Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN FC 2021/03/16 2020-2022 Committee on Finance 6th Session Hawaii County Building 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, Hawaii March 16, 2021 CALL TO The regular meeting of the Committee on Finance was called to order at ORDER: 9:03 a.m. in the Council Chambers, Hilo, by Mr. Matt Kaneali`i- Kleinfelder, Chair. ROLL CALL: Present: Mr. Matt Kaneali`i- Kleinfelder, Chair Ms. Heather L. Kimball, Vice Chair Mr. Aaron S. Y. Chung, Member(came in later) (via videoconference from Kona) Ms. Maile Medeiros David, Member (via videoconference from Kona) Mr. Holeka Goro Inaba, Member (via videoconference from Kona) Ms. Ashley L. Kierkiewicz, Member Ms. Susan L. K. Lee Loy, Member Mr. Herbert M. "Tim" Richards III, Member Ms. Rebecca Villegas, Member (via videoconference from Kona) STATEMENTS The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, FROM THE Statements from the Public on Agenda Items. PUBLIC ON AGENDA ITEMS: (There were none.) COMMUNI- The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, CATIONS: Communications. Change Order As directed by the Chair and with no objection from the Council Members, the of Business: following item was taken out of order: Comm. 134: COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT FOR THE FISCAL YEAR JULY 1, 2019 TO JUNE 30, 2020 From Acting County Auditor Maxinne A. Pacheco, dated February 17, 2021, transmitting the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report prepared by the Department of Finance, pursuant to Hawaii County Charter, Section 10-13. ; and Comm. 134.1 From Acting County Auditor Maxinne A. Pacheco, dated February 17, 2021, transmitting a PowerPoint presentation prepared by N&K CPAs, Inc., titled "Financial Audit for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2020." FC-6 March 16,2021 Motion to Close File: Ms. Kimball moved to close file on Comm. 134 and all related communications. Seconded by Mr. Richards. (Note: At this time, Audit Principal Chad Funasaki and Assurance Services Division Senior Manager Andrew Ho, both of N&K CPAs, Inc., came forward to address the members of the Committee.) CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Today we have Mrs. Deanna Sako, and we also have Maxinne, and I believe online—maybe if you could state your names. I know you're here from N&K CPAs, Inc.,just state name your names for us so we know who's out there. And, Deanna, if you guys want to come up to the front? (Note: At this time, Finance Director Deanna Sako came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. FUNASAKL I'm Chad Funasaki, N&K CPAs. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Chad. MR. HO: Andrew Ho, N&K CPAs. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Andrew. Thank you for joining us this morning. Why don't you—I mean, you did the report. This is a yearly report that we do. If you could just go over the you know, give us a quick and dirty breakdown of how it looked this year, how we did; and then if the Council Members have any questions, they can ask them after you're done. MR. FUNASAKL Thank you. I believe our PowerPoint slide that was transmittedI'm not sure if it's going to be on screen, or would you want us to share our screen? CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: If you would like, yes you can share screen. MR. FUNASAKL Okay. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: And we do have your PowerPoint presentation. It was submitted as Communication 134.1. MR. FUNASAKL Okay. Yeah, thank you. Yeah, good morning, Chair Kaneali`i- Kleinfelder and Finance Committee members. Yeah, we're here this morning to present the results of the audit of your Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, for your CAFR. So yeah, we have this slide that we transmitted just to give an overview of how it went. Page 2 FC-6 March 16,2021 (Note: At this time, Mr. Funasaki and Mr. Ho provided a PowerPoint presentation to the members of the Committee. For viewing of the subject presentation, please see the DVD copy of the meeting proceedings on file in the Clerk's Office or the video archives online from the County's homepage at www.hawaiicounty.gov. A hard copy of the presentation is made a part of the record, see Comm.134.1.) CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you for that kind of brief summary. It really you also submitted about 160-page document. That is available online, if anyone is interested or is watching what's going on. There's the full Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for Fiscal Year 2019-2020. And so that is available online, if anyone is watching. But I'm going to yield for now to the other Council Members if there are questions, and then we'll go from there. Thank you for that brief summary. I see no lights in Hilo. Kona, I cannot see right now, but do you have any questions? MS. DAVID: Not at this time, Chair. Thank you. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Ms. David. Okay, Deanna or Maxinne, if you wanted to say anything. MS. SAKO: I just wanted to comment very briefly that I'd like to thank Kay Oshiro, our Controller, for preparing this wonderful CAFR that we all get to look at. And for those of you that may not have figured out what the picture on the front is, that is actually our newly closed landfill in Hilo. So that was a big project we completed this year, so it made the cover this year. But it might not be obvious to everyone. So thank you guys for your support. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. And that thank you for giving Ms. Oshiro some praise. Yeah, it took me about 30 seconds to looking at that picture to figure out what exactly that green mountain was. Thank you, Deanna. Okay, well given no questions, I really do appreciate your time this morning, and thank you for the very comprehensive report. I'm sure this would be a basis for us to use going into the next fiscal year as we look at our budget upcoming. Again, thank you for your time and for being here. And with that—yes, sir? Go ahead. MR. FUNASAKL Sorry, go ahead. I'm sorry to interrupt. I just also wanted to thank Deanna and Kay for the support during the audit. It wasn't easy. I mean, we did—it was basically a remote audit due to the pandemic. So there were challenges there, but we were able to issue it by the end of the year. So again, I Page 3 FC-6 March 16,2021 do thank Deanna and Kay, and the other people involved with helping us. It went as smoothly as we could have hoped, so I just wanted to give our thanks there. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Thank you for that, sir. Okay, so we have a motion to close file on Communication 134. All in favor? Vote on Comm. 134: The motion to close file on Comm. 134 and all related Filed communications was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members David, Inaba, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas, and Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder—8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Chung— 1. Excused: None. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, let's go to our next order of business. Thank you, gentlemen, for your time. Appreciate it very much, as we can reach out to you. MR. FUNASAKL Thank you. MR. HO: Thank you. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Okay, let's just go right to the top. And then just a note for everyone, the Planning Department, Mr. Kern and April Suprenant are asking that we move Communication 151 to the end of the agenda because they're in a meeting, so I'll be skipping later on. Let's go right to top of the order, sir. Return to Order The Chair directed the Committee to return to the order of business. of Business: Comm. 30.5: REPORT OF FUND TRANSFERS AUTHORIZED: FEBRUARY 1 — 15, 2021 From Controller Kay Oshiro, dated February 16, 2021. Page 4 FC-6 March 16,2021 Vote on Comm. 30.5: Ms. Kimball moved to close file on Comm. 30.5. Filed Seconded by Ms. Kierkiewicz and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members David, Inaba, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas, and Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder–8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Chung– 1. Excused: None. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Next order of business, sir. Comm. 31.7: REPORT OF CHANGE ORDERS AUTHORIZED: FEBRUARY 1 – 15, 2021 From Finance Director Deanna Sako, dated February 17, 2021, transmitting the above report pursuant to Hawaii County Code Section 2-12.3. Motion to Close File: Mr. Richards moved to close file on Comm. 31.7. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Any comments, concerns, questions? Seeing— MR. INABA: eeingMR. INABA: Yes. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Oh, go ahead, Mr. Inaba. MR. INABA: I was wondering if anybody from Finance is there to explain the Office of Housing change? CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Deanna is here and ready to answer any questions that you may have. (Note: Finance Director Deanna Sako came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. INABA: Thank you, Director Sako. Please? MS. SAKO: I'm sorry, which change order? MR. INABA: For the Office of Housing and Community Development. What isit says it's for a Project Manager for Kula`imano Elderly Housing. What is the—it's kind of a big jump, so could you explain that for us? Some $62,000 to $134,000, is that correct? It's on February 8, 2021. Page 5 FC-6 March 16,2021 MS. SAKO: So that project, is one of the affordable rental properties that Housing does manage, and we put it out to bid. Hawaii Affordable Properties is the vendor that maintains that property and kind of does everything for them. So they collect the rents and do all of that also. So this was an optiona bid that had option years left. It's actually a whole additional year that we're adding on, so that's why it's such a large increase. So I believe based on the total we're in year two now—or cumulative change orders, so three. We're in the third year right now. MR. INABA: Okay, got it. Thank you so much, Director Sako. Chair, I yield. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Inaba. Thank you, Deanna. Seeing no further questions, we have a motion to close file on Communication 31.7 on the floor. All in favor? Vote on Comm. 31.7: The motion to close file on Comm. 31.7 was carried by Filed the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members David, Inaba, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas, and Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder—8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Chung— 1. Excused: None. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Communication 32.2, please. Comm. 32.2: MONTHLY BUDGET STATUS REPORT FOR THE MONTH ENDED AUGUST 31, 2020 From Finance Director Deanna Sako, dated February 22, 2021, transmitting the above report pursuant to Hawaii County Charter Section 6-6.3(h). Vote on Comm. 32.2: Mr. Richards moved to close file on Comm. 32.2. Filed Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members David, Inaba, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas, and Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder—8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Chung— 1. Excused: None. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Next business. Page 6 FC-6 March 16,2021 Comm. 32.3: MONTHLY BUDGET STATUS REPORT FOR THE MONTH ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2020 From Finance Director Deanna Sako, dated February 22, 2021, transmitting the above report pursuant to Hawaii County Charter Section 6-6.3(h). Vote on Comm. 32.3: Ms. Lee Loy moved to close file on Comm. 32.3. Filed Seconded by Mr. Richards and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members David, Inaba, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas, and Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder–8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Chung– 1. Excused: None. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Next communication, sir. Comm. 32.4: MONTHLY BUDGET STATUS REPORT FOR THE MONTH ENDED OCTOBER 31, 2020 From Finance Director Deanna Sako, dated February 22, 2021, transmitting the above report pursuant to Hawaii County Charter Section 6-6.3(h). Motion to Close File: Ms. Lee Loy moved to close file on Comm. 32.4. Seconded by Mr. Richards. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Any discussion, Council Members? Seeing none, Ms. Sako, thank you for doing the last three-monthly budget reports, and getting those done. And with that, motion on the floor is to close file on Communication 32.4, all in favor? Vote on Comm. 32.4: The motion to close file on Comm. 32.4 was carried by Filed the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members David, Inaba, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas, and Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder–8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Chung– 1. Excused: None. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, we're going to skip over Communication 151. Let's go to—I think we have Steve Pavao of District 2 as a nomination. Good morning. Thank you for being here this morning. Thank you for being here Pomai. Can you, Mr. Clerk? Page 7 FC-6 March 16,2021 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: Comm. 156: NOMINATION OF STEVEN PAVAO TO THE SALARY COMMISSION From Mayor Mitchell D. Roth, dated February 25, 2021, requesting the Council's review and confirmation. Requires Council Confirmation by: April 18, 2021 (Section 134(k), Hawai`i County Charter) Vote on Comm. 156: Ms. Lee Loy moved to recommend confirmation of (Approved) the appointment of Mr. Steven Pavao to the Salary Commission. Seconded by Mr. Richards and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members David, Inaba, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas, and Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder—8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Chung— 1. Excused: None. Executive Assistant to the Mayor Pomaika`i Bartolome came forward and provided a brief narrative of the nominee's background and experience. Committee Members spoke in favor of the appointment. Chair Kaneali`i- Kleinfelder informed Mr. Pavao that he does not need to appear at the Council meeting for the final confirmation of his appointment. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Let's go to 67-21 (Resolution). Change Order As directed by the Chair and with no objection from the Council Members, the of Business: following items were taken out of order: Res. 67-21: AUTHORIZES THE PAYMENT OF FUNDS OF A LATER FISCAL YEAR AND OF MORE THAN ONE FISCAL YEAR FOR A MULTI-YEAR LEASE FOR TWO MULTIFUNCTION COPY MACHINES FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT Authorizes the Mayor to enter into a five-year lease agreement with an approximate monthly cost of$170 per copier. Reference: Comm. 150 Intr. by: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder(B/R) Page 8 FC-6 March 16,2021 Motion to Approve: Ms. Lee Loy moved to recommend adoption of Res. 67-21. Seconded by Mr. Richards. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: We did reach out to Robin Bauman from DEM (Department of Environmental Management). I don't know if they're present today. Is anyone from DEM? Okay, okay. Yeah, okay. Council Members, do you have any questions or concerns about the two copy machines for DEM? Okay, I was expecting that. Seeing none, we have a motion on the floor to forward Resolution 67-21 to Council with a favorable recommendation. All in favor? Vote on Res. 67-21: The motion to recommend adoption of Res. 67-21 (Approved) carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members David, Inaba, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas, and Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder—8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Chung— 1. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, Ms. Kaneali`i will not be available today, unfortunately. So let's go to Communication 155, and let's see if the body would like to move it to Council, and see if there is any discussion on that. So, Mr. Clerk,please read in Communication 155. Return to Order The Chair directed the Committee to return to the order of business. of Business: Comm. 155: NOMINATION OF DIANE KANEALI`I TO THE PUBLIC ACCESS, OPEN SPACE, AND NATURAL RESOURCES PRESERVATION COMMISSION From Mayor Mitchell D. Roth, dated February 17, 2021, requesting the Council's review and confirmation. Requires Council Confirmation by: April 11, 2021 (Section 2-215(k), Hawaii County Code) Motion to Approve: Mr. Richards moved to recommend confirmation of the appointment of Ms. Diane Kaneali`i to the Public Access, Open Space, and Natural Resources Preservation Commission. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Tim, as this is your district, I'll let you lead the discussion. Page 9 FC-6 March 16,2021 MR. RICHARDS: Alright. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: But I was going to ask Pomai to come up and do the introduction, although Mrs. Kaneali`i is not here today (Note: At this time, Executive Assistant to the Mayor Pomaika`i Bartolome came forward and provided a brief narrative of the nominee's background and experience. Committee Members spoke in favor of the appointment. Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder announced his recusal from voting due to the fact that the nominee is his aunt. Ms. Bartolome stated that Ms. Kaneali`i will be present at cull Council for final confirmation.) Vote on Comm. 155: The motion to recommend confirmation of the appointment (Approved) of Ms. Diane Kaneali`i to the Public Access, Open Space, and Natural Resources Preservation Commission was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members David, Inaba, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, and Villegas —7. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Chung— 1. Excused: Chair Kaneali`i- Kleinfelder— 1. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Let's go to--you know, let's do Communication 169, please. Comm. 169: REQUESTS EACH COUNCIL MEMBER TO SUBMIT A PRIORITY LIST OF FIVE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS WITHIN THEIR DISTRICT FOR CONSIDERATION IN THE 2021-2022 BUDGET From Council Member Matt Kaneali`i- Kleinfelder, dated February 25, 2021. Motion to Close File: Ms. Lee Loy moved to close file on Comm. 169. Seconded by Mr. Richards. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: This is coming from my office, and this really comes from my interest in seeing what the Council Members are wanting to do in their district, but more so as the Council has a very important duty in moving the budget along. But I've just come to notice that we don't always have a strong say in what we want, and what we want to see in our districts. Being this is a communication, and then I'm the Finance Committee Chair, I was hoping to get a list from each Council Member as we move forward into the budget season to see what your priorities are in your districts. If you don't feel comfortable doing that, that is completely fine, but this was a way of having the discussion in Council and openly. And also it just lets us kind of reach out the Page 10 FC-6 March 16,2021 administration if you have haven't already to discuss what things in your district that you're wanting, and that you want to see. You know, given our economy and our budget and the concerns that everyone has, this may be a very tight year, but it still doesn't I don't think that stops us from wanting to make progress in our districts. This can be done later. We can have an open discussion today. We can amend and add things to this communication going forward, but it gives us a good starting point and it gives us you know, coming up with our departmental reviews, a way of showing them exactly what we're looking for in our district. So with that, I'd like to hear if there are any comments from the Council on this. Just hoping for some input today and seeing how we feel about that. So I'm going ahead to go and open the floor to the Council for any discussion, if any. Ms. Kimball, go ahead. MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Chair. Being this is my first time going through the budget review process, I'm not familiar whether this is a typical thing to do or not. But I do like the idea of us using the committee setting as a more deliberative place to discuss what we want to do within our own districts, but also to share so we can have the countywide perspective and think about how we're allocating fairly, but also for the most responsible use of the taxpayer's funds. I'd like to get a little more guidance from you in terms of what your expectations are. I mean, is this just a one, two, three, four, five list? Do you want more detail? Do you want some budget estimates? What is the expectation in terms of the information communicated from the different districts? CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Thank you. Anyone in Kona? MS. DAVID: Chair, not really. I just was wondering how—if we don't do it right now,how do we get that information to you? Via communication or—yeah, that was my question. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Ms. David. I'll go answer after we get everyone. Ms. Lee Loy, go ahead. MS. LEE LOY: So opening up the communication. I understand the vehicle that you provided to us, so thank you very much for that. I still am calibrating the budget, what the budget will look like on May 1st. We have a future discussion coming forward by Ms. Kierkiewicz with Senator Schatz, and then a future conversation with the State as far as how some of this other monies will be coming down into the County. And so I actually want to assess Page 11 FC-6 March 16,2021 that a little better and then talk about a collective CIP (Capital Improvement Projects) wish list. That's how I'm calibrating this right now. So while I am appreciative of it, I just feel we don't have quite all the right information or tools that we might have just two weeks from now or a month from now. That's my thoughts right now, because I really am eager to hear the conversation with Senator Schatz and how might leverage and amplify some of that coming down to the County before thinking through some of the larger infrastructure needs that the County will need. Yeah, so that's my thoughts. Thanks, Chair. I yield. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. Mr. Richards. MR. RICHARDS: Thanks, Chair. I'm going to echo a little bit of what Council Woman Lee Loy just said. I like the venue that this opens up. And without trying to take any liberties but your response to Council Chair, I'm thinking that what we might do is postpone this to the call of the Chair to get input and then put back inside. I do like what Sue just said, about a collective CIP wish list; and depending on what kind of funding we might see from the Feds, we might see from the State with Fed money, I'm because I'm thinking about the needs of my district and a lot of it is the CII' is going to be in the construction, maintenance, and repair for our park system. I know, Heather, you got some stuff, Kolekole Park, for one that I think it's been closed as long as I've been in office, or about as long. So I'm thinking, this way we can't actually discuss this amongst ourselves unless we're in a setting like this to discuss this. So this may actually fuel a conversation about a collective CIP. That we may say, "Okay, a big driving force is Parks and Rec." So what do we need there and how do we see the priority of funding that? So I've got no answers for you right now. I've got a lot of ideas. But I think a little more information. Let me circle back around and collectively come up with something going forward. Thanks, Chair. I yield. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Richards. Ms. Kierkiewicz, go ahead. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. I just had some clarifying questions for you around—if this is supposed to be preliminary conversations before we have actual budget conversations coming up in April and May. In terms of the priority list, we already have an existing template for submitting Capital Improvement Projects. Are you looking for us to fill that out and submit that for a larger discussion? Page 12 FC-6 March 16,2021 You know, I'm with Council Member Lee Loy in that we have a number of conversations that are going to be happening in the very near future, that I think will help guide what sort of priorities we do eventually make for our districts. Many of the monies that are coming may have certain restrictions or requirements and how they can be spent, which at the end of the day kind of drives our decisions. So appreciate this conversation and very interested to see where it goes. I yield. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Ms. Kierkiewicz. Okay, hearing nothing from Kona besides Mrs. David's question, I'll go run through some of these answers. Mrs. Kimball, expectations as far as presentation and presenting the data. What I'll be looking for was, as I mentioned in the communication, a priority list: one, two, three, four, five, and if—you know, if there's more, if you have more than this, you have ten, then feel free. But we're looking for the basics, you know, what is the project? The scope of that project is going to be in the Capital Improvement Project data that you put in during the budget process. You could fill those out anytime. But having those prioritized in a list so that we can all see them. And again, that may be uncomfortable. There may be some things that your district wants that you're not seeing as a priority, but this is your prioritized list of improvement projects that as we walk into the next fiscal year and we have this budget process, these have to be laid out in coordination with the Department of Finance. And it's useful for Deanna to know what we are looking at and what we see as priority and trying to match those two pictures. Because there may be things that we prioritize in our district that are not a priority for the administration, and that's that balance between what the Council is looking for and what the administration is looking for. So sorry, as far as my expectation, brief prioritized list. And if you have more than five, that's great, I mean, we probably do. But given our budget this year and what's happening, I'm guessing that we're not going to have funding for ten, you know, large projects. So I went with five. I'm looking for a project amount and your list. You know, one, two, three, four five, what you're looking for. I would guess that in each respective community there will be different priorities, and your community may push for things more so than others. And again,just a brief summary. And then that opens the discussion and let us communicate that. You know, via this communication, which we'll get to in a second, to the administration. As far as how to submit, you know, Mr. Clerk, if we were to postpone this to the call of the Chair or to lay on the table so we can the discussion moving, can we add as amendments or add as communications to this communication? Page 13 FC-6 March 16,2021 MR. BROWN: I think the main thing to consider would be to make sure that all discussion is done in the public setting so that they can continue to see what's going on here. So submissions as communications that come before the Council where the discussion is had, in a public setting, would be probably the safest way to do it. Again,just—there are multiple ways to do it. Again,just being cautious that discussion is made in public setting. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. Okay, so we can—what would be correct? Say at the end of today or the end of this item, we would postpone to the call of the Chair, to the next meeting, and keep it open? MR. BROWN: That's one way to do it. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. And then Council Members could submit as a ? MR. BROWN: As a communication to the Council, bringing up the projects that they feel are important in their district. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. MR. BROWN: Because these are communications, you could even close file on this today and submit a new communication, you know, speaking to that. But postponing to the call of the Chair I think would also accomplish what the Council is looking for. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. I like that because then it has a home, yeah? We're giving it a home and a place to fall back to, where we can amend that communication. Not amend it but add to it. MR. BROWN: Yeah. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: And then—Mr. Chung has joined us, so we can let the record reflect that Mr. Chung has joined us today. Thank you for being here, sir. As far as waiting for State and Federal funds, I completely agree. I know that plays a crucial role on what kinds of funds are available and what we're going to be doing going forward, and other areas to pull funds from. Grants and things that we can use and leverage for our districts, respectively. So yes, I completely agree. And that's why letting this be open and just letting us add on to this communication as we go forward. Again,just a tool to express what we are looking for in each one of our districts. Page 14 FC-6 March 16,2021 Yes, as far as this being an open venue for discussion, this is how we have to do it. We have the Sunshine Law, which we all are very aware of, and how we cannot go and have a discussion amongst all of us to talk about what we want to have in our districts, but in an open setting we can. And via publicly agendized information, we can. So that's the importance of having this presented as a communication today and letting each one of us add to it as we go. And then looking at CIPS, yes we have all the ability to do Capital Improvement Projects. We can add projects as we go throughout the year, any time. We can re-up the projects that are existing. But it doesn't mean that they will happen, and it will not be set going forward in the next fiscal year. So that's the importance of this versus just having a CIP list. This gives the Council more directive in approaching projects that we want to see and incorporating them into the next fiscal year's budget. And more so than having projects floating on the books, this is a little bit more guiding in what we want to see. So that's the intention behind this. Mr. Henricks, since you joined us today do you want to add anything? (Note: At this time, County Clerk Jon Henricks came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. HENRICKS: Just based upon this—County Clerk Jon Henricks. Based upon the discussion, you're anticipating written correspondence, right, communications from yourself,probably and the other eight Committee Members. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: That would be the hope. MR. HENRICKS: Are you looking for something consistent, as far as the documents, as far as, you know, if it's five or more, are all to be included in a single document, or would they be separate, or could they come in different times? Would each—could it be something that's already on the CII' or should it be a new project, does that matter? And then also, is the expectation that each project would be accompanied by a Financial Impact Statement, which is customary for capital projects, which does take some time to develop. But that spells out your details, right, of your funding sources, what type of improvement it is, when you expect it to occur, and what department is in charge. Is that the kind of detail you're looking for? Because we want to be able to recognize these documents when they come in, and then we don't want to make any assumptions as to whether or not something is, you know, complete or meets the requisite expectations for this committee. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: That's a great point. Thank you. Yes, everything that you said, yes. If it's a capital improvement project that has already been completed and the Financial Impact Statement has been done, that's Page 15 FC-6 March 16,2021 wonderful. If it's not, thenI mean, the best thing to do would be to have that capital improvement project paperwork done and filled so that we have a good estimate of how much it's going to cost, because Deanna wouldn't be able to work with anything that didn't have a cost associated with it. And so, I would guess that a majority of the projects that will come back from the Council Members will be existing CIP projects that they want to prioritize, but it could be that there's something new that they haven't had the time to do the paperwork yet; in that case, I would highly suggest getting the CIP paperwork done. But yes, submit with all of that in mind. That's what I'll be expecting, and as a written communication. But again not in a huge amount of detail. I mean, we want to see it, we want to know what it is. If it's an existing project, you don't need to get into the detail so much as it is already listed, and we have our capital improvement project book that was given to us by Ms. Sako a couple of weeks ago. So, it's more just getting a list of what we're looking for as far as Council Members in our districts and what we're shooting for coming up for this next fiscal year and starting those and making sure that we're participating in our budget as much as we can. MR. HENRICKS: Okay, thank you for that clarification. And then I just—well, thank you. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Just one more time. So you went through a nice list there. You know, I just I wanted to get this idea out and moving. MR. HENRICKS: Right. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Because we have the budget looming. MR. HENRICKS: Yeah. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: So in your eyes, what are the important details? MR. HENRICKS: Well, I'm just wondering if this would look something like what is presented when you do have the budgets in front of you. When you're amending the capital budget, it's not that—it's not a—it's not that much—it's not an overall amount of information. It essentially provides, you know, an appropriation number, description ofa title of the project, what department will be responsible for the project. And then again, the most important part to these, which do require some effort and assistance from the administration to complete, are the Financial Impact Statements, and that was the main thing, I was wondering if that is the expectation. Page 16 FC-6 March 16,2021 Especially if it's an existing project, then those exist already. They might need to be updated if they're a little bit older. But if it's a new project or it hasn't been on the books for a while, then if you're looking for a Financial Impact Statement, then that should be noted today as an expectation today for it to move forward in a way that is meaningful to this committee in this effort. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I agree. I agree. Thank you. MR. HENRICK: Yeah. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Yeah, that's incredibly important. And then if you didn't have a Financial Impact Statement, I don't know what we would do with the information, because Deanna can't do much with a blank project with no cost associated. I can see her shaking her back there in a very affirming manner. MR. HENRICKS: So ideally, not put too many boundaries on this, but each Council Member would submit maybe a singular memo with their five personal projects listed. Even in apriority there within, maybe as far as one, two, three, four, five as most important, and then each one would have an accompanying document, at least at the minimum, the Financial Impact Statement for each of those projects. That's kind of a vision of what you would come out of this meeting to get forward to the next meeting. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, yes. MR. HENRICKS: No I'm asking, but— CHR. utCHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: No, no. No, I agree. MR. HENRICKS: I'm not trying to dictate. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: No, no, I agree. No, I agree. I agree. MR. HENRICKS: I'm just trying to wonder where CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: This is new to me, too. You know, I've seen this done, and I understand the importance of this, and this givesI'm just giving Council Members a way to move forward on projects. But what exactly it looks like, there's always a question in my head. So thank you for helping me kind of clarify what we're looking for. MR. HENRICKS: Sure. Page 17 FC-6 March 16,2021 CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Council Members, I MR. HENRICKS: It's important for us too, as far as knowing what to look for when we receive it. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. MR. HENRICKS: Thank you. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. So I think what Jon has kind of provided is good. A brief description of the project, what the departments responsible, Financial Impact Statement, if available. That's a great way of moving forward with this. Deanna, do you have anything you want to add? Anything that can help guide us, or any thoughts on this? (Note: At this time, Finance Director Deanna Sako came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MS. SAKO: Good morning again. As some of you had mentioned, yeah, this is kind of a challenging budget year. So one of things we are focused on is getting ready for the stimulus money that we hope to come along. So those projects need to be shovel ready. So it's not just preparing a priority list, but it's working with the departments to make sure they're aware of your priorities. Because those are the ones the departments need to have shovel-ready and to make sure that they're in design already. So it's kind of a you know, it's a team effort, everybody needs to work together. And so we have been trying to make sure the departments are aware that they should be working on their projects and getting them shovel ready. That's really—last time when we had the ARRA (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) funds, you know, a decade or so ago; that's how County of Hawaii was able to take advantage of more funding than the other counties, is because our projects were shovel-ready and ready to go. So we want to be in that same position again. So I think it's a team effort, everybody working together. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Deanna. That's a great piece of information for us to look at, and another reminder to work with each department to make sure that we are aligned, yeah. Okay, mahalo. Thank you. Okay, Mr. Chung, go ahead. And you had some questions or some concerns? MR. CHUNG: Yeah, thank you. First of all, I wasn't here at the beginning when you were giving your introductory statement, so I'll take a look at it later on. Page 18 FC-6 March 16,2021 But I have to say when I read this request, it was sent to me by aide, I'm not going to tell you how I reacted, but I'm just going to try and put a positive spin on it. You know, I'm here to do whatever I can to assist the process. But the same questions that Mr. Henricks brought up were the things that came up in my mind. It's not just as simple as throwing out five projects, or three, or two. And following up on what Deanna said, see, the CIP process has to be in conjunction with the administration, not in separation of them, because they're the ones who have the technical expertise, they're the ones who can put on the cost items to each and every one of these things. So what I'm worried about is if we throw these things out—never been done before, maybe to your credit, I don't know. But I've always worried about CIP request, because what happens is they have a tendency of sometimes heightening the expectations of the public. Unless we have real money backing these projects, we're not really doing a service to the community, in my humble opinion. There are two schools of thought with regards to CIPS. One is, you just come up, provide your wish list and allow the administration to pick and choose what they want. The other one, which was advanced by Curtis Tyler many years ago, was a fiscally responsibleI'm not saying it's correct—but it was a fiscally responsible type of approach, where every CIP that comes up has to be backed by real money. Very difficult, okay, but that is one approach. These are the two schools of thought. But if you accept the first school of thought, the one where you just throw out things and let the administration pick, now what happens is it leaves the public with some kind of expectation that, "Oh, it's going to happen." When we have I'll just give you an example; $500 million worth of CIP requests, but only about like $40 million worth of money to actually back it. Obviously, something's got to give. You can't do it. And a lot of times I've seen Council Members utilize the CIP process as a political pool. That's dangerous. To the credit of my colleagues, I haven't seen it happen over the last few years, you know, where you try to bring a lot of people in, you know, get this rah-rah situation, and then nothing happens, right? So kudos to the Council right now. I think for this thing to responsibly be operated, we have to work with the administration. And it's not something where we can throw things out, give you a list of five—for example for me, okay, Waianuenue Regional Park, Kaumana blah, without touching base with the administration and getting firm numbers on it. And their take, it's going to be very difficult. I think it's going to fly in the face of the government, in my opinion. I just wanted to state that. Page 19 FC-6 March 16,2021 But if you want five, I'll give you guys five, but I just don't know what's that going to accomplish. Thank you. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Chung. Ms. Kierkiewicz, your light is on. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Yes, thank you. I was just curious what sort of discussions happens with the administration prior to this communication being submitted. I'd like to make sure that they're not blind-sighted that we are in coordination. And so your discussion of wanting our priority list, I just feel like I'm hearing that— was hatwas like a deal made that if we do this, that this is coming from them, that want to see a priority list; and if we do this, then our projects are going to get funded. I just want some clarity there. Because I have no problem working with the administration and getting what I need done for the district and the island. And I also want to stress that I don't want this process to be one where all of the Council Members are scrapping for their districts. There have been so many instances where there have been inequitable investments in other communities, and we're trying to address those challenges now. So I want to make sure that we are making decisions as a collective and move our whole island forward. So I appreciate this, Chair, but I'm likely not going to be submitting a list of priorities. I think that my staff's time is better spent preparing for the actual budget cycle that we are going to be convening very shortly. And I'm happy to have discussions about capital improvement projects during that particular time. So, thank you. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Ms. Kierkiewicz. Kona, checking in? MS. DAVID: Chair, no comments here, except really appreciate the discussion. Thanks. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Ms. David. Ms. Lee Loy, go ahead. MS. LEE LOY: Yeah,just sitting and listening what Ms. Kierkiewicz expressed about pitting Council Member for district needs against one another, which leads to political leverage. I'm all about moving our island forward. And so when we talk about priority funding, my district has the airport, has the harbor, has the landfill. These are big community needs that's going to take a lot of money the wastewater treatment facility. And so this moves our entire island forward if we're investing in this type of infrastructure. And I don't want to be dismissive to someone, like Ms. Kimball, who needs some help with her parks. Page 20 FC-6 March 16,2021 But even following that school of thought, we don't even have a needs assessment from the Parks department to prioritize what the shape of their assets are and the need of their assets. And so this budget process, when a lot of that is being gleaned out, is where I tend to focus my time also. And then, even as Ms. Sako said, getting stuff shovel-ready, what's in the way of some of the projects that could really address our aging infrastructure? What is that need, and what is the price tag to that? I just don't want to scrap with one another. I just rather have an island- conversation to address real assets that would move and lift us all up. And this is some of the other work that I know Ms. Kimball is doing, Ms. Kierkiewicz is doing, in other circles, in different streams that are important. You know, I would support to the call of the Chair, but I actually think the best way to deal with this is through our budget process and then look at future policy-shifts, or something that shifts everybody together rather than individually in our districts, to barter votes for future equities in the district. So Chair, I yield at this time. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you,Ms. Lee Loy. Ms. Kimball, go ahead. MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Chair. I'm really appreciating this discussion here and the points of my colleagues. One of the things that I do appreciate, you know, the need to hear from the federal government, the need to hear from State about what kind of money is going to be flowing through, and then getting departmental information. As mentioned,parks, bridges, that's a lot of what I'm concerned about—the ADA (American with Disabilities Act) compliance. And we have those in the capital improvement budget,but I don't know really at the granularity, like which bridges, which parks, what projects, how much. That said, I hear a real value in all of us discussing as a Council what maybe in broad strokes our priorities are, and thinking about how—for me, the priority is best using our funds to meet the needs of our community as a collective, as a whole island. You know, some of the things that we do see is a duplication of effort or a failure to prioritize with a system's thinking approach. I'm not sure how that we do this with this particular communication, but I do think it would be a value for this body to spend time talking about our larger priorities, when it comes to capital improvements for the whole island. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Clerk, you had a request for a recess. Do you want to take the recess now, or you want to close up this item and then we'll go from there? Page 21 FC-6 March 16,2021 MS. VILLEGAS: Mr. Kaneali`i- Kleinfelder? CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Sorry, Ms. Villegas. Sorry, but Aaron asked for a brief recess. I just want to check with him to see if he needs to do that now and we continue the conversation, or MR. BROWN: Yes, if you don't mind, Chair. We do need a quick recess just to address some quick technical stuff, but it shouldn't take too long. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. Ms. Villegas, would you be okay if we're going to take a quick recess, and when we'll come back we'll take you first? Okay, thank you, Ms. Villegas. MR. BROWN: Thank you, Chair. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, so we're in recess. Recess: At 10:13 a.m., the Chair called for a recess. Reconvene: The meeting reconvened at 10:22 a.m. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, we are back from recess, and thank you for your patience today. Ms. Villegas, you were next on the list to go ahead. Hopefully, you're in Kona. I am having a hard time seeing that side of the screen. MS. VILLEGAS: I am. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: There we go. Okay, go ahead. MS. VILLEGAS: I'm so tiny. I look so little over here. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Nice to hear from you today. Go ahead, Ms. Villegas. MS. VILLEGAS: Likewise. I just wanted to first off thank you for bringing this forward and providing kind of another perspective, another avenue for us to explore not only within our own districts but as a County what our CIP projects are. And I suppose, for me, I see this communication as an opportunity. I guess I didn't see it as a way to fight over resources or to become some kind of contentious demanding for specific districts to get their projects funded, but more as an opportunity to really look at what I mean, some of these CIP projects have been on these books for decades. I think we all—it was explained to me, first coming into office that this is kind of a wish list, which is always fantastic to have, and hopefully we can manifest it. Page 22 FC-6 March 16,2021 But given a broader understanding of the priorities, I know that when I look through my booklet and package, some of the first things I noticed that brought questions to my mind had to do with projects that I know are geographically in my district but were listed in other districts. So given a broader understanding of some of these projects really impact and affect more than one district, or perhaps they may have been numbered at a time prior to a redistricting—last redistricting proj ect. So my point being I want to thank you, Mr. Kaneali`i-KI einfelder, for bringing this new perspective, bringing this new opportunity as a way to broaden our understanding of the needs of our County as a whole and reallyI mean, I didn't I don't believe that District 7 even has five projects listed on the books, but I did note that some other districts had way more than five on the books. So kind of a cool opportunity within a public format for all of us, because we can't talk offline about these kinds of things, for us to talk about it here amongst one another, and also for the public to listen. And I heed the warning of Mr. Chung in not wanting to accidentally turn that into creating promises that we can't keep or sending the wrong message to people, because I appreciate the terms that were utilized earlier saying—and I'm forgetting the specific numbers, but it was something in the hundreds of millions of dollars in our total CIP asked, versus I think you said $40 million is what's really available. So in order for us to function as a succinct body, I think—well, I really appreciate your courage in presenting something like this. And with an administration that has been so willing to think outside the box. And other members of this Council who are so enthusiastic for those opportunities, when it comes to other topics, I am hopeful that same level of support could be provided for your intentionality in bringing this forward. So thank you for that. And I look forward to continuing to explore the broader needs of our County, how they break down through each of the different districts, and how we can collaborate to make sure that the finite resources that we do have are most strategically allocated to the projects with the greatest need, and where the risk reward equation balances out the best for the service of our island as a whole. So thank you for that, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. I yield. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Ms. Villegas. Any other comments in Kona? Mr. Chung, your light is on. MR. CHUNG: Yeah, I wanted to clarify. You know, when I said $100 million and the $40 million, I just did that to illustrate. I made up those numbers. You know, I really don't know what those numbers are, and I don't want it quoted in the paper or anything like. I just wanted to make a point. Page 23 FC-6 March 16,2021 You know again, I want to help this process through, but having given it more thought, you know, I might do the same thing that Ms. Kierkiewicz is going to do, you know, I just might not turn in anything and reserve my comments for when we really discuss the CIP at the very end of the budget process. But last night I was watching TV and I was watching Kauai and Oahu getting belted, right, by the rain, and then our mentor and friend, Chip Fletcher, came on and he was of course interviewed as being one of the experts on this global warming situation. And I really thought, you know, in terms of being district centric, it's important for all of us I guess as people who represent our districts. but as Ms. Lee Loy said, we have to look really broader. I mean, we have aging infrastructure. We have a sewer system that really needs a revamping or more money to get us going where we need to go. I think we really have to take hard look now at gearing our infrastructure to the global warming situation, and that's going to be daunting task. We have to enlist the support of our Public Works and Planning people. If we don't do it now, we kick the can down the road, then next thing you know you know, it's going to be somebody else's problem. But we've got to start doing things now. So, it's not really looking at districts, it's really looking at things from an island-wide standpoint that the CIP our focus needs to be, in my opinion. But thank you. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Chung. Ms. Kimball. MS. KIMBALL: Yeah. Thank you, Chair. I just would like to make one comment. In response to that, I think there is value though in us communicating from our individual districts what some of the needs are. Because I don't know what's going in Sue's district. I know a little bit about what's going on there in Sue's district, but not entirely. And so maybe looking at the communication of these priorities; not so much from the standpoint if we're going to fight over whose priorities are more important, but really just to kind of communicate the information from our area that we know best to the larger whole as to what each of our individual districts have as a priority. So with the goal to look at, as Council Member Chung is saying, look at everything in an island-wide capacity. I would say that I'm not aware fully, to my comfort level, of some of the priorities in the other districts, and I feel I like I would better informed to make some decisions about CIP priorities for the island as a whole if I did have that information. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Okay, seeing no further discussion, my closing thoughts. Everyone raised some really good points today. I feel like we have a clearer way forward. The point of this is to help us as a body walk into the next three months or so with a very clear intention of the Page 24 FC-6 March 16,2021 projects that we see as priorities in our district. My goal in life is never to cause more strife or more issues amongst people. And we're all very aware that the CIP list is more of a wish list. I may not be as experienced as some of my more senior Council Members, but politics was not on my mind in the submission of this communication. More so, how we as a body work with our administration to express what we know, our priorities in our districts. I don't expect our administration to know exactly what we see as priorities. We are boots on the ground in our district. We know our community. We know what's needed. We deal with the emails and the phone calls more so than anyone else. And so who better to help guide the discussion on what we see as priorities? And walking into this budget, this document just helps paint a very clear picture of what our community wants, and how we work with our administration to set these priorities. A lot of what came up today was very helpful in just clarifying how we can move forward, what needs to be done beforehand. And of course not giving the wrong idea that these will happen, but these are what we want to see happen. These are the things that our district is asking for, or has been asking for, for years or for decades. And I just I feel like this would be a good way to help us move ahead as a body together and not on separate tracks, or just hoping that things will happen. I think many times that I've seen over the last two years, you know, my first term, it was more of a you hope things will happen in your district more so than you're helping to guide things happen in your district. And this is the tool to help us guide and help create versus hope. So with that said, I think today I'm going to, I believe, postpone this to the call of the Chair so we can bring back the communication. There is no requirement for you to submit anything, but I think it would help, and be very helpful in helping us move forward as a body. MR. CHUNG: Mr. Chairman? CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Mr. Chung? MR. CHUNG: Yeah. Sorry, I know usually the Chair gets the last word, but I just wanted to make a comment. Just so that there's more misunderstanding, I don't think anyone here, myself for sure, implied that this was politically motivated on the part of the Chair. What I tried to express was, based on my experience, this is what can happen in a CII' situation, okay? I want to leave you guys with this one thought, I've always looked at CIP as being something that can really test the mettle of an individual lawmaker. Because when a CIP project is advanced or introduced by one of us, we want to see it through. Not just leave it out there and say, "Well, it's somebody else's Page 25 FC-6 March 16,2021 problem." But it's something that we should introduce and then work to see through, and that includes working with the administration, with the legislature, and other bodies that are going to be providing funding, maybe even federal government funding for the project, and then getting the necessary public support. Again, I have to reiterate my reservations about just throwing things out there because it's going to be too messy. It's just my personal feeling. But I don't think I or anyone else suggested that this was politically motivated. It's just these are the pitfalls that we have to watch out for when we're dealing with CIP wish list. Thank you. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you for clarifying that. No, it can be. I learned on the way in to that not every project that comes up on the CIP will be done or may ever be done, and it could be started and stopped, and things lapse. And it's something quickly learned that projects that my district said were promised to them ten years ago were actually CIPS that were put on the books that never did happen. And there's a huge difference between appropriation and encumbering funds. And just learning these different aspects of how the process works is not something everyone understands. But again, going into the budget the Council is very involved in this process. It's not a single-sided process where we just sign off on a budget. Our job as the County Council is to work with the administration to set priorities, to raise and lower taxes, and to create a budget that works not only for the administration but also for the community. And we bridge that gap and that's us. And so this is a tool to help us work and express what we're doing and what we see as priorities. And again, you don't have to submit anything if you don't feel that that's a need that you need to do. But for me and maybe for some of the more rural districts, I think this is an incredible tool to use. So with that— MR. hatMR. BROWN: Excuse me, Chair? CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Yes, Mr. Clerk? MR. BROWN: You would need a first and a second on the motion to postpone to the call of the Chair. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. MR. BROWN: A motion would have to be made and seconded. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, so I think the appropriate motion would be to postpone Communication 169 to the call of the Chair, which leaves it open and can be provided more communications as needed, correct? Page 26 FC-6 March 16,2021 MR. BROWN: The communication could be brought back for discussion at the Chair's—when the Chair wants to do so, should they decide to do so. CHR KANEALII-KLEINFELDER: Okay. Okay, so may I please have a motion to postpone Communication 169 to the call of the Chair? Vote on Postponement: Ms. Villegas moved to postpone Communication 169 (Approved) to the call of the Chair. Seconded by Ms. Kimball and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, David, Inaba, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas, and Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder—9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR KANEALII-KLEINFELDER: Do we have to go back to the main motion, or we are pau? MR. BROWN: No, we are that is taken care of. We can move on to the next agenda item, if you like. CHR KANEALII-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, sir, and thank you for the discussion everyone. I appreciate it. Okay, let's go to Resolution 65-21. ORDER OF The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, RESOLUTIONS: Order of Resolutions. Res. 65-21: AUTHORIZES THE ACCEPTANCE OF A DONATION OF EQUIPMENT, SUPPLIES AND FOOD TO THE COUNTY OF HAWAII FROM HAWAII RISE FOUNDATION AND VIBRANT HAWAII The donation, valued at$68,000, and will be used to provide support for virtual learning spaces for children and corresponding food distribution. Reference: Comm. 149 Intr. by: Mr. Kaneali`i- Kleinfelder(B/R) Motion to Approve: Ms. Lee Loy moved to recommend adoption of Res. 65-21. Seconded by Mr. Richards. CHR KANEALII-KLEINFELDER: We have Maurice Messina here today. Thank you for joining us. You'll be here for the next two resolutions. Ms. Kierkiewicz, would you like to go ahead? Page 27 FC-6 March 16,2021 MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chair. I need to disclose that I am a volunteer board member, and the Economy Stream Chair for Vibrant Hawaii. And in consultation with Corporation Counsel, I will be recusing myself from this vote. Thank you. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. Well, being that you're a volunteer board member, do you want to discuss this resolution? MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Chair, if you have questions about the project, I'm happy to answer them, but I don't want to participate in the vote. Thank you. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, thank you. Okay, Council Members, any discussion on Resolution 65-21? Ms. Lee Loy, go ahead. MS. LEE LOY: Yeah, actually I—with Director Messina here today, if you could just come forward. I'm grateful we have two of these programs in District 3, which is the Waiakea Uka Gym and then down in Keaukaha. But you know, you're touching many communities with this program. So I just wanted you to give an outline of what Vibrant Hawaii is doing for us in our County assets and how this donation is really helping those in community. Go ahead, Director. (Note: At this time, Parks and Recreation Director Maurice Messina came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. MESSINA: Sure. Maurice Messina, Director of Parks and Recreation. I'd like to start off by actually thanking Vibrant Hawaii, Ms. Kierkiewicz, and Hawaii Rise Foundation. What we saw was there was this big gap. When they came to Parks and Rec., we had this big gap of—we had hubs stopping after CARES Act went away. And right now we're able to serve five different sites with about 80 students. And they're doing distance learning. They're getting good meals. They're getting exercise. They're getting out of their houses. We have not had one complaint. Everything is going safely. All of the meals are outstanding. The distance learning is great. And now that school is starting back up again, some of the kids were able to go to school twice a week, and those other three days they're back in our hub. And all of our workers at the sites, they're excited to be back and helping these kids. So we have nothing but positive, positive, positive comments. And once this ends, we'll be spending the next couple of weeks this ends to start working on our Summer Fun programs. So these kids in these areas, they're going to be catching up on a lot of things that they missed out. Page 28 FC-6 March 16,2021 MS. LEE LOY: Great. Director Messina, thank you for that. And I have to agree, I mean, this is public-private partnerships using a County asset leveraging our nonprofits to provide for our community. So I really want to thank you. But I also want to thank Vibrant Hawaii, Hawaii Rise, who has been an amazing community partner and nonprofit agency and of course all the teamwork at Vibrant Hawaii, Ms. Kierkiewicz, especially you, and recognizing this bigger need for community. I'm going to be asking my colleagues to continue to support this. This is how we bridged community at a time when there was so much uncertainty. So thank you for that and thank you for bringing this forward. Chair, I yield. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. Any further discussion from Kona? MR. INABA: Chair? CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Yes, Mr. Inaba? Go ahead. MR. INABA: Of the $60,000 that we are discussing acceptance of right now, how much of that is actual equipment and supplies verses food that, you know, is a one-time expense? MR. MESSINA: I'll have to go back and double-check on all those numbers. But yeah, I'll have to go back and check on those numbers and I can let you know that. MR. INABA: Okay, thank you. And then, you know, very grateful to Vibrant Hawaii for this donation. And it seems like those programs are doing well according to your report, Director Messina. As a Council Member for District 8, I'm just wondering how it was determined where this donation would be used and spent, because I see it's just for Papa`ikou, Waiakea, Waimea, and Honomu. MR. MESSINA: Ms. Kierkiewicz can help me out with that. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Chair, if you don't mind if I could just weigh in here. And I just want to clarify. While Vibrant Hawai`i is the catalyst for this resilience hub network, the funding was made possible through a generous donation from Kohala Coast residents. These are private dollars that are helping to support 22 resilience hubs around the island. They saw the need and just the support that communities were provided with CARES funding and wanted to find a way in which to continue these efforts. There was a call for proposals, if you may, Mr. Inaba,put out to community. We received over 45 applications from community partners wanting to do something in their community and they saw this as a vehicle to make that happen. Page 29 FC-6 March 16,2021 I reached out to Director Messina to see if we could find a way to activate all of our County park assets to make this happen. Not all of them were able to step up and serve in this capacity at this time, but I think what we're doing incrementally is showing how we can have these public-private partnerships, how we can leverage these spaces to really be nimble and adapt to the times and serve community. And so, I'm kind of sad that we didn't have more. I think there's only one in Puna this time around, which breaks my heart. But I think what we have here is a model that can be duplicated in more communities when we have more funding support, either from private partners or some of the American rescue plan money. So I hope that's helpful. The money that we were able to secure allows hubs to operate until May 31st And I do want to share the one critical aspect of this program is to help build up community and economic resilience in our people. So everyone that committed, and this was determining factor for many of the hubs, many of them that committed to wanting to elevate this work had to commit to doing an economic development project. Community-driven tourism, food sustainability, every single one of these hubs has to do or scale up a community garden. Art, placemaking, health and wellness; every single community has committed to working on an economic development project because what we want them to be at the end of this is more resilient and diversifying our economy. So small steps but this is a big step on a massive scale. And I hope that we are able to secure more funds so that we can have more hubs around the island in the future. And I look forward to working with you, Mr. Inaba, to make that happen on the west side in partnership with Ms. Villegas. Thank you, Chair, for the latitude. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Ms. Kierkiewicz. MR. INABA: And so my question is, these funds are being used at hubs or at County facilities? Because I'm seeing County facilities here, so I'm just unclear. MR. MESSINA: These five hubs are County facilities staffed by Parks and Rec. personnel except for the Honomu one. Yeah. MR. INABA: Okay. I'm still unclear on how all of the funds, like there's no funds going to any park here on the west side or any facility here on the west side. If I could, I'm just trying to understand of how a total of$60,000, nothing is being seen here on this side. MR. MESSINA: Right. So right now we're Page 30 FC-6 March 16,2021 MR. INABA: I'm not trying to come across, I just want to understand that, you know, our duty as Council Members to advocate for our community. And I just want to make sure it is clear for the community how this donation has been decided upon and the use of it. MR. MESSINA: Correct. So we have all of our facilities right now. All of our facilities are being used for different things, whether it's testing, whether it's vaccinations, whether it's food-drops. And we pull together three to four of our staff members for each one of these hubs. And looking around at the resources that we had—for instance, if you look at the Waimea hub, we've got three different recreation specialists and a recreation director working that. In the future if we can get more funding, of course we want to see what else we can expand. But as of right now with the resources we had available and the facilities we had available at the time, this is where we are. And like Council Member Kierkiewicz said, we want to be able to expand these in the future. And if we are able to get more funding, we want to go island-wide with this. Just the resources that we have and the limited availability that we had is where we are. MS. KIMBALL: Okay. Mahalo, Director Messina. And big mahalo to Hawaii Rise for this donation for our County. Chair, I yield. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Inaba. MS. VILLEGAS: Chair, comment please. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Ms. Villegas, go ahead. MS. VILLEGAS: Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Inaba, for bringing up these questions. I think they very succinctly bring up some of the other questions that I have received also on the west side. I know that so much good has been done through Hawaii Rise and Vibrant Hawaii. And when we look at the resilience hubs and that concept, and the term, and how it continues to grow and prosper—but I just couldn't help but I just wanted to say thank you, Mr. Inaba, because as we watch the CARES funding be allocated, I believe it was $1.9 million, went Vibrant Hawaii through Hawaii Rise for the creation of 20 different resilience hubs, of which only one was located on the west side of the Big Island. And so just to acknowledge the constituents and the people on the west side who kind of noticed some of that disparity in equitable distribution of resources. I really appreciate Mr. Inaba bringing that forward and asking these questions humbly and graciously, and with the intention of drawing attention to the opportunity to more equitably distribute the resources. Also, I just want to say how grateful I am, and so many people are throughout the island. But specifically here in District 7 we have so many organizations and Page 31 FC-6 March 16,2021 nonprofits that are working within our community that didn't necessarily come for this CARES funding and continue to take care of the people they take care of in the capacities they do, and to fundraise and kind of continue to operate their organizations and the services they provide to our community groups and those in need in a very resilient fashion. And so I'm really grateful that those organizations still are operating to such a capacity that perhaps it may have been perceived that Districts 7 or 8 didn't need an allocation of resilience hubs in the same capacity that other parts of the island. But I want to echo Mr. Inaba's questioning and asking for consideration as resources are being distributed through the administration and through contributions to our County, that there is still a lot of need here and there are lots of organizations that could utilize the funding. And our County parks, you know, those that we have here on the west side, we just would appreciate any and all support in those capacities, as well. So thank you for taking those things in consideration as more resources become available. I yield. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Ms. Villegas. MS. DAVID: Chair? CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Ms. David, go ahead. MS. DAVID: Yes, thank you. Mahalo. First of all, I really would like to thank Council Member Kierkiewicz for explaining that process. And so I have a question for Director Messina. The County facilities or park facilities in each district, should an organization wish to participate in this program, would they be contacting Parks and Rec., or would they be contacting Vibrant Hawaii or Hawaii Rise? I know that there are several organizations in Ka`u as well that have dedicated members that I guess would really like to participate. And should the offer be increased, or the program increased, who would they contact? MR. MESSINA: Well I can speak on the County side. It's the same as if somebody who would want to come in for a childcare program. They come in. They meet with us. We discuss the needs, we discuss what they have available, and we move into an MOA (Memorandum of Agreement) with that group, with that organization,just like we did with Vibrant and Hawaii Rise. And then we just get into the discussion about what programs they want to offer, what resources they need from the County, what resources they can provide. But they can just contact us directly. I won't speak for Vibrant, but I would imagine if they would do something like this again, they would do the same thing, is they would go out and ask for, you know, who wants to be part of it. But as far as the County goes, if any Page 32 FC-6 March 16,2021 organization wants to do anything in any of our County facilities, they contact us directly and we work with them. MS. DAVID: Thank you very much for that. And thank you for all your work in putting these programs forward. I appreciate your clarifying that for me. Thank you. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Ms. David. Ms. Kierkiewicz, go ahead. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: And, Chair David, I did want to share with you. We so have two hubs in your district. Michelle Galimba is the captain for the Na`alehu hub in partnership with `O Ka`u Kakou. And Katy Graham and Julie and Neil are leading the Pahala food resilience hub. So they've got a lot of great action happening there. We also had a local church in Ocean View reach out, wanting to do something for the Micronesian community. So happy to connect with you on that and see if there are other community partners. There are funds left. And so if any of my colleagues know community partners that would like to start a hub in their community, you all have my phone number, you all have my email,please, this is an invitation to reach out. And let's work together to build up that community resilience. Thank you. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Ms. Kierkiewicz. MS. DAVID: Thank you. Chair? CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Yes? MS. DAVID: It's me again. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Go ahead, Ms. David. MS. DAVID: Yeah, and thanks for mentioning that, about Michelle Galimba and the hubs in Pahala and Ka`u, because they did do an excellent job during COVID, in managing those hubs. And I just wanted to do a shout out and thank them and let them know that it's still a viable program and thank them for their help. So mahalo. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Ms. David. Anyone else in Hilo? Okay. Seeing none, Mo, thank you. What kind of equipment was provided for this $68,000, or this for purchases? MR. MESSINA: For things like wireless devices, laptops, arts and crafts, ukuleles. Page 33 FC-6 March 16,2021 CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: And this is equipment supply versus fund supply to buy equipment, correct? MR. MESSINA: Yeah, all the purchase that were made—like the County did not personally make any purchases. None of our people made purchases. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. So computers, wireless, you know, you're building out kind of small hubs for our kids and keiki to use, given the times? MR. MESSINA: Correct. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: And then you had staff. This doesn't cover staffing. So we have Park and Rec. staffing,paid by the County utilizing what was donated to provide these hubs to the community? MR. MESSINA: Correct. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. And I think Mr. Inaba asked, but how was this chosen? So this was through an MOA? For different sites that were chosen, were through an MOA with Vibrant? MR. MESSINA: Right. So Vibrant approached us to utilize certain County facilities. So like what Ms. Kierkiewicz was talking about, the other hubs that are in Ms. David's district. Since those are not in a County facility, we were only when Vibrant approached us for the use of these specific facilities, that's why we went into the MOA with them. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. So signing them away. And then they chose the sites they were going to fulfill? But they had to work with the County because you had to figure out what personnel you had available? MR. MESSINA: Yes. Well, and what sites we had available, as well. Because like I said earlier, some of our sites are used up four or five times a week for testing, vaccinations, food-drops, and stuff like that. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. And they—it is too bad. I think Ashley mentioned that there is no Puna sites. Because there is a lot of need in Puna as far this donation itself. So I look forward to seeing some, I think, more of our rural districts. It's good to see Hamakua and Kohala being represented with some sites. But I'd love to see some action in Puna, as well. MR. MESSINA: Yeah. And on that, if for some reason we end up taking a step back with this, with COVID, this partnership is going to basically give us a Page 34 FC-6 March 16,2021 roadmap on how we can do this better in the future. More facilities, more learning for these kids. I mean, if you would seethe way that these kids act just after the first week of being trapped in their house for this whole time, you know. Their parents dropping them off—and the meals are great. They're learning ukulele. They're out there practicing. I beat a couple of kids in basketball already. So, it's pretty good. CHR KANEALII-KLEINFELDER: I can guess my kids would be happy out of the house, too. Thank you for your work on this. I appreciate it. Thank you for the discussion today. So we have a motion on the floor to forward Resolution 65-21 to Council with a positive recommendation. All in favor? Vote on Res. 65-21: The motion to recommend adoption of Res. 65-21 (Approved) was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, David, Inaba, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas, and Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder–8. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: Committee Member Kierkiewicz– 1. CHR KANEALII-KLEINFELDER: And that leads us to our next resolution. Res. 66-21: AUTHORIZES THE ACCEPTANCE OF A DONATION OF A BRONZE STATUE OF A MYTHOLOGICAL FISHERMAN TO THE COUNTY OF HAWAII The statue, valued at$10,000, was donated by Henry Bianchini, and is located at Lili`uokalani Gardens. Reference: Comm. 149 Intr. by: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder(B/R) Motion to Approve: Ms. Lee Loy moved to recommend adoption of Res. 66-21. Seconded by Ms. Kimball. CHR. KANEALII-KLEINFELDER: Council Members, any discussion on this amazing statue? Maurice Messina is here. And just to say this has raised a lot of comments throughout the community, here on the east side of the island. But go ahead, Mr. Messina. MR. MESSINA: So, if I may start off with this. So Mr. Bianchini, Henry, he's the artist that did the King Kalakaua statue at Kalakaua Park, and he's also the artist that did the piece in the center of the Hilo Library, if you've ever seen that. Page 35 FC-6 March 16,2021 When I came into this position, I should have put the brakes on this, on the whole art exhibit, realizing that the all the paperwork wasn't done, everything wasn't finished yet. And that's all on me, it doesn't fall on anybody else. It falls on me as a director. And some good things have come out of this, out of my mistake. Some of the good things are the talk about art in our town. I don't ever remember this much talk about art in our town. It also opened up some communication lines that I did not know were available to me. For instance, the East Hawaii Cultural Center has an advisory board, a Cultural Advisory Board,Historical Advisory Board. And they said in the future, they could help us with any of these donations that we receive, and helping us find proper locations, proper atmosphere, proper places with historical significance of where to put art exhibits. I spoke to Henry this week and last week, and we've also been speaking with Queen Lili`uokalani, the board there, about possible locations of the statue. And we're going to work with Henry, we're going to work with East Hawaii Cultural Center, we're going to work with the Queen Lili`uokalani board, to find a more suitable location. There was confusion in the beginning about where this should be, and even though that confusion was there, I still should have put the brakes on it, and I didn't. So we're going to be finding the right location with these three individuals or these three groups, and I believe we can come to a place that everybody feels that it should be. For the people call our offices, we have about 50-50, people like it/people don't like it. And it really seems to be the location that is the one thing. And if would have been able to do the resolution before doing all this, that's some things that we could have worked out with you guys. For the people who just completely openly hate it, and some pretty visceral phone calls about it, I would just ask those people to maybe understand what the statue is about and understand that not everybody agrees on all artwork. He's a pretty good artist and we're happy to be working with him, and we would like to work with him more in the future. But utilizing East Hawaii Cultural Center and their Advisory Board in their capacity to help us figure out the best ways to move forward on this. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Mo. Good sum-up of where it came from and how it happened. And yes, it did raise a lot of comments. I would like to open the discussion to the Council Members. Whose district does this fall into? Mrs. Lee Loy. Okay, your light is on. Go ahead, Ms. Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Mo, for that. One organization that I didn't hear was Friends of Lili`uokalani Park: K. T. Cannon Eger, David Tamura, and Glenn Miyao. Page 36 FC-6 March 16,2021 MR. MESSINA: So Sue, when I mention the board, that's who I was talking about, the Friends. MS. LEE LOY: So they provided us with a call-to-action in their letter opposing this donation, which is to remove it. And I hear you though. This was definitely a process that didn't work. Community likes community engagement. And so when I read the resolution when it was already established, it didn't match. The way that this particular resolution is, we're accepting it and looking for a place for it to go up, when it's already up. You know, in this teaching moment, in this learning curve, with the transition of the administration, you know, I have stand by a community that's taken care of this beautiful park with an aesthetic and a specific lens on what a Japanese tea garden looks like. And so, you know, I'll be bold with the ask. It has to come down. It has to be relocated. Which then raises a bigger question. You know, we're accepting donations and we're not hearing the whole story on why. And so that community engagement process should start a whole lot earlier. I don't know if this continues to be the right vehicle to accept it. I mean, it's broad-strokes enough where we're going to accept it and we're going to place it somewhere at Lili`uokalani, or Isles or, you know, Nihon Koen,which is another place that entire 24-acre park encompasses. You know, I want to hear from my other colleagues. I know they got calls, also. I just know I didn't appreciate not knowing anything about it and having to field questions around it. And then when I went to the organization, K. T. and that squad, they were taken aback that they didn't feel anybody came to them. There was a conversation of, "Hey, we're looking doing something,"but there was no, "What's the story behind this? Why this place?" There was little community engagement and I think it would've gone very differently. So with that, I yield. I do want to hearI know Mr. Chung also had fielded some calls about this donation. And I think I'm just going to stand by it has to come down. Chair, I yield. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. MR. CHUNG: I might as well talk. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Mr. Chung, go ahead. MR. CHUNG: Maurice, you were somewhat apologetic for how this thing went through. But I will say, when I look at the timing on all of this, we're in March, right, you just started in December. This is a piece of artwork. You don't have to answer this, but I know you weren't the person who started all of this. You know, Page 37 FC-6 March 16,2021 you're just trying to see it through, okay? I don't hold you responsible at all. In fact, I think you're trying to provide a reasonable solution to this situation based on what you have heard from the public. And I think that's really good and that's, you know, why I think you're a very good fit for the position that you're in. You know, it's unfortunate that a donation, let alone a piece of artwork, would be the center of this kind of controversy, right? But I think what you've suggested or what you're planning to do is going to really work out well. I mean, there will be some who just don't the artwork and, you know, can't do anything about that. But it's all about placement. One of the persons who spoke to me really put it nicely, because I guess that area—and I haven't really seen it. I was going to take a look, but I never got to seeing the placement. But my understanding is it's in an area where a lot of people, you know, residents and tourists alike, will take a picture, you know, a sweeping view of Hilo, and Papa`ikou and all of that, the bay area. And then now you have this piece of work, one person's impression, right, going in the frame. I think it's best to just kind of move it, yeah. And then we really appreciate the effort that was put forth by both, your department and the artists, right? So that's all I've got to say. I think you guys are doing the right thing. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Chung. Ms. Kimball, go ahead. MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Chair. First, I'll say I think it is the goal of every artist to have their art stir up conversation and this was a successful project in that regard. It is always in the eye of the beholder to appreciate art. And I actually really like this statue. I have a question for you, Mr. Messina. It's just the one whereas clause in this resolution that places it Lili`uokalani Gardens. And my question is, is there any obligation other than the fact it's written here in this resolution, to place it in the Gardens? Or could we just amend this, take that out? That allows us to accept the statue and basically have the whole island to determine where is the most appropriate place for it. MR. MESSINA: What we would like to do, is working with the ones that we've mentioned, to find the proper location for it. And once we find that proper location, amend the resolution. And then when we come back in front of Council with that, say this is the exact location that we want to have this. I would like to have the Council accept it in whatever location it's going to be at other than just taking that completely out and not having an undetermined location right now. Page 38 FC-6 March 16,2021 MS. KIMBALL: Yeah, okay. That makes sense. I have no more questions. I yield. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Mr. Richards, go ahead. MR. RICHARDS: Thank you, Chair. I agree with everything that was said about art is in the eye of the beholder. But most importantly, Mo, thanks for coming forward and just saying, you know what, we need to hit the pause button, this is not the right fit. It's very unusual for government to come forward and say something like that. And so just, you know, character of what we're talking about, you specifically here. Thanks for doing that because in the best interest of the community, the best thing to do is hit the pause button while we retool it. So I thanks. Just thank you, Mo. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Richards. Anyone in Kona? MR. INABA: Chair, Holeka. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Go ahead, Mr. Inaba. MR. INABA: Thank you. I do agree with Council Member Lee Loy. You know, especially when organizations malama a place for so long, I think we do need to consult them, you know, I would pay them that respect for them to chime in their mana`o. So hopefully going forward we can do that. I do support the acceptance of this statue. Perhaps defer to that district's Council Member and perhaps the department to find the best location for it. But mahalo to Henry for creating this, and with a mo`olelo that tells a story—or the mo`olelo with that location. So looking forward to supporting and hopefully we can find the best place for this. Mahalo. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Inaba. Anyone else? MS. DAVID: Chair? CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Oh, go ahead, Ms. David. MS. DAVID: Yeah,just really quickly. I just would like to say thank you to Council Member Lee Loy for explaining the historic or the history about this situation so that we can understand. And also, I would like to thank Director Messina for apparently taking the responsibility for something that as Mr. Chung said, it basically was in progress before he became director. So thank you so much, Director Messina, for taking responsibility, and the efforts you are Page 39 FC-6 March 16,2021 making now to resolve this matter in an equitable fashion. So, thank you everyone. Mahalo. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Ms. David. Mr. Chung, go ahead. MR. CHUNG: So Maurice, let me see if I understand this now. When we do take the final vote on this resolution at the Council level,your department is going to be prepared to identify a site. So that should be done by prior ? MR. MESSINA: We already started having the conversation with East Hawaii Cultural Center. And also, when it comes in front of the full Council, the artist will be here as well, to explain his piece. MR. CHUNG: I mean, was there any kind of condition of him donating this that it be placed at a certain site or area? MR. MESSINA: No, sir. MR. CHUNG: Okay. Alright. Thank you. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Ms. Lee Loy, go ahead. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you. And I listened very carefully to something Ms. Kimball said, which is, you know, we're grateful for the donation. But that "whereas" specifically drives it into a location. And I just think this needs more work. Because if we're going to talk about a donation and this becomes a historical document, I think we can start describing these places with a proper place name, and that's not contained in here. You know, we want to talk about Kaineha, which is the actual proper name of Isles. We want to talk about Mokuola, but also blend that with the story of the artist on why he designed the piece. And so I hear the director's hope to move this forward. I rather just hold it here, work it all out, and then create a resolution that tells that whole story that honors that place, honors the caretakers of that place. Because it might end up not actually being the best place, and it could end up in Papa`ikou, or somewhere else. That's my feelings about this. I don't think this resolution does the artist or the community, who is paramount for me,justice. We can work on this a little bit more. And I think the community engagement piece will help us develop a really strong resolution to accept this art piece. Chair, I yield at this time. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Ms. Kimball. Page 40 FC-6 March 16,2021 MS. KIMBALL: Yeah, I think Ms. Lee Loy is on the money here. It's something that we could actually use to create a really nice public record that talks about the artist, talks about the place. I love the idea of including more appropriate placenames. So my question would be at this point I think it's appropriate not to move it out of this Committee today. The question is whether to just get rid of this resolution and start anew, or to do an amendment. I yield. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I was going hear from the Clerk—actually you know what, Mo, would you like to amend this resolution, or you want to start fresh? MR. MESSINA: I personally would like to start fresh. Yeah, once we realize the paperwork hadn't been done, we were in a rush mode to get this to you guys. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. Does that work for everyone if we just let this one go and then come back with a fresh resolution? MS. LEE LOY: Yeah, Chair. Go ahead, go ahead. Pll just make a motion to withdraw this resolution, if that's where we're at. Motion to withdraw resolution CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Before you do, I want to say couple of comments and then we'll go for the motion to withdraw. I would also, without being disrespectful to the artist, mahalo for the donation. Art takes time. And in his eyes, he saw something and that was his creation. And I've been an artist. Not everything you make is loved by the community. Some people love it, some people hate it, so here we are. And he did draw a lot of comments which is what is art is supposed to do. But again, where do we put it, how does it look, and then the overall process of how do we make sure the process equals what the community wants. And I think just important to note that Henry took time to make this. And although it's not meeting some of the community's want, as far as placement and look, we definitely appreciate the gesture and the donation. And I do appreciate you, "falling on the sword," as you put it for this. Because I understand this is a rollover from last year. So, thank you for that. And unless you have any other comments? Okay, Ms. Lee Loy, if you would like to make the motion? Page 41 FC-6 March 16,2021 Withdraw Res. 66-21: At this time, Ms. Lee Loy announced the withdrawal of Res. 66-21. CHR KANEALII-KLEINFELDER: Okay, so we will be officially withdrawing Resolution 66-21. And Parks & Rec. and Mo will develop a new resolution going forward to accept the donation and create a placement of. Okay, is there anything else needed, on the Clerk side? All good. Okay, well thank you for the discussion. Thank you, Moe. MR. MESSINA: Thank you. CHR KANEALII-KLEINFELDER: Okay, let's goI think if I am correct, let's go to Bill 27 because I believe Real Property has been outside waiting for a very long time. And I'm sure that they're getting a little sore on the lower-back out there. So Bill 27, Mr. Clerk. Bill 27: AMENDS CHAPTER 19, ARTICLE 7, SECTION 19-53, REPEALS CHAPTER 19, ARTICLE 7, SECTION 19-58.1 AND SECTION 19-58.2 OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE 1983 (2016 EDITION, AS AMENDED), RELATING TO THE NONSPECULATIVE RESIDENTIAL USE REAL PROPERTY TAX DEDICATION Repeals the nonspeculative residential use dedication program, effective July 1, 2021. Reference: Comm. 152 Intr. by: Mr. Chung Motion to Approve: Mr. Chung moved recommend passage of Bill 27 on first reading. Seconded by Mr. Richards. (Note: At this time, Real Property Tax Administrator Lisa Miura and Assistant Administrator Keita Jo came forward to address the members of the Committee.) CHR KANEALII-KLEINFELDER: Mr. Chung, as this is your bill, I'll let you lead the discussion. MR. CHUNG: Yes, very briefly. I mean, this is a very simple bill on its face. It just repeals the Non-Speculative. Residential Dedication program. This programI'm only going to talk in terms of the policy aspects because the technical matter should be addressed to the Department of Finance: Keita, Deanna or Lisa in Kona. And I also wanted to recognize the efforts of our Legislative Research Branch, headed by Mr. Henricks, in really taking a close look at this matter and actually drafting it. Page 42 FC-6 March 16,2021 This program was initiated at a time when we had escalating real property valuations many, many years ago. Since that time though, well subsequent to that, was the enactment of another County law, which placed a three percent annual cap on these valuations for homeowner-type properties. At that time, with the enactment of that subsequent law, it closed the door for anyone who wanted to get into the non-spec program. So only those persons who were in that program prior to the enactment of the three percent cap law remained. And they could choose to stay in there. But basically a lot of those guys were stuck, they found no way out. And I want Lisa to explain or give different stories as to how people were negatively affected by it. You know, the suggestion for the repeal of this non-spec program has been made by the Real Property Tax Review Board for, I'm thinking at least the last six years to the Council,perhaps eight years. And we have made no effort to at least try to discuss this matter. Look, I'm not married to this thing. This is not my bill. I'm just trying to bring this forward for discussion, you know. People who worked very closely with real property tax, and that's a very, very complicated body of law, have made the request. Just recently, the working group, right, came up with that same request. It would behoove this Council to at least discuss the matter. This is the vehicle by which we do it. I think from a policy standpoint, it's actually good. What we came up with was to let people stay at their frozen the people who are in the program presently will be allowed to stay with their frozen valuation until the 2023-2024, I think, fiscal year. Now, that's open to discussion because if it's the will of this body to first approve the repeal of this law, then we might also want to look at different scenarios here. We could also allow people to stay in with their frozen values until their ten years is up, then they're out. We could do that. We could do it this way. We could extend the period by which they would have their frozen values. There're all different kinds of things that we can do. Before handing it over to the department though, I think what we should do is, I would a make a request—and I think the department is in the process of doing this anyway. But apprising those persons who are presently in the program. I know you guys got to send out like about 300 to 400 letters. But, you know, I think it's going to be an effort well spent if we could notify them as to what is being discussed here, and see if they had any comments, right? Because they're going to be the persons affected by it. But I really believe that this is, you know, when people really take a look at what the effect of this repeal is, or are, they'll see that it's not really bad, and it actually is better for them. But now I'm going to hand it over to the Finance Department. Thank you. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Chung. Lisa or Keita, take it away, please. Page 43 FC-6 March 16,2021 MS. MIURA: Okay, I'll start. Lisa Miura, Real Property Tax Administrator. As Mr. Chung indicated, this was presented on the report by the Real Property Tax Review Working Group as well as the Real Property Tax Board of Review. Just for the public's information, the Board of Review handles all of the appeals. So that's every year when assessment notices go out, there is a board that is independent of our office, that is volunteers by the public, that hears all appeals on value and programs, which includes exemptions or the denial of an exemption or program. So Mr. Chung was right, it's been for the last eight years that they've suggested in the final report to County Council, that this program be repealed in its entirety. The Real Property Tax Working Group, it used to be called the ad hoc committee. And a real property tax review has also suggested in a recommendation to County Council and administration that this program be ended due to the—nobody new can get into it so there are people that feel it's not fair and equitable. Keita and I can share all of the numbers and all of the information about it, but the main thing is that—like Council Member Chung had reported, there is program was very valid and it had very good merits when it was created. At the time when County Council increased the homeowner tax class to have a three percent cap as well as increasing the age exemption, Council looked at ending and repealing this altogether. But for one reason or another, decided to allow it to continue with nobody else coming in, with the sunset of this program being, when the last person no longer renews. The problems that have come out of it, and there's always these unintended consequences that we're not aware of when this happened in 2005, includes the fact that when you have a frozen value, when you renew it, your frozen value goes up to halfway between what your frozen value was and that new market value. Owners have to commit to five or ten years. Majority of the taxpayers in this program are in the ten-year program. And what happens is, if their life changes throughout that ten years, they get rolled back to the beginning of that dedication period plus the ten percent penalty. And I know a lot of people may think that's not very much, but what we've learned through the years is the way the market has been increasing they end up paying quite a bit. And one of the last ones that came up was nearly a$20,000 bill for someone who really needed it to pay for their medical treatment. And so it's—we've had many different cases. Now not everybody is going to be happy that this is going away. There are some people in there that strongly feel they will live another 20 to 30 years, and they would be happy with the frozen value. When Council looked at ending this program in 2005, it was by pulling everybody out and putting them in at the market rate. And that's not what this current bill is doing. This current bill pulls them out and leaves them at their Page 44 FC-6 March 16,2021 frozen rate. And after so many years, then you go up the three-percent homeowner exemption assessment cap. Owners, the benefit to them with having them go into the homeowners, is if next year your status changes, and you need to downsize, or you need to go sell your property, so you have the assets to utilize to move somewhere else, maybe with your kids, then you aren't penalized. And that's the biggest takeaway. We've gotten called and asked how much the County will make on this, and we don't actually make money by having this changed. It actually just makes the program more fair and equitable. In majority of the cases, the County doesn't see a gain from this at all. The gain really comes to the County when the frozen value resets. So we have a ton of spreadsheets that do illustrate how it affects people, because we've been talking to them. So what Council Member Chung asked for, was letters to notify all 459 property owners. We are more than happy to send that out. We only held off, in this case, because we weren't sure if Council was going to advance it and if there were going to be any amendments requested. Keita, would you like to add anything? MR. JO: I would just like to add or echo your thoughts on the biggest negative impact from this program is the rollback component. So when you're a kupuna and your life changes, you go into assisted living, you utilize that nest egg that you've built for so many years. You're hit with a rollback once you sell that property. It's considered a breach. So that, you know,just highlights again one of the unintended consequences of this program that we're seeing. Just last week, we had a rollback request for a particular property, and it was a $16,000 rollback bill. So, it's something that's very real. Something that I think this particular bill addresses. And we're able to provide any data that you need or have questions. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Mr. Chung, go ahead. MR. CHUNG: Could I make one more comment, too? And this relates to the timing of this bill. At first, I wanted to rush this bill through so that we could be prepared for the upcoming tax year. But during the process of drafting this, we decided that we would make it—we would have the values frozen until 2023-2024 fiscal year. So we have time, right? So we don't have to rush things through, but I just wanted to bring this up so we could discuss it. So I don't have any problem. I don't think you guys have any problem with deferring it, right, under those but it would be a deferral if the body is so inclined. It would be a short deferral, you know, and it would just be so that we can kind of figure out, you know, or tweak this matter if we're in favor of it. So I think we should kind of get a poll as to where everybody is at on this and what Page 45 FC-6 March 16,2021 kinds of concerns or what kind of tweaks, they might want to see done to this. But MS. MIURA: Councilman Chung, could I make a comment about the non-rush a bit? MR. CHUNG: Okay, maybe there is a rush. Go ahead, Lisa. MS. MIURA: There is and there isn't. Obviously, it is up to the Council on what they want to do and our job at Real Property Taxis to adhere to it. There are 330 properties that would have to renew this year, and I think it would be out of 459 because of when this program went to effect. It went to effect in 1990 with the start year of'91. So that's why you see 330 properties actually ending this year. MR. CHUNG: Okay. MS. MIURA: It would be nice to tell them what to expect so that they could make an informed decision. MR. CHUNG: Yeah. I didn't realize that. Thank you very much, Lisa, for bringing that up. I guess we should move quickly on this one way or the other. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Chung. Ms. Kimball, go ahead. MS. KIMBALL: Thank you. Council Member Chung, I just want to say mahalo for bringing this forward. I do think there has been a need to have a discussion about this. As was stated, certainly at that time, this was implemented, there was a need. And I think they're discussing—you know, there were unintended consequences to this as we've heard from Lisa. It bears discussing if there's ways to get to the intention of the original legislation but maybe through a different vehicle. So I am willing to continue the discussion about this. But I'm curious about—from RPT (Real Property Tax), is for those outstanding so if there's 450 that still exist and 300 that are going to need to renew, of the remaining ones do you have the timeframe it would take to get all of those out of the system, basically to get to the renewal point? My question—one of my concerns I do have about this is that it—there's a component of it that feels like a promise made that hasn't—isn't going to be kept. But I think if we stop it at the renewal point, that isI'm a little bit more comfortable with. Like say we're not going to renew these anymore. So if we were to run the clock out on all of the ones that exist, how long would that take? Page 46 FC-6 March 16,2021 MS. MIURA: It would end in 2031, and if they go out of the program, then what happens right now is they go up to market value. MS. KIMBALL: Right. Okay. I'm going to yield for now. I may have more questions as I hear from some of my other colleagues on this. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Are there any comments in—was that Holeka? MR. INABA: Yes. Thank you, Council Member Chung for bringing this legislation forward and acting on the recommendations of the working hui. And mahalo, Lisa, for being here to explain it. And I think that when we do create legislation, we need to make sure that we tidy up the ship and make sure that we're not having things like this however-30 years down the line. So I look forward to supporting this bill in a timely fashion. So mahalo, Mr. Chung. Chair, I yield. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Inaba. Ms. Lee Loy, go ahead. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Chair. I'm going to be supporting this. I agree that there was a level of expectation when some of these individuals got into the program. But I also listened carefully to Lisa and the Real Property Tax Working Group that's been pushing this for the last eight years. And had we acted upon it, or a prior legislative body had acted upon it, they would have been pulled out, and the last person—and if I'm doing the math right, Lisa, would have been out of the program by 2023,right? I heard her say 2031; but if we had acted on it eight years ago, the last program would be 2023. And so I'm willing to manage expectations, but the idea of letting them go till 2031 what would be about 100-plus. I think there's ways to communicate to them so that they can go get ready. And we have the three-percent cap, safety net that will catch them. Just from a personal experience, I bought my first home in 1992, and I got into this dedication program. Because I was 22 years old, and having those frozen values helped me manage a home with very limited income at 22 years old. And so realizing homeownership was huge and it set me and my family on the right course to have this type of asset. But also recognizing that my real property tax wouldn't keep climbing because back in the `90s homes were going like hotcakes, which is something that we're experiencing right now. And so I shared all of that because I see the wisdom in getting as many people as we can and giving them notice. Don't renew. We have this other three-percent cap. And for the ones left, had we acted six or eight years ago, their time would've been up, come 2023 or 2024. Page 47 FC-6 March 16,2021 So I'm going to be supporting this. And I think the notice will be the first opportunity for us to truly understand who understands what they're in, what options they have available to them, because I would really hate to see some rollback on people trying to get out of their home, into assisted living or something else, which puts—it wrecks their financial opportunities. Mr. Chung, thank you for bringing this forward. Chair, I yield at this time. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. Any comments in Kona before I go back to Mr. Chung? Okay, seeing none, Mr. Chung, go ahead. MR. CHUNG: Alright. You know, under the present program, every ten years the value will increase 50 percent of that amount between their frozen value and the current market value. So one thing that the Real Property Tax Division wasn't able to answer, and understandably so, was that what would be a greater amount, that 50 percent or three percent being compounded annually, right? And it is really hard to tell, it really depends on the market. But I just wanted to throw that out. But I want to ask Lisa, you heard Ms. Kimball's question, right, or concern? You know, when I started this discussion off, I did mention that there are several ways of dealing with those people who are presently in the program. We proposed one in this bill, but there are other ways of doing it. Do you have any comments regarding Ms. Kimball's suggestion? Could you work with that? Or could you also suggest a hybrid? For example, if making—there will be no more renewals, for example. But people will stay frozen but no more renewals but also allowing people to opt out maybe, in between. Because we want—see, what we're trying to do here, one of the purposes of this is to provide those people who have been in the program for a long time, and presumably—well they're much older than Ms. Lee Loy—an escape clause, you know, given their current situations. So could you comment first on Ms. Kimball's idea, which I'm totally okay with that too. Give us your thoughts. MS. MIURA: So my thoughts were that if we let everybody ride out till they ended, and it ranges between a lot of them in 2021 to the last three that end in 2031, my only concern is when that period ends, they would all jump up to market value. So there is an option Council could look at with guidance from Corporation Counsel, is an amnesty where they could be offered a period of time to all get out now. And if they got out now, or whether it's next year, they could come out—and I guess the big discussion is, is Council going to let them all come out at their frozen values, which is going to be a lot less than market because they haven't reset or are you going to make them go up to market but let them end their dedications early? Page 48 FC-6 March 16,2021 I think the problem is, and the reason why you have so many people—and the average age of the person in this program is 72, a lot of them feel like going up to market is something they can't afford. That's one of the spreadsheets Keita did run, and it would be a very big jump in value for majority of them. The ones that may not see it as much are the ones that just renewed last year, and that's the ones that you're seeing ending in 2031. It may have been a small group, but that's definitely a group who are not going to see a benefit from the change we're talking about today. We also could have done five-year renewals. That's an option now, five or ten years. I think the goal is to end the program and to not penalize them. So this seemed like one of the easier ways, to allow that; or the most fair way versus what was considered in the past. And the Real Property Tax Review Working Group did explore many different types of ways to end the program, but this seemed, from them, to be the most fair. As I mentioned, earlier they're not wed to this. I think the concern is that there are 330 parcels out of 459. And it would be nice for us to be able to explain to them something that they could understand without making it super technical of how the Council would like to proceed. Did I answer your question? MR. CHUNG: Well, yeah, I guess it did. I mean, you explored all—many different scenarios. And I think you articulated what we're all thinking here, too. You know, we don't want to penalize anyone, but we want to at least provide a safety valve in the event that they do get out. So how about this, I'm just going to ask that we move this forward because timing looks like it's an element here, and whoever has any ideas, go talk to Lisa, yeah, so that we don't violate any Sunshine Laws. And then, I think we all know what we're trying to achieve, right? And then we'll see how things look after, when it hits the Council floor. Is that okay with you guys? Alright, thank you. MS. MIURA: Can I just verify if we should—we'll send out the 459 letters. We'll commit to trying to get that out by Thursday. Our assessment notices went out, so our office will get a lot of calls. But either Council or the public can contact me or Keita Jo to discuss. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Lisa. Ms. Kimball, go ahead. MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Lisa. That was actually one of my questions, is to see if we're still going to do that notification here, because that's one of the things that I would like to hear from, is the folks in the program. The other number I was curious about, if you have it. Do you have the number of folks that have been in breach, as a percentage or ? MS. MIURA: I don't. Keita, do you have that one there with you in Hilo? Page 49 FC-6 March 16,2021 MR. JO: I don't. Anecdotally, you'll probably get five to six that end up breaching every year. So it's significant enough that it matters. MS. KIMBALL: Yeah, I look forward to further discussion on this. I think there's definitely a way to make this work. And I will share my colleagues' sentiment that we don't want to punish anyone or put undue physical pressure on anyone, especially in these times. So I think there is a way forward on this, and I look forward to more discussion. Thank you. I yield. MR. CHUNG: One more comment. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Mr. Chung, go ahead. MR. CHUNG: I think the easiest way of handling this is you know, I will continue discussing this with the Real Property Tax Division, but I'm going to stick with the draft that we have. And if anyone else has other ideas about this, come up with another draft. How's that? Maybe—so that it doesn't get too confusing, yeah. Then if I get another draft, then someone else gets another draft, it just might become a bit confusing. But I'm not, as I said, wed to this draft. But we'll just leave it like this, and anyone else who wants to come up with a draft, do so. I might do it too, actually. Or we—as long we don't violate the Sunshine Law. That's all, yeah. Thank you. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Chung. Kona, any more comments? MS. DAVID: No, Chair. Thank you. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. Thank you, Ms. David. MS. LEE LOY: Chair? CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Ms. Lee Loy, go ahead. MS. LEE LOY: Yeah, thank you. Lisa, can you clarify one more time? I heard it, but I want to hear it again. You mentioned we have about 450 in the program. The biggest group coming forward is about 300 and some change, right? But you also said the remaining 100 would feel the least effect of this change because they're only in the program—or they just started the program. MS. MIURA: Not quite. There are 459 properties in the non-spec, 330 are set to renew this year, so we have to actually send letters anyway to them. Because it's a dedication, they have to apply by a certain date in September. Of the others, the ones that just most recently renewed, they actually will be affected the most in a Page 50 FC-6 March 16,2021 negative manner because they just renewed, so their frozen value already went up. But if the way the bill is currently written, majority of the property owners will stay at their frozen value even though they were supposed to renew for next year, which means they will actually see a saving over the next ten-year period. MS. LEE LOY: Okay, got it. Thanks. Thank you for that clarification. MS. MIURA: You're welcome. MS. LEE LOY: Chair, I yield. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Okay. Lisa or Keita, is there a breakdown of the parcels as far as,you know, who is where? You know, is there a percentage? A high percentage in Kona, or east side, or west side? I mean, what is the breakdown? MR. JO: Yeah, so the current breakdown is approximately 17 percent of the properties are located in West Hawaii, and the balance in East Hawaii. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Oh, so the most— MR. ostMR. JO: That's the general breakdown. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Oh, so most of the people in the program are east side? MR. JO: Yeah. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: And what I mean what—as far as valuation in it, what is the—once this program were to end and the valuation was to up, what would the value the increase in value would be for the County? MR. JO: I believe the current proposal was to freeze the value through 2023; 2023-2024 would be the first year that a three percent cap would be attached to that frozen value. So it would basically fall back into what would traditionally that homeowner's exemption program. And then according to our analysis, you know, the County would lose income as a result of this change; to the tune, based on our estimates, about$70,000 per year less revenue. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. From the 400-something properties? MR. JO: Correct. Page 51 FC-6 March 16,2021 CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, thank you. That were my questions, okay. Mr. Chung, thank you for bringing this forward and for following through on what the working group asked us to do so many times and so many years, before I even came into office. Good discussion today. Thank you. So I think, as we're wanting to move this forward, then the motion on the floor is to forward Bill 27 to Council with a favorable recommendation. All in favor? Vote on Bill 27: The motion to recommend passage of Bill 27 on first reading (Approved) was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, David, Inaba, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas, and Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder—9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you for your time today, Lisa and Keita. And moving on to our final order of business, Communication 151. Return to Order The Chair directed the Committee to return to the order of business. of Business: Comm. 151: FAIR SHARE ANNUAL REPORT AS OF JUNE 30, 2020 From Planning Director Zendo Kern, dated February 26, 2021, transmitting the above report,pursuant to Hawaii County Code, Section 2-162.1(a). Motion to Close File: Ms. Kimball moved to close file on Comm. 151. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy. (Note: At this time, Planning Director Zendo Kern and Planning Program Manager April Suprenant came forward to address the members of the Committee.) CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: We have Director Kern here in Hilo Chambers for questions. As soon as Jon is done sanitizing and following our COVID regulations as required by law, you could take the seat, sir. Thank you for being here. I'll go ahead and—why don't go ahead and break this down for us a little bit, and I'm going to yield to the Council for any further discussion. MR. KERN: Thank you, Mr. Chair, and members of the Finance Committee. Mr. Chair, do you mind if I take my mask off? CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Go ahead, sir. Page 52 FC-6 March 16,2021 MR. KERN: Thank you. So if you wouldn't mind, what I was going to do is just kind of give a brief overview of the Fair Share kind of a concept and a program, and then I can you to answer any questions. I also have April Suprenant on Zoom as well, for any other information that might come up. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: That would be good. And thank you for your patience today. MR. KERN: Oh, no problem. Alright, so Fair Share Contribution. As a condition of an ordinance amending a Zoning Code, the County Council may require applicants to make a Fair Share Contribution to mitigate the potential regional impacts of the development with respect to Parks and Recreation, Fire, Police, Solid Waste disposable facilities, and roads. The value of the contributions is based on the cost of the public facilities per developed unit. And the County Council determines whether the Fair Share Contribution is made as cash, land, facilities, or any combination thereof. The Fair Share Contribution is typically due and payable prior to the final—receive the final subdivision or plan approval and is based on the actual number of units developed. So generally the Fair Share appropriations—all projects using fair share funds must be appropriated by the County Council with the appropriation identifying Fair Share as the funding source for all of the portion or the total project cost. And appropriation for a capital expenditure that is not encumbered lapses at the end of two fiscal years following the fiscal year that the appropriation was made. A couple of the key elements and takeaways from the Fair Share. There needs to be a rational nexus, meaning it needs to be in the general area in which the Fair Share came from, it needs to be a capital improvement project, new construction located in the actual judicial district in which the Fair Share was collected, and has to have a regional benefit. So that's the general concept. I can get into a little more history. We can move forward on any questions you folks have as far as funding and what we have. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: When did this start? MR. KERN: Well, that's a bit of a history. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Brief history. MR. KERN: So originally the Council tried to basically do an impact fee back in the 90's. And the impact fee did not pass. So what happened was the Council started kind of adding Fair Share Contributions or requirements at various times and various applications. And it was a little bit all over the place. And so what Page 53 FC-6 March 16,2021 then happened is the Planning Department kind of took this over and made it a part of most rezoning applications. So any type of rezoning application you'll see in there, is a condition to meet Fair Share. And so it's not codified, it's become a practice that the department as well as the Council have gotten accustomed to doing. The Fair Share Contribution is set, and then each year it goes up by CIP (Capital Improvement Projects Budget). So whatever the change is would be the consumer price index change, and so we move forward. So what might've been, you know, $12,000 in Fair Share Contributions, you know, a few years ago would be closer to like $15,000 these days. So that's the history. It sits here as more of a practice than the law. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. MR. KERN: You're welcome. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. MR. KERN: I'm happy. That's generally where we are at right now. And so that's how you folks see the rezoning come and all of the money in these accounts came from. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Beautiful. I'm going to yield to my Council Members, or if any Council Members have discussion, comments, questions? Ms. Lee Loy, go ahead. MS. LEE LOY: Director, thank you for being here. MR. KERN: Pleasure. MS. LEE LOY: Yeah, it's been just part of a condition of approval with—and the irony is a rational nexus but as we attached them to conditions of approval it was all kind of scattered, right? But I just wanted to focus in on page ten, which is our contribution appropriation and capital funds availability, and you know, the totals at the very end. You know, we have total contributions, total appropriations, and then total lapsed appropriations. And I just wanted to understand, you know, this is a tool, a bucket of money, to help stand up regional parks. I know my district has used it for a new fire station, for Kuawa field. So I see the value on the contributions. I think what's concerning for me is we start moving a capital improvement project forward and then it loses steam so the appropriation lapses. And from what I can see, it's about 54 percent. So I'm not appreciating the efficiency. And that's not on you guys. I think it talks a little bit more about this collaborative collective effort. Can you share, if you know—or April. Thanks for being here, April. You Page 54 FC-6 March 16,2021 know, how—and Aaron always says this, the efficacy, right? If this is actually really working in the way that we intended it to be. That's my first question. MR. KERN: So I'd say with my limited time in this position, I don't have the history to answer that effectively. It's something that I'm interested in as well. So I think April would be the most appropriate person to answer that. MS. SUPRENANT: Aloha. Thank you, Chair and Council. April Suprenant, Planning Department. I'm happy to address that. You know, I think the individual—we can give our perspective, but I also think it would be interesting to further inquire with the various CIP departments. I can tell you that the struggle that they have is in that any given that I have seen, is that in any given region under the type of funds that are available, there's not, with the exception of a few regions such as North Kona, is the best example. But most of the regions don't carry a high enough balance to make it worth the departments to use different funding sources in order to fund a particular project. It becomes more burdensome. But again, I would relay that question also to them to be able to answer. So I think we have been able to achieve a lot of projects. We've even been able to fund some planning projects that are directly related to capital projects. So I think those are good things. I can give you an example of one that's lapsing such as the fire maintenance shop is lapsing as of this report. However, in this coming CIP they have that re-appropriated into this current years CIP. So we'll see that come back because they are ready to move forward with that project. So we do make this report, and any information that we have at the start of the CIP process every year. We make these funds available. We urge them to try to use them any way that they can. And sometimes they do and sometimes they don't. For instance, in this report we have about nearly $500,000 in new appropriations with three different projects that make that up. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, April. And maybe this is more for some of my newer colleagues. April, explain how these projects actually have to be new or build capacity? I think we're looking at ways to improve some of the aging infrastructure that we have in the districts which continue to serve these new developments or new communities. But we can't take any of this money and go fix the pavilion because the way this is structured is for new assets or expanding capacity. Can you share that? MS. SUPRENANT: Absolutely. That's common in impact fee ordinances in general. So most jurisdictions who have impact fees have to abide by that. And if you—several of you are well-versed in takings law. And so there are some legal parameters that I'm not really prepared to get into. But we can certainly talk with Council separately. But there are some legal aspects of it where the point of these Page 55 FC-6 March 16,2021 funds is to help expand infrastructure and capacity in order to support the new development, which is the new number of dwelling units added in any given region. And so if 400 dwelling units are added to that region, then these impact fees are paid, or they also can be in-lieu if the developer actually puts in a park or puts in a new road or improves or widens an intersection in order to accommodate. So there are those types of projects that can be used as in-lieu credits towards what they would owe for Fair Share. And so that's why the projects have to be capital and have to be new, it's because it's trying to add to the capacity, trying to add the infrastructure in order to support the new development directly related. MS. LEE LOY: Great. And April, you and I have this conversation all the time. If we have a park but it needs a bathroom, is that considered increasing capacity for that asset? It's an existing asset but we need this money to then further enhance that asset so that we can have more carrying capacity at that asset. Your thoughts? MS. SUPRENANT: I've seen some administrations say yes, and some administrations say no. So there are differing opinions when it comes to that very simplified question and I think that the administration and the Council need to weigh those, you know, in an ongoing basis. As Director pointed to, this is not a formalized or codified program. It doesn't live in the Charter. It doesn't live in the Code. It doesn't live in the General Plan. It doesn't live in any specific piece of legislation that's passed by, ordinance, or whatever. The only place it lives is the condition itself in any given rezone ordinance. That's where it lives. And so again the guidance that is being used is based on, and there have been several at this point as many of you know, the various impact fee studies and reports that have been done, and previous multiple ordinances that have been tried to pass through the County Council. And so this is sort of a simplified version of what could be used in impact fees which would be structured, you know,probably a lot differently. Usually impact fees are triggered upon building permit rather than on subdivision or plan approval. But this is the only way we in Planning, since it lives in an ordinance that comes out of Planning i.e. rezone, then the subdivision or plan approval is the best sort of point to trigger when the funds are due. MR. KERN: And to add to that, your question, Councilwoman Lee Loy, is something that I've been thinking about a lot and kind of struggling with, what does that mean as far as capacity? What do we do as far as existing infrastructure, existing park? And so far it's been hands tied. But I don't think that needs to be the case. I think we can have a conversation and understanding on how to utilize some of this. It was a conversation that I was actually talking about the other day. Page 56 FC-6 March 16,2021 So if there was a parks facility and it was, you could say house 100 folks in it and it was demolished and rebuilt as 100, that would not be new capacity. However if it had 110 people as capacity, does that change the thinking? And I believe it would. So that's I think an ongoing conversation that's going to be a spark to as how we could utilize some of this because when you're challenged with the amount of capital that we have to do an entire project, right. Yet the impact of some of these projects are impacting our areas, our parks, our roads now. So couldn't we help with some of that? And that's again something that I'm open to discussing. MS. LEE LOY: Great. I love that fresh look at that because even in that example I still believe even if we increase it and improve it to just 100 but now we're ADA (Americans Disabilities Act) compliant, we're offering, you know, disability community to access the park. There's more ways to look at growing capacity not just by individual user but the capacity of that user. And so I'm open to this innovative way of looking at this Fair Share because some of this, as April said, it's all attached to rezone. And rezone won't happen in Puna because there's no infrastructure or water and the concurrency law gets in the way of that, right? And so we're trying to make infill happen from a planning perspective. But then the infrastructure might not be able to support that infill because the water lines are too small, or we need another fire—whatever it is. And so, you know, I always like having this conversation. I like the direction that we could be more innovative around it and really look at what rational nexus truly means, what increasing capacity means, and really start using this money in a way where it's turning into enhanced assets for everybody to use. Chair, I'm going to yield at this time. I think me, Director, and April over at planning will have more conversations on this. Thank you for bringing this forward. I yield. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Mr. Chung, your light is on. MR. CHUNG: Yeah. I mean, this is all interesting conversations but, you know, I like how April put it. It doesn't live in the Charter, it doesn't live in the Code, it lives in the rezoning ordinance. But actually I think it's more than that. It lives in the mind of the administrator and that's not really a good thing. You know, I've never been involved in any of the Fair Share discussions, you know, during all my time here as well as impact fees. But you know, I do recall there's an adverse reaction when people talk about impact fees. You know, my mindset is that impact fees must be good because at least the developer knows exactly what they have to do, right? They can pencil that in. But there must be something else afoot, you know, I don't know what it is. I don't know if it's political, practical, I have no idea. Maybe someone can educate me at some point. Page 57 FC-6 March 16,2021 You know, I'm kind of wary about the fact that we've been imposing Fair Share assessments without any kind of legal authority. You know, so if we want to tighten things up it should be done via a Code or at the very least a rule. But I don't think you can do a rule if you don't have any kind of enabling Code provision to allow for that. And you know, if we do codify it the use of those funds as, you know, being brought up by Ms. Lee Loy, can be included of course. It will be. And it can be as fluid as you guys want really, yeah? But it shouldn't be a situation where it kind of changes with each administration. It becomes very difficult, I think. That's all I've got to say really on that. Thank you. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Chung. Ms. Kimball. MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Chair. And thank you, Council Member Lee Loy, for getting into some of the nitty-gritty of this because it really helped illuminate this a little bit and generate some questions for me,particularly around April's comment that this doesn't live anywhere in Code. Yet we have some guidelines, this rational nexus. And you talked about takings also. I'm curious, these guidelines here and the definitions about it having to be used to increase capacity or for new infrastructure. Is that coming out of HRS (Hawai`i Revised Statutes)? Where does this guidance live right now? MS. SUPRENANT: I would have to go back and look up the reports that were previously done on various attempts to forward an impact fee. But there was one back in the 90's. There were others back in the, I want to say, 2013-ish span of time with the Council when two different ordinances were tried to pass during that time. To better answer that question. Which we can look for those reports and further those to Council for further discussion. I think the point is that the developer is putting forth money as, in essence, an impact fee. Their fair share of the impact that their development that their development is having on the surrounding neighborhood and region and therefor they're paying those funds in. And so the County has a due diligence to use those funds to do just that. And so to expand or new construction as it also says. So that's where the whole point of rational nexus comes from. And also just the duty that we have just to honor the funds that the developers have put forth to pay for their impact to the region from their developments, and particularly as it pertains to services and infrastructure. So again, that's where it comes from. But again, I'd have to look up those reports to forward those to you. MR. KERN: And to add to that, the way I understand it, and I'm not necessarily 100 percent accurate here. But there was a couple impact fee ordinances that went through that never passed. And the rational nexus criteria were taken from those based on those legal parameters that were defined in those. So there's an ordinance that comes through, right, an impact fee ordinance, and it's supposedly vetted, right, on that. And so that was pulled out of those ordinances essentially Page 58 FC-6 March 16,2021 to kind of give that general direction. But I think we can look at it with some fresh eyes, you know, without question. MS. KIMBALL: That sounds very nebulous, and I would like to explore that more. If I'm understanding you correctly, so the ordinances were written. Those ordinances included this rational nexus that being vetted by LRB (Legislative Research Branch). Those ordinances didn't pass, but we're still using that guideline. But we don't know that that actually was originally—maybe it complied with the law but it's not necessarily in there because there is some sort of HRS (Hawai`i Revised Statutes) or federal rule in the State in place. MR. KERN: My understanding is that former Director Yuen kind of brought this together. So I'm going to go out on a little bit of a limb then he was a pretty diligent individual and there was some vetting around that, not just kind of pulling out of thin air and throwing it in there. So I'm sure there was criteria that he followed to do that. Again though, we can take a fresh look at it. MS. KIMBALL: Yeah. I see the need, as one of my other colleagues mentioned, for maybe a little bit of flexibility in terms of where these funds can be applied, given jus the variety of situations that we have. So I appreciate the opportunity to explore this further with you folks and have additional conversations. Thank you, Chair. I yield. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Kona? MS. DAVID: Thank you, Chair. No comments on side. Thanks. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. That leaves me. Questions. When there's a subdivision created, usually there's a requirement that"X" percentage of the land is dedicated to be a park. I think it's a requirement by Code. It's not an option. How does that interplay with the Fair Share Contribution as far as the requirement to have park space but also the Fair Share requirement? Are they completely separate or are they linked together? MR. KERN: They're linked in the sense that if a project puts in the park, then that would go against the portion of the Fair Share requirement for the park component. Similarly, if they were to put in a new roadway, they would also get basically a credit for that portion of the roadway against the portion of the fair share for roadways. It would be the same if it was land that was donated. So as stated earlier, it could be a like kind, it could be cash, it could be land, it could be other offsite development, or it could be a combination or an onsite development or combination thereof. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: So I mean,we require them to make park spacing. It's five percent of the total project that's the requirement for a park. Page 59 FC-6 March 16,2021 But they can use the value of that dedicated land to the County against the Fair Share Contribution? MR. KERN: They could. Or they could use the capital that was spend on the park against it. And another really simple way as you've seen the rezones come through, they require like a five-foot road widening setback on the roadway for a future County road. Before it goes to Fair Share, that portion of that land could be deducted off of their Fair Share because they're essentially contributing that land to the County. So there's no double-dipping essentially. You don't build a park. You don't build a road and pay your maximum Fair Share. You pay the proportionate amount however that weighs out. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: In my head it seems like, I wouldn't call it double-dipping, but it would say that we required a five percent park area. Is that right, five percent, yeah? MR. KERN: Five percent on a certain size park. And that's in Chapter 23. So that's even the case for non-newly zoned property. So comes up even if there is no Fair Share, that requirement per Chapter 23 would come up. Now on a rezoning you have the Fair Share contribution in that and now a calculation off of that. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Oh, maybe they should be separate. You create the park area, at least the space, and then you as well have to pay your Fair Share. MR. KERN: I'm not saying that. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: But that makes sense to my mind just from giving what was said in the Code. MR. KERN: Two separate issues. So one is the large, for Chapter 23, if you have a large enough subdivision you're required to, you know, provide the land for the park. Now on a rezoning ordinance, that could be as small as a two-lot, you know,rezone for residential and it could be in there or larger, right? So it's really a balance. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: And then what strikes me too is these funds are additional to our budget. It's not, I mean, I can see using them for other things. You know, obviously there's going to be need on both sides, new capital improvement projects that don't exist, or you know, facility hardening on the opposite side, things that already exist. But these are also just additional funds that can be used to fund new things. I mean, looking over this, Puna doesn't have $220,000, because there's just not a lot of Fair Share Contributions being made in Puna clearly. North Kohala is the exact opposite. You know, there's a lot of Page 60 FC-6 March 16,2021 funds available. It is hard to see a lot of lapsed appropriations while knowing that those were not encumbered and spent. MR. KERN: I would say though that the difference on the appropriations that are lapsed, they don't go away. It just still goes back into the kitty and they're there to be used. They don't disappear. So those funds are left in there. They don't go away until they're spent. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: That's good. MR. KERN: It doesn't evaporate into the ether like the General Fund can CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: That's wonderful. Yes. MR. KERN: Because you know, you're balancing a lot of needs with the general fund, where these funds are specific for, here's your park money, here's your road money, you know, here's your solid waste money, and then broken down by the rational nexus. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. So they're not spent, they stay within this? MR. KERN: Yes. And they just have to go through the process to re-appropriate them on the next go round. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Does this have its own section in our Code, I mean, in our budget? Like there is one account and the whole thing is completely separate? I see Deanna. Deanna's got the eyes. Thank you, Deanna. (Note: At this time, Finance Director Deanna S. Sako came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MS. SAKO: So when you review the CIP budget in the front, there actually are projects. If they're appropriated with Fair Share, they're actually listed under the Fair Share section. And then in the Monthly Budget Status Report and the balance sheet for the Capital Project Fund, there is a fund balance account specifically for Fair Share. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. So it's got its own separate house. MS. SAKO: Yup. They're tracked separately. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. And then it looks like we have $12 million in contributions this year, correct,just from looking at the report? Page 61 FC-6 March 16,2021 MS. SUPRENANT: That would be total. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Total. MS. SUPRENANT: It's total for all of the Fair Share Contributions to date. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: To date or just 2020? MS. SUPRENANT: To date. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Since the beginning of time, $12 million. Okay. And then a $4 million balance. MS. SUPRENANT: And we have a total balance of$4 million,right. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. And for that$4 million is there—do you have projects in mind? And what would be the hold up if you had the funding but nothing being done? Is it that the departments need more manpower to get it done or we need to finalize a project or do an EA (Environmental Assessment), what is it that holds up, you know, the spending of the funds? MS. SUPRENANT: That's a capital question for the departments and it probably varies on the type of project that it is and the process that it needs to go through in order to accomplish it. It varies. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: So a good discussion about Capital Improvement Projects could be helpful then? MS. SUPRENANT: Yes. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. Thank you. And then you said this is all based on the CIP which is not capital improvement projects. Thank you for clarifying that. But the MR. KERN: This is in the Fair Share. But the interesting component is that the fair share is for CIP projects. So it's another funding source for CIP projects. So for example, if the fire department—we could build a facility for the Fire Department, but we couldn't actually but an apparatus. So it falls under the CIP of Capital Improvement Project. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Sorry, but the percentage was based on the index prime you said, correct? MR. KERN: The percentage is based off of the numbers that they came up with per unit,per housing unit, at that time to say here's the impact it would have, let's Page 62 FC-6 March 16,2021 allocate, you know, I'm just using made up numbers here. Let's allocate $3,000 per unit for a park. Let's allocate $3,000 for police and so on so forth. That set the basis for this Fair Share Contribution. Every year that increases by CIP so it's keeping up with the times. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: And CIP stands for? Sorry. MR. KERN: Capital CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Because there's two that we're talking about, two CIF's. MR. KERN: Consumer Price Index. And I'm saying CPI instead of CIP. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. Thank you. So we're talking about CIP's but we're talking about a CPI which is confusing. So Consumer Price Index. MR. KERN: And that keeps, which is generally around two or three percent a year. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. MR. KERN: So basically, it's keeping up with the cost of things increasing, right, because pavement 20 years ago was a different price than pavement today. So what the Fair Share Contribution was 20 years ago or 10 years ago was less than it was today. So the CPI is just to keep up with current costs. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: So I mean basically what you're saying is this was just created and the amount that we charge for Fair Share is completely up to us and guiding document would be the zoning, rezoning approval document with all the Fair Share contributions listed per item? MR. KERN: There was a rational nexus of how these numbers were put together. That, I do not have in front of me and would be happy to work on digging that up and providing that for you folks. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Yeah, I'd be interested to see that. But more so, I mean, going forward, do we have to follow? Can we increase, decrease? I mean obviously we can decrease. But could we increase? MR. KERN: I'm not sure. Something that we'll have the Corporation Counsel vet out. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: And then by how much? Page 63 FC-6 March 16,2021 MR. KERN: Something that I can have Corporation Counsel vet out. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: All amazing questions. This is big. This is not a small amount of funding. It really helps the community do new capital improvement projects going forward. MR. KERN: It does. It also, there's a balance, right, because we talked about affordability. And each one of those goes directly to the cost of the lot. So often times we'll see an affordable housing project come through and say the Fair Share would be waived. So when we're talking about affordability and having various options, we need to balance that with also the improvements that we need in the community. So it's just something to be mindful of. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Okay. Ms. Kimball, go ahead. MS. KIMBALL: Yeah. I just have a couple quick clarifying questions. When the Fair Share is determined in the ordinance, is it tied at that time to a particular capital improvement, or it just goes into that fair share budget or does it vary? MR. KERN: It just goes into the fund. It'll go into the fund and then that would then be appropriated by whatever department at that time. MS. KIMBALL: Okay. At what stage does it go into the fund? And maybe this is a Deanna MR. KERN: The stage it goes into the fund would be prior to final subdivision approval or plan approval. So for example, if we had a rezoning ordinance that was done say, 10 years ago and the zoning lapsed what you folks see, and it would come in for a time extension. Generally, often times the fair share is changed to reflect what today is. And then at whatever point and time they get to prior to final subdivision approval or plan approval, then that money would be due. So just by passing the change of zone ordinance does not mean the money is allocated, right, or even written. It has to go through that steps. So right before they're actually provided a product, a lot, or a building, or a multi-family unit. MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Chair, for the opportunity to ask that clarification. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Kimball. That's a good question she put forward. Thank you. Kona, any further comments before we wrap it up? Okay, seeing none. Thank you for the discussion today, Mr. Kern. Appreciate it. MR. KERN: Pleasure. See you soon. Page 64 FC-6 March 16,2021 CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Yeah. Thank you. Mr. Brown, I believe we have a motion on the floor to close file on Communication 151. And again, thank you for your patience today. MR. KERN: Thank you all very much. Have a great rest of your day. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Sir. So that brings us to the end of our Finance Committee. May I please have a motion? MR. BROWN: Nope. If you could just take the vote, Chair,please? CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Sorry. On the motion to close file on Communication 151, all in favor? Vote on Comm. 151: The motion to close file on Comm. 151 was carried by Filed the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, David, Inaba, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Richards, Villegas, and Chair Kdneali`i-Kleinfelder— 8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Lee Loy — 1. Excused: None. ORDER OF The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, RESOLUTIONS: Bills for Ordinances. (Note: Items for this category were taken up previously, out of order.) BILLS FOR The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, ORDINANCES: Bills for Ordinances. (Note: Items for this category were taken up previously, out of order.) CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: With that, may I have a motion to adjourn? Page 65 FC-6 March 16,2021 ADJOURN- There being no further business, at 12:30 p.m. Ms. Kimball moved to adjourn MENT: the meeting. Seconded by Mr. Inaba and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, David, Inaba, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Richards, Villegas and Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder— 8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Lee Loy— 1. Excused: None. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: We are adjourned. Approved: 5/3/2 Mr. Matt Ka eali`i- ` leinfelder, Chair (Date) Finance Co ittee \ MK/na Page 66 1