. The answer to this is because this is an amendment to a change of zone ordinance, what we do often times is go through and strike out conditions that have already been completed. In this case, the drainage easement that was granted to the County was completed before they came in for their amendment. MS. KIMBALL: Thank you for helping me come up to speed on some of these things. I do appreciate it. And then just finally for my own clarification to the current owner and the Ikaika Ohana, where—so I want to understand this process, the approval of this plan revision is one of the contingencies for the transfer of this property between you two. Is that my correct understanding or can I just have some clarification on that? MR. ROCK: Overall, the amendment for the zoning coordinates it is the condition for the affordable housing project to be able to move forward. So for us in order to secure that financing from the federal tax credits, state tax credits revolving fund, and other project sources, we do need to have the coordinates approved so that we can move forward with the development as proposed. And that would include the acquisition of the project by the limited partnership from the current property owner. MS. KIMBALL: So if these changes are not made will that transfer still continue or only ifI just want that to be expressly clear. MR. ROCK: They will definitely be negatively impacted because the project would not be able to move forward as contemplated. And so while we continue to pursue affordable housing, and you know, specifically in Hilo, which has a very strong need for the housing, if this ordinance does fail, it carries with it a high degree of risk that this project does not move forward. MS. KIMBALL: Great, thank you very much. I'm interested to hear from the Council Member whose district this property resides in, and with that I'll yield. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Mr. Richards. MR. RICHARDS: Thank you, Chair. We use the term affordable housing, and it's been my experience that that is a very broad statement. And it ties into that AMI (area median income). When we say the whole thing, what AMI percentage is this and who do I ask that to? MR. ROCK: If I may respond on behalf of the developer team, the targeted AMI for the development, it's 64 units total. Sixty-three of those units are targeted for AMI's between 30 percent and 60 percent of the area median income, and then there's one manager's unit. Page 12 PC -1 January 5, 2021 MR. RICHARDS: Okay, so that truly is affordable. Just for—we've had other things come through where it's 140 percent AMI which is not really affordable, characterized. So, I appreciate that. Chair, I yield. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Mr. Richards. Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. Oh, okay, I just want to check in with my colleagues in Kona. Any questions or comments. MS. DAVID: Chair Kierkiewicz, this is Maile. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Hi, Council Chair, go ahead. MS. DAVID: I just wanted clarification. I was listening to the discussion, Mr. Darrow had answered Council Member Kimball's question about whether the Fair Share contribution would not be required for the affordable units only. Is that what he said? Mr. Darrow? MR. DARROW: Yes, Council Chair David. That is correct. If an applicant proposes affordable housing units, we are implementing the deletion of the requirement for Fair Share for those particular units. And again, this is in an effort to try to promote affordable housing or affordable rental units. MS. DAVID: Right, I understand. So that provision you're referring to is the Condition M that says, "Should the property be developed as an affordable rental housing project ... no fair share contribution shall be required." MR. DARROW: Correct. MS. DAVID: Okay. Well, and I guess it's just me, but when I first read this, it just appeared to me that—and I'm glad Ms. Kimball clarified thatIt appeared to me that the housing project itself as a whole, if it was affordable then no Fair Share would be required. So just a clarification for me because I read it differently, and maybe it's only me, but it seemed to say that if the whole project wasn't affordable MR. DARROW: I'm sorry to interrupt. MS. DAVID: No, no, go ahead. MR. DARROW: This was an issue that came up with the Suffolk project, if you folks recall. There was this question of double-dipping that came up, and if you look at the end of Condition M? That's basically what we kept. That's our standard language, and that is that if this project is not an entire affordable housing project, then the end of the condition would be more applicable. Which Page 13 PC -1 January 5, 2021 is basically the units that are proposed for affordable housing would be exempt, but that the applicant would not double -dip in the sense that if they went beyond a certain amount and they received the excess housing credits, it's almost as if you're getting two benefits there. MS. DAVID: Thank you for clarifying. MR. DARROW: Yeah, and so because this project came in as 100 percent affordable housing, we added in the language in the beginning of the condition. MS. DAVID: Awesome, that's great, and thank you for clarifying that. Mahalo, I yield. MR. DARROW: Thank you. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chair. Anyone else in Kona? Okay, seeing none, Vice Chair Chung. MR. CHUNG: Yeah, just a very brief statement, because this development is in the district that I represent. But most of the discussions here are really germane specifically to the district, but entails a broader discussion on planning principles. But as it relates to my district, the district that I represent, this project has been on my radar for many years, and it's something that I support. And you know, we have to tweak a few things here and there, but we need affordable housing in Hilo. That is clear, okay? And whatever we can do to facilitate it, we should try to do it. Now I want to just let you guys know, however, that this project, this property I believe is adjacent to something that we just downzoned. You weren't here Heather, but it was the Vincent Tai property, okay? But those were separate issues. These are separate issues. Vincent Tai's property involved just not fulfilling certain conditions, and to the chagrin or annoyance of neighboring properties. And then they rose up. But this is something that can be really good for Hilo, I believe. Thank you. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Mr. Chung. Seeing as there are no comments or questions, I just want to thank Mr. Rock. I believe early on in my first term we had met to talk about affordable housing solutions, and I really appreciate your perseverance and dedication to helping our island increase the affordable housing inventory, and we are very excited because you have a strong track record of getting things done. So thank you. We have a motion on the floor to send Bill 6 to the Council with a positive recommendation, all in favor please say "aye." Page 14 PC -1 January 5, 2021 Vote on Bill 6: The motion to recommend passage of Bill 6 on first (Approved) reading was carried by the following voice vote. Ayes: Committee Members Chung, David, Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas, and Chair Kierkiewicz — 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Motion carries. Mr. Clerk, before we take up the next matter, I have been asked to call for a five-minute recess. So I am putting the committee in recess. We will reconvene at 1:46 sharp. Thank you. Recess: At 1:41 p.m., the Chair called for a recess. Reconvene: The meeting reconvened at 1:47 p.m. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: At this time, Mr. Clerk, I'd like to take up Comm. 44, please? Return to Order The Chair directed the Committee to return to the order of business. of Rn�ine�� COMMUNI- The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, CATIONS: Communications. Comm. 44: APPOINTMENT OF ZENDO KERN AS PLANNING DIRECTOR From Mayor Mitchell D. Roth, dated December 11, 2020, requesting the Council's review and confirmation. Requires Council Confirmation by: February 5, 2021 (Section 13-8, Hawaii County Charter) CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. May I have a motion to send the appointment of Zendo Kern as Planning Director to the Council with a positive recommendation? Motion to Approve: Ms. Lee Loy moved to recommend confirmation of the appointment of Mr. Kern as Director of the Planning Department. Seconded by Mr. Richards. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: If I could call forward Mayor Roth to provide some opening remarks. And I believe we have Zendo in the Zoom room. Page 15 PC -1 January 5, 2021 (Note: At this time, Mayor Mitch Roth came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MAYOR ROTH: Thank you, Chair Kierkiewicz and members of the Council. Before I get started, if I may ask for the Kona chamber, if they can keep their mics on. We noticed that during the last appointments there was a lot of conversations going on over there. And you know, for just the perception of propriety and to make sure that there's no, you know, anything out there. I'm not saying that anything was said that shouldn't be said. But I think until we have the room fixed and we can have, you know, people outside and the public there, it would be a good idea to keep the microphones on for all the, you know, meetings. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Mayor Roth. Chair David, is that something we can accommodate right now? Keeping the mics on in your conference room? MS. DAVID: Chair, yeah, that's the request and I think in the past when we had our meetings, we were asked to turn our mics off because of people coming in and out and entering the chambers. But if Mayor Roth wants us to leave it on, then that's fine. I believe we can do that if everyone in Hilo leaves theirs on as well. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. If you could be so kind as to maybe turn the volume down, that would be very helpful. That way we can cut back on feedback noise. MAYOR ROTH: And it's, I mean, it's not just for this hearing, I mean for any hearing that you have—it just, you know, we had one of the testifiers talking about, you know, different things with not being able to testify in person; having to use laptops and not being able to hear. You know, and in this chamber everybody's here and there's a whole bunch of other people, so there's not a lot of conversation going on between the council members. And so just until we have that room fixed, I think it makes a lot of sense. We don't want things coming back because of, you know, appearance and things like that. Anyhow, thank you very much for the opportunity to talk. So, Mr. Kern as our Planning Director, we feel very comfortable with Mr. Kern meeting the minimum requirements and having talked to a lot of the council members and having had their assurance that if Mr. Kern meets the minimum requirements, they will vote yes. I feel very positive that you should be moving him forward. Page 16 PC -1 January 5, 2021 According to the Charter under Section 6-7-2, "The Planning Director shall have a minimum of five years of training and experience in a reasonable planning position, or a degree in planning." Not both, it's an "or." So let's start with Mr. Kern's experience and training. First off, he has been a council member. And I don't know if you want to count that for anything, I'm just saying, but he's had two -years of experience as a council member. He's also had sufficient experience on the Planning Commission and Water Commission. All dealing with planning. His business as a Planning Consultant of over six years or around six years more than qualifies him to do that. He has a couple of other things that qualify him, so I don't feel that there's any question whether he meets the requirements. But again, with everybody else, what we did is we interviewed him and we did some vetting. We asked people from around the community, people with some knowhow. Doug Adams, who you'll be meeting later on. I don't know if you want to ask him a bunch of these questions, but he was one the key people. Doug is very meticulous about checking everything, and he made sure that Mr. Kern had his minimum requirements prior to being interviewed. We also asked Mr. Brilhante, who was here, who I'll ask to come up to do, you know, a secondary check to make sure. I've personally reviewed the law and the Charter and feel very comfortable with his ability to meet this requirement. You know, a couple of people have brought up the case with Bobby Jean Leithead-Todd. In that case we were talking about an engineering degree or something similar. That's a very different picture than we're talking about here. As far as her experience, they had no problem. In looking at previous people who have held this position as Planning Director, I think one of the ones that comes to mind is Chris Yuen. His experience in planning—well, his experience was an attorney, and his ability to supervise or have administrative capability had to do with him supervising one person in his office as an attorney. Mr. Kern has far more administrative capacity than some of the other people that have come before this Council that this Council has already set the precedent for. So I feel very comfortable with Mr. Kern taking this position. Mr. Kern is not your typical person that you, you know, runs a County department. We know what typical has got us. We want changes. I mean that's what people have elected us into office to do, is to make really positive changes. The great thing about Mr. Kern when you look at the people who had testified against him, a lot of people who are testifying Page 17 PC -1 January 5, 2021 against him—you know, are testifying because he was on the other side of the Planning Department. That's great. That gives him a deeper understanding. You know, recently my friend Todd Eddins got appointed to the Supreme Court of the State of Hawaii. Todd Eddins, throughout his entire career, he was a defense attorney. He defended murderers, rapists, and thieves. As a prosecutor, you would expect me to jump up and down against his appointment to the Supreme Court. I didn't. Because much like Zendo, I believe that he has the ability to do the job. You know, when there's conflict of interest. People brought up conflicts of interest they would have with other clients. I'm not worried about those conflicts of interest. I'm very familiar with conflicting out of cases as a prosecutor. I'm very familiar with, you know, the ideas of recusing and putting other people to make that decision. But what's really great, some of the people that were testifying against him were testifying against projects that have a secondary mechanism that you have to go through and a third mechanism that you have to go through, i.e., the Planning Commission, and then County Council. So there's a lot of things that, you know, back up the decisions that it's just not putting ink to paper. So I don't feel that there's going to be any issues there. I think we'll be able to go through those things. You know, Zendo has a varied background. A lot of the stuff he's looking at has to do with green building, and being a, you know, sustainable builder. He's one of the first people to build a certified green building in Hawai` i. That's important. You know, as we move forward, we have to think about sustainability. And sustainability has a whole bunch of different avenues. But probably the biggest and most important one for me is the ability to allow the children that grow up here to raise their children here. And quite frankly if we keep on going the way we've gone we're not going to get there. We're already shipping our kids off island. We need to have a different mindset if we're going to do things differently. And I think that's really the beauty of bringing someone like Zendo in. There's a whole bunch of protections for those things that people are worried about, but Zendo has the right mindset. You know, there's a lot been said that he doesn't have a college degree. You know, again I want to hold accountable or hold the promises made to me by different council members that they're going to judge people by the requirements put out by the Charter, and the Charter does not require that degree. It requires the experience. Zendo has more than that experience. Page 18 PC -1 January 5, 2021 The other thing I really appreciate about Zendo, he's a team player. He's willing to meet with other departments. He's already got together with Public Works and with Housing and they've, you know, started having discussions. You know, that's crazy that would be a big deal in our County. But that's a big deal in our County right now, you know, we've been working in silos. We need to have people working together. And at the end of the day, you know, the vision and the direction that that department is coming from me. I know some people had some concerns about with Mr. Rodenhurst about where his funding came from, well my funding came from many of the same places and more. I had funding from all over the place. I had some of the people, you know, testifying against Zendo Kern who funded me. You know, I appreciate their funding but that doesn't make the decisions on how I go forward. Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder talked about unions. I had HGEA (Hawai`i Government Employees Association) support me. HGEA supported me before, and I can tell you that we've had union grievances. I went all the way to hearings and won against the union. Just because people support you doesn't mean that you have to go along with what they say. I believe you do what is right. Integrity is doing what's right no matter who's watching. And I believe that Zendo can do that; I believe Ikaika can do that. In my Administration, they better be doing those things. It goes for everybody. You know, I don't have a group that I necessarily hang around with. I have people who are the poorest of poor. You know, one of the biggest things that I have supported is something called Camp Agape. Through Camp Agape, I've become really good friends with people who've been in prison. So people see me and they have a hard time figuring me out. I have people who have, you know, who've been homeless to people who are multi -millionaires that are supporting and have backed me. And I expect everybody, all my departments to treat those people who are homeless just as well as they treat those people who are millionaires. That's really, you know, the key. The mission I gave to them is I expect you and your departments to treat people the way you'd want your family members treated. And that goes for everybody. And I honestly believe that Zendo can do that. In talking to people at the Planning Department, they feel good. They feel that they're being listened to. I think that's important, but it's also important that our public feels listened to. So with thatoh, I'd like to bring Bill Brilhante up real quickly. I did ask Bill to go over the qualifications and to give an opinion. So much like we did with Mr. Rodenhurst, I'd just like to ask him to come up to give his quick report. Page 19 PC -1 January 5, 2021 (Note: At this time, Human Resources Director William `Bill" Brilhante came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. BRILHANTE: Good afternoon Committee Chair and Council Members. William Brilhante, I'm the Director of the Department of Human Resources. I question that at times like this, but anyway. Yes, as Mayor Roth has stated, I have been asked to do an informal vetting of Mr. Kern's application as the Planning Director, and based on the information that has been provided to my department, I assigned it to my Recruitment and Examination Division. Mr. Kern's work experience far exceeds the requirements of the charter as it relates to this position. However, like I stated earlier, the ultimate determining factor and decision makers are you, you know, as the Council as to whether or not you feel that's he's qualified. And I'm just not going to opine on that, but I just will tell you again, based on the information that's been provided to my staff, Mr. Kern would meet the requirements for the position, or does meet the requirements for the position. I'm happy to answer any questions anybody may have. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Mr. Brilhante. I also want to give the Director Appointee, Mr. Kern the opportunity to address this body. Mr. Kern, go ahead. MR. CHUNG: Madam Chair, just as a matter of personal privilege, and I had my light on for a long time over here. I would personally like Mr. Kern to be here. I don't know how other people feel about it. It's just, it's easier to interact with a person who's here instead of, you know, having a door behind him. I'm going to be making a motion to defer this matter until Mr. Kern can get back, and I'll leave it up to the will of this body. But, I would like to say one thing, though, just as a fact check, real important. With Chris Yuen, there's a lot of parallels, you know, between Zendo and him. But he got his administrative experience because of his time on the Land Board. They looked at the State Statute, and as a member of the Land Board, they used the word "Administrative Head" of something. I just wanted to make sure that you guys know that, so you know, somebody doesn't come back and fact check you guys on that. That's what happened, that's how he qualified. MAYOR ROTH: Thank you, Mr. Chung. And you know, again, Mr. Kern has, you know, the different commissions that he sat on as well as a council member. You know, and when I agreed to allow Mr. Kern when I offered him the position this was a trip that he had planned to see his daughter. And so I thought that we were going to be doing this in December when I agreed to allow him to do this. Page 20 PC -1 January 5, 2021 MR CHUNG: But, I'm just going to make a motion. MAYOR ROTH: I don't have any objection to that. MR. CHUNG: Yeah, I'll let the chips fall as they may. You know, it really comes down to how everyone feels. But I'd like Mr. Kern to be here. I think it's fair to him too, actually. So I'm going to make a motion to defer this to the next committee meeting. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: That's fine with me. I do want to make sure that we are providing Mr. Kern the opportunity to weigh in on that suggestion. Mr. Kern, do you have any objections. MR. KERN: Aloha, Madam Chair, can you hear me okay? CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Yes, we can hear you fine. MR. KERN: I'm fine. If it's the will of the committee to postpone, I'm perfectly fine with that. I do apologize for being away in the mainland here. This is a very important time with my daughter, especially with COVID and less time having together during the year. That's what it's all about, so I'm happy to address the committee in person, and I'm happy to postpone. I'm at the mercy of the committee, thank you so much. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, I appreciate that. MS. LEE LOY: Chair? CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Ms. Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: Just for a point of clarification and even for Mayor Roth or Mr. Brilhante. And I appreciate the summary of the Charter. And I hear you loud and clear. It's administrative experience or a degree in a respective field. But the Charter goes on to say, "And three years of experience in a responsible planning position." And so, just for clarification purposes, and Mr. Brilhante, maybe you can help us with this. Is it concurrent? So it's experience or; and so three and three? Three and three concurrently? MAYOR ROTH: My reading of the Charter, is concurrent if fine. They can be together. MS. LEE LOY: Okay. MR. BRILHANTE: Ms. Lee Loy, again, that's a very good point. Because as everyone, you know, is aware now the language. You know, we had the Page 21 PC -1 January 5, 2021 discussion earlier with Mr. Rodenhurst. And you know, the language for the requirements for the Public Works Director, that sentence was crafted a little bit differently. It was, you know, five years of experience with three being, you know, in administrative capacity. Here, you know, it's a little confusing, the language and the Charter. The specific reading is "The planning director shall have head a minimum of five years of training and experience in a reasonable planning position, or a degree in planning, engineering, architecture, geography, or another planning -related field and three years of experience in a reasonable planning position." So the way that our office looked at this language, we looked at it disjunctively. It was separate, so it was the five-year requirement of a responsible planning position. In addition to that, another three years of which shall have been in a responsible planning position. So that's how we vetted the requirements for this position. And again, that still didn't change our final position that Mr. Kern did meet the minimum requirements. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you for that clarity, and you know, at the end of the day, and for the record, satisfied. Under the terms of the conditions of the Charter, however it's written, "And/or," "or/and" together, Human Resources has determined that the credentials of Mr. Kern has been satisfied. I also wanted to clarify that point regarding the case with Ms. Ford and Ms. Bobby Jean Leithead-Todd, because I too believe that that is being completely modulated and misrepresented to mislead what that case was about. And I've heard Mayor Roth's explanation, but Mr. Brilhante, can you please just maybe expand a little bit. And maybe at more of a grassroots level, for so many of us—not only our council members, but even other people watching who are trying to understand the legalese of it and how it really did come about, and what the final decision of the courts were. MR. BRILHANTE: You know, a very simplistic explanation. You know, I'll be happy to provide that, but if you want an expertise explanation, I think Assistant Corp. Counsel who's now Acting Corp. Counsel, Ms. Renee Schoen is here. And I think I would defer to the higher authority. But my very simplistic explanation as to what occurred in, you know, that previous matter you referred to, Bobby Jean and Brenda Ford was a requirement in the Charter for the Department of Environmental Management Director, was to be certified as an engineer or if not certified, then have a certification in another related field. And that was the issue, you know, so. And that's the requirement of the Charter. The question came up whether or not Bobby Jean's law degree and her previous experience, you know, compiled together met that requirements. Page 22 PC -1 January 5, 2021 That's not the case here. The case here is we're looking at whether or not Mr. Kern meets the requirements for administrative capacity requirements. And like I said, that's how we vetted this, and those were the issues we addressed. And when we look at a lot of the testimony I heard earlier was the fact that a lot of the public who testified said that he didn't meet the experience. However, in the same breath, they continued to oppose him because they felt that he may have conflicts of interest because he was involved in so many planning cases as a consultant. So, you know, it's six of one; half -a -dozen of another. And you know, it's not for me to make that determination. Again, that's the decision for you to make. That's why you guys get paid the big bucks here. But, you know, I just wanted to add that. That was an observation I had about a lot of the testimony I heard. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you for that. I just really wanted to smooth this out because I'm hearing a lot of testimony that tends to be hyper -focused on a measuring stick. And then clouded with different optics. And so, thank you for allowing that to be part of the record. I do too, believe that it would go a long way to have Mr. Kern here to have just a better interaction. We saw that with our previous nominee, Mr. Rodenhurst and being able to look someone in the eye is helpful. So I'll be supporting something like that just to bring a lot more conversation around. What we're hearing is a very important department. I do have one final question, Mr. Brilhante. We changed the terms of the Charter. Whether it's for DEM, Planning, Public Works, and even more recently, the Fire Chief. Has any of their job duties changed? MR. BRILHANTE: You know, you'd have to pose that question to the previous mayors and the current mayor. But as far as I know, none of those duties or responsibilities have changed. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you for that clarity. Chair, I yield at this time. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. MR. CHUNG: There's no second to my motion. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: I know, I didn't formally recognize your motion either. Would you like to make it now? Motion to Postpone: Mr. Chung moved to postpone Comm. 44 to January 19, 2021. Seconded by Ms. Kimball. Page 23 PC -1 January 5, 2021 CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Any discussion on the motion to postpone the appointment of Zendo Kern to Planning Director to January 19''? Any comments from Kona? Okay seeing none? Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, go ahead. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Chair. I'm going to say a simple comment which is, when you have a job interview, you show up. That's it, that's all I'm going to say. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Ms. Kimball, you have your light on, any comments? MS. KIMBALL: I guess, I actually have a comment to Mayor Roth and Mr. Brilhante, but I think with this motion on the floor, it's probably not appropriate anymore. MR. CHUNG: If you want, I can withdraw it, since they're here. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: That's fine, go ahead and withdraw. Withdraw Motion Mr. Chung withdrew his motion to postpone. to Postpone: Ms. Kimball withdrew her second. MS. KIMBALL: Thank you for putting up with my novice behavior. The one question I have, and this kind of stems from what Council Member Lee Loy said about really honing in on the measuring stick. And you're a lawyer. You know that words are important. And particularly within the Planning Department. I've served on the Board of Appeals. We've made decisions based on the definition of one word. Both of you read the qualifications for this as "Experienced in a reasonable planning position." Whereas the word in the Charter is "responsible." And I do think that that is actually critical here and pertains a little bit to the difference with Chris Yuen, I think, in his appointment. So as we proceed on discussions on this, I think that is something that I'm going to need to see clarified. Because for me, a "responsible" position is something different than a "reasonable" planning position. Thank you. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. MR INABA: Chair? CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Yes, Mr. Inaba. MR. INABA: I just want to say, Mr. Kern I just received, let me say for the record today, that I asked you for the same information that I asked Page 24 PC -1 January 5, 2021 Mr. Rodenhurst for, and I only got your email after making the comments earlier at 11:30, an hour after this meeting should have started. So I'm hoping that in the future I can get the information (inaudible) over three weeks. So I have this for the next hearing in two weeks, but I want it to be on the record that I only received it today. MAYOR ROTH: Mr. Inaba I apologize for that. I believe my office sent everything to you. And that was what we're saying to all of our cabinet members that we're sending over the required documents. MR. INABA: Mr. Kern, do you have anything to say to that. MR. KERN: I do yeah, as well as coming from the Administration. You had asked for me for that. I stepped into the Planning Director position, and I've been working from between 5:00 and 6:00 o'clock in the morning all the way through till about 5:00 or 6:00 o'clock in the evening. As well as Saturday and Sunday in preparation for my trip to see my daughter. So I did run out of time. did see that. I'm not going toI saw that, I was like, oh crap, I need to get that to Council Member Inaba. So I did it as promptly as I could, and that's why I apologize for the delay in that. MR. INABA: Mahalo. That's it. Thanks Chair. MS. VILLEGAS: I have a question if I could ask? CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Yes, Ms. Villegas, go ahead. MS. VILLEGAS: Where does that put us within the 60 -day timeframe? CHR KIERKIEWICZ: We have time. We can pitch this to one more committee meeting, and then we have a Council meeting on February 3rd MS. VILLEGAS: Okay, thank you. That's just something I needed to clarify. Motion to Postpone: Mr. Chung moved to postpone Comm. 44 to January 19, 2021. Seconded by Ms. Kimball. CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Any discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor please say "aye." Page 25 PC-1 January 5,2021 Vote on Motion The motion to postpone Comm. 44 to January 19, 2021, to Postpone: was carried by the following voice vote. (Approved) Ayes: Committee Members Chung, David, Inaba, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas, and Chair Kierkiewicz— 8. Noes: Committee Member Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder— 1. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Motion carries. Mr. Kern, we look forward to seeing you in person here in the Chambers on January 19tH MR. KERN: Look forward to being there. Thank you all so very much. CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Mayor Roth. ORDER OF The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, Order RESOLUTIONS: of Resolutions. (There were none.) CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: May I have a motion to adjourn? ADJOURN- There being no further business, at 2:17 p.m., Ms. Lee Loy moved to adjourn the MENT: meeting. Seconded by Mr. Richards and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, David, Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas, and Chair Kierkiewicz—9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Approed \( 2 Ms. As . Kierkiewicz, Chair ( ate) Planning Committee AK/dt Page 26