Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN COUNCIL 2022-07-06 2020-2022 Hawaii County Council 441h Session Hawaii County Building 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, Hawaii July 6, 2022 INVOCATION: Reverend Kazunori Takahashi of Honpa Hongwanji Hilo Betsuin gave the morning's invocation. CALL TO The regular meeting of the Hawaii County Council was called to order at ORDER: 9:00 a.m., in the Council Chambers, Hilo, by Ms. Maile Medeiros David, Chair. ROLL CALL: Present: Ms. Maile Medeiros David, Chair Mr. Aaron S. Y. Chung, Vice Chair Mr. Holeka Goro Inaba, Member Ms. Ashley L. Kierkiewicz, Member Ms. Heather L. Kimball, Member Ms. Susan L. K. Lee Loy, Member Mr. Herbert M. "Tim" Richards, III, Member(came in later) Ms. Rebecca Villegas, Member (came in later) Absent& Excused: Mr. Matt Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Member PLEDGE OF The Chair directed the Council to the next order of business, Pledge of ALLEGIANCE: Allegiance. (At this time, County Clerk Jon Henricks led the Council in the Pledge of Allegiance.) PETITIONS, The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business, Petitions, MEMORIALS, Memorials, Certificates of Merit, and Expressions of Condolence. CERTIFICATES OF MERIT, AND (Note: At this time, Ms. Kierkiewicz presented Certificates of Merit to the EXPRESSIONS OF Pilipa`a Na Wahine Volleyball Club for winning the Southern California CONDOLENCE: Volleyball Association's 13'h Annual Summer Soiree Tournament.) Recess: At 9:19 a.m., the Chair called for a recess. Reconvene: The meeting reconvened at 9:22 a.m. Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 STATEMENTS The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business, FROM THE Statements from the Public on Agenda Items. PUBLIC ON AGENDA ITEMS: The following individuals registered to speak and came forward when called by the Chair: Kristen Alice: Bill 152, Draft 2 (Comm. 721.18), comment; and (representing Community Bill 175, Draft 2 (Comm. 812.2), in support. Alliance Partners and HOPE Services Hawaii) Wendy Laros: Bill 174, Draft 2 (Comm. 810.3), in support. (representing Kona-Kohala (See Comm. 810.8) Chamber of Commerce) APPROVAL The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business, Approval OF MINUTES: of Minutes. CHR. DAVID: Ms. Lee Loy, a motion please. MS. LEE LOY: Chair, a motion to approve the minutes of May 4, 2022. It's reflected as May 3rd on the agenda but should be May 4, 2022. CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Vote on Approval Ms. Lee Loy moved to approve the Minutes of May 4, of Minutes: 2022. Seconded by Mr. Inaba and carried by the (Approved) following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, Inaba, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Villegas, and Chair David—7. Noes: None. Absent: Council Members Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder and Richards —2. Excused: None. Page 2 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 Vote on Approval Ms. Lee Loy moved to approve the Minutes of May 18, of Minutes: 2022. Seconded by Mr. Inaba and carried by the (Approved) following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, Inaba, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Villegas, and Chair David—7. Noes: None. Absent: Council Members Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder and Richards —2. Excused: None. ORDER OF The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business, Order of RESOLUTIONS: Resolutions. Res. 443-22: TRANSFERS/APPROPRIATES AN APPROPRIATION OUT AND FROM A DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT AND CREDITS SAME TO A DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT TO PROVIDE A GRANT TO THE PAHOA LAVA ZONE MUSEUM FOR EXPENSES RELATING TO PLACEMAKING INITIATIVES FOR PAHOA TOWN Transfers $15,000 from the Clerk-Council Services —Contingency Relief account (Council District 4); and credits to the Department of Liquor Control, Public Programs account. Reference: Comm. 845 Intr. by: Ms. Kierkiewicz Motion to Approve: Ms. Kierkiewicz moved to adopt Res. 443-22. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy. CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Ms. Kierkiewicz. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chair. Providing this pretty sizable CRF (Contingency Relief Fund)to the Pahoa Lava Zone Museum, which has expressed an interest in working with various community partners to do block parties in Downtown Pahoa. So, hoping that this seed money can be stretched over the course of the year and we are able to just have a good time, support local businesses/artisans in the Puna area. So, looking for everyone's support. Thank you. CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Anyone else? Seeing none, all those in favor of approving Resolution 443-22, please say "aye." Page 3 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 Vote on Res. 443-22: The motion to adopt Res. 443-22 was carried by the (Adopted) following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, Inaba, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Villegas, and Chair David—7. Noes: None. Absent: Council Members Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder and Richards —2. Excused: None. Res. 444-22: AUTHORIZES THE PAYMENT OF FUNDS OF A LATER FISCAL YEAR AND OF MORE THAN ONE FISCAL YEAR FOR A MULTI-YEAR LEASE FOR ONE MULTIFUNCTION COPY MACHINE FOR THE FIRE DEPARTMENT Authorizes the Mayor to enter into a five-year lease agreement with an estimated monthly cost of$194 to be used at the department's Administration office in Hilo. Reference: Comm. 849 Intr. by: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder(B/R) Waived: FC Motion to Approve: Ms. Lee Loy moved to adopt Res. 444-22. Seconded by Mr. Inaba. CHR. DAVID: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder is not here today. So, Council Members, do you have any questions? I believe a waiver was requested. So, if you have any questions regarding why this is being pushed through, I believe it might be a time issue, that we've got to sign these agreements. So, if no one else has questions, all those in favor of approving Resolution 444-22, please say Ic aye. Vote on Res. 444-22: The motion to adopt Res. 444-22 was carried by the (Adopted) following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, Inaba, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Villegas, and Chair David—7. Noes: None. Absent: Council Members Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder and Richards —2. Excused: None. BILLS FOR The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business, Bills for ORDINANCES Ordinances (First Reading). (FIRST READING): Page 4 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 Bill 181: AMENDS ORDINANCE NO. 06-82 WHICH RECLASSIFIED LANDS FROM AGRICULTURAL—20 ACRES (A-20a) TO FAMILY AGRICULTURAL— 3 ACRES (FA-3a) AT KALOKO MAUKA SUBDIVISION, NORTH KONA, HAWAII, COVERED BY TAX MAP KEY: 7-3-024:008 (Applicant: Clinton Hinchcliff, Jr.) (Area: 21.992 acres) The Leeward Planning Commission forwards its favorable recommendation for this amendment, which would in part allow a five-year time extension to comply with Condition D (Final Subdivision Approval), amend Condition E(Restrictive Covenants), and delete Condition J(Improvements to Kaloko Drive/Mamalahoa Highway Intersection). The property is located along the south side of Kaloko Drive at the northeastern corner of its intersection with Hao Street, Kaloko Mauka Subdivision, North Kona Reference: Comm. 829 Intr. by: Ms. Kierkiewicz (B/R) Approve: PC-69 Motion to Approve: Ms. Kierkiewicz moved to pass Bill 181 on first reading and adopt Planning Committee Report No. 69. Seconded by Mr. Inaba. CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Ms. Kierkiewicz. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. This was a pretty straightforward request. Taking a look at the report, there was significant discussion in Committee. We also have the consultant for the project here in case anybody has any questions. But I'll be supporting this measure. Thank you, Chair. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kierkiewicz. Anyone else? Seeing none, all those in favor of approving Bill 181 at first reading, please say "aye." Vote on Bill 181: The motion to pass Bill 181 on first reading and adopt (Approved) Planning Committee Report No. 69 was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, Inaba, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Villegas, and Chair David—7. Noes: None. Absent: Council Members Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder and Richards —2. Excused: None. Page 5 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 Bill 182: AMENDS CHAPTER 19,ARTICLE 10, SECTION 19-71, OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE 1983 (2016 EDITION,AS AMENDED),RELATING TO REAL PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTIONS Increases the general exemption amount for property that is owned and occupied as a principal home and adds new age ranges with corresponding exemption amounts to the schedule of exemptions for property owners of principal homes who are 60 years of age or older. Reference: Comm. 830 Intr. by: Ms. Kimball Approve: FC-164 Motion to Approve: Ms. Kimball moved to pass Bill 182 on first reading and adopt Finance Committee Report No. 164. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy. CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Ms. Kimball. MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Chair. So, we had an excellent discussion around this in Committee, and I appreciate everyone's support in moving it out of Committee. As we were deliberating, the point was raised that maybe we want to amend this to require a certain residency duration before this benefit kicks in. And I started kind of working on that, but I decided I kind of wanted to get a little bit of feedback from this group before I did that, about where exactly we want to place that. I did have a discussion with Corporation Counsel, that it is legally reasonable because we could say that you could get these benefits at a certain time of residency because you've contributed to the tax base to a certain amount. And so, legally, it's possible. I see our property tax administrator is here. She and I only were able to have a brief discussion via email about the mechanics of it. And so, that might be actually the more challenging piece of how it can actually be integrated into our system. So, given that, what I wanted to just kind of put out to the group today is, would you like to consider this residency requirement with respect to the age-range benefit or the 20 percent benefit? I mean, it could apply at either place. And so again, Lisa and I have to work out the mechanics of it. And I'll come back with an amendment, but I kind of wanted to get a little feedback on that first. I will also say that we have time on this. So, I'm happy to postpone at the first reading here rather than move it on once we've had this discussion, so I have an opportunity to bring that amendment to the group. Thank you, Chair. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Before I go to you, Ms. Lee Loy, I just want to note that Judge Strance is available on Zoom for us if we need to. And welcome, Administrator Miura. Go ahead, Ms. Lee Loy. Page 6 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 MS. LEE LOY: Thank you to the maker of this piece of legislation. Thank you, Lisa, for being here. I do want to work a little bit harder. I also—as this body knows, we have another piece of legislation. And I just want to make sure the mechanics of not only this piece, but something that we have already discussed and I'm doing a lot of due diligence on that one—and wanting to make sure that these link up nicely to truly provide everything that we're trying to get back to our constituency, which is some level of relief. And also that the Real Property Tax department has the mechanics within their systems to actually do some of the things that we want to do. I'm definitely willing to work on it a little bit more. And if that's something to hold it here and postpone it a little bit, I will support that. But yeah, I'm watching this along with the other work that I'm doing. So,that's my suggestions. Thank you, Chair, I yield. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. Anyone else? Administrator Miura, would you like to weigh in at this point since we're discussing this? Or if anybody else has any questions? If not, then that's fine as well. Ms. Kimball. MS. KIMBALL: Council Member Lee Loy, can you remind me again what date we're reconsidering the other piece of legislation that's mentioned? MS. LEE LOY: Thank you. Chair, if I may respond? CHR. DAVID: Go ahead. MS. LEE LOY: It's our first meeting in August. MS. KIMBALL: I'll make a motion—let's discuss these together to postpone Bill 182 to the August 3rd Council meeting. Motion to Postpone: Ms. Kimball moved to postpone Bill 182 to August 3, 2022. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy. CHR. DAVID: Any discussion MS. LEE LOY: On the postponement, Chair? CHR. DAVID: On the postponement. Go ahead. MS. LEE LOY: Yeah, absolutely. I'll support this postponement. Just as a reminder, the previous piece of legislation I still have sitting back in Committee. So, we'll actually discuss that in Committee, and then this piece will follow the next day. Thank you, Chair, I yield. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. Go ahead, Mr. Chung. Page 7 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 MR. CHUNG: Yeah, inasmuch as I'm not going to be here on the 3rd, I just wanted to weigh in just a bit. And I'm going to reiterate what I had stated the last time, because I think that's what Ms. Kimball was looking for, some guidance from each of the Council Members. I support this bill because it's keeping with the times. But what causes me some angst is really the—it's not related to this specific bill, but just the overall concept of this arrangement. I think that only because a person reaches a certain age does not or should not entitle that person to an exemption. My feeling. There are some persons of a certain age who are able to pay their fair share, and yet there are others who have contributed many years to our tax roll who should be given a break, I believe, in deference to those many years of contributions. I know it would probably be unconstitutional to go with a residency requirement, but another way of doing it would be to have some mechanism whereby you build in the years that a person has availed themselves of a homeowner exemption. And they could have bought a new home. But as long as they had a homeowner's exemption or were in the homeowner class or whatever it is, I mean that's something you've got to talk to our experts over there. That way we're taking care of the people that we want to take care. That's our target, really. And I'm not trying to pick on anybody, but there are a lot of people with substantial resources who are going to come here to retire. And for them to get an automatic exemption just based on their age, it just kind of causes me some heartburn. So, that's all I have to say. Thank you. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Chung. Mr. Inaba, go ahead. MR. INABA: Thank you. Council Member Kimball, I think, in response to your question as to where those types of changes might occur, I would say, for myself, it would be in this Section 4, the second part of the bill,just because there's a lot of information and numbers and years of age and all kinds of things happening in Section 3. So,just to—and we see just one additional exemption amount in Section 4 of the bill. So, it would just help, I think, for us when looking at the Code to read more clearly. But I do support what Council Member Chung is talking about. And I know the intention is to somehow massage that into this. But yeah,just in response to your question today: the second part of the bill. Thank you. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Inaba. Anyone else before I go back to Ms. Kimball? No? Ms. Kimball, go ahead. MS. KIMBALL: I just want to thank my colleagues for weighing in and providing some feedback. No promises. We have a lot of work to do to kind of figure out what might be possible. But I do appreciate where you're coming from and share some of that concern, that the folks that are able to avail themselves of Page 8 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 this benefit really should be the ones that have been contributing for a significant amount of time to our tax base. So, we'll try to make that happen. But yeah,just appreciate your feedback. And if there are other ideas that come to you in the interim,please feel free to reach out to my office. Thank you, Chair. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Anyone else? Seeing none, on the motion to postpone Bill 182 to the August 3 meeting, please say "aye." Vote on Motion to The motion to postpone Bill 182 to August 3, 2022, was Postpone: carried by the following voice vote: (Approved) Ayes: Council Members Chung, Inaba, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Villegas, and Chair David—7. Noes: None. Absent: Council Members Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder and Richards —2. Excused: None. CHR. DAVID: This matter is postponed to August 3rd Bill 183: AMENDS SECTION 25-8-25 (KEA`AU ZONE MAP), ARTICLE 8, CHAPTER 25 (ZONING CODE) OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE 1983 (2016 EDITION, AS AMENDED), BY CHANGING THE DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION FROM SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL— 10,000 SQUARE FEET (RS-10) TO VILLAGE COMMERCIAL— 10,000 SQUARE FEET (CV-10) AT KEA`AU, PUNA, HAWAII, COVERED BY TAX MAP KEY: 1-6-002:082 (Applicant: Lawrence Palmer) (Area: 11,254 square feet) The Windward Planning Commission forwards its favorable recommendation for this change of zone, which would allow the applicant to establish a furniture and appliance retail outlet to include two showrooms, two bathrooms, a workshop/storage space, and a parking lot with four parking stalls, one of which will be ADA accessible. The property is located at 16-540 Laukahi Place, approximately 150 feet east of its intersection with Old Volcano Road in Kea`au, Puna. Reference: Comm. 832 Intr. by: Ms. Kierkiewicz (B/R) Approve: PC-70 Motion to Approve: Ms. Kierkiewicz moved to pass Bill 183 on first reading and adopt Planning Committee Report No. 70. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy. CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Ms. Kierkiewicz. Page 9 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. I see we have the applicant and the representative on Zoom in case folks have questions. I wasn't at Committee and I just wanted to take an opportunity, Ms. Palmer, to mahalo nui you for your investment in the Puna community. It is a growing community, and the services that you're going to be providing through this project are going to be really significant and make a positive impact. So, I'll be supporting this request today and ask my colleagues for their support. Thank you, Chair, I yield. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kierkiewicz. Anyone else? Seeing none, all those in favor of approving Bill 183 at first reading, please say "aye." Vote on Bill 183: The motion to pass Bill 183 on first reading and adopt (Approved) Planning Committee Report No. 70 was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, Inaba, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Villegas, and Chair David—7. Noes: None. Absent: Council Members Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder and Richards —2. Excused: None. Bill 184: AMENDS ORDINANCE NO. 22-63, AS AMENDED, THE OPERATING BUDGET FOR THE COUNTY OF HAWAII FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2023 Increases revenues in the Real Property Taxes account($65,000); and appropriates the same to the Grants to Nonprofit Organizations account. Funds would be used to provide additional grants-in-aid awards to nonprofit organizations. Reference: Comm. 851 Intr. by: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder(B/R) Waived: FC Motion to Approve: Ms. Lee Loy moved to pass Bill 184 on first reading. Seconded by Mr. Inaba. CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Ms. Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Chair. Thank you for advancing this. My mom always told me sometimes you've got to make a mess to clean a mess. And this particular piece of legislation is a lot of the work that we did in the nonprofit. So, I just want to take a minute to just make sure that all of our Council Members have gone through this piece of legislation, and then the subsequent one hereafter. These are all the programs that we talked about, all the funding, the different sources of funding, and the awards. Asking for my colleagues' support. Page 10 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. Anyone else? Mr. Inaba, go ahead. MR. INABA: Yes, thank you. Ms. Nakagawa, could you just come up and make sure we have everything correct today. I think I reviewed it and it all makes sense. But this is the last step, I think, for now. So, since you're here. (Note: At this time, Finance Deputy Director Diane Nakagawa came forward to address the members of the Council.) MS. NAKAGAWA: Yes. Good morning, members of Council. Diane Nakagawa, Deputy Finance Director. Councilman, yes. So, the 65,000 is to increase grants-in-aid, for the total of 3,440,000 that was requested in the total grants-in-aid package recommended by Council. MR. INABA: Perfect. Okay. And then, I guess that's it for this measure. Please don't go anywhere. Thank you. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Inaba. Anyone else on this? Seeing none, all those in favor, then, of approving Bill 184 at first reading, please say "aye." Vote on Bill 184: The motion to pass Bill 184 on first reading was carried by (Approved) the following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, Inaba, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Villegas, and Chair David—7. Noes: None. Absent: Council Members Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder and Richards —2. Excused: None. Bill 185: AMENDS ORDINANCE NO. 22-63, AS AMENDED, THE OPERATING BUDGET FOR THE COUNTY OF HAWAII FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2023 Decreases appropriations of$3,440,000 in the Homelessness Grant-In-Aid account ($260,000) and the Grants To Nonprofit Organizations account($3,180,000); and appropriates the same in varying amounts to 133 nonprofit grant-in-aid programs. Reference: Comm. 852 Intr. by: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder(B/R) Waived: FC and Comm. 852.1: From Finance Director Deanna S. Sako, transmitting a proposed amendment to Bill 185. Page 11 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 Motion to Approve: Ms. Lee Loy moved to pass Bill 185 on first reading. Seconded by Mr. Inaba. CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Ms. Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: Again, it lists all the different programs. And asking for my colleagues' support. I yield. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. Anyone else? Seeing none MS. LEE LOY: Chair? CHR. DAVID: Oh, go ahead. MS. LEE LOY: There is an amendment to the bill. I'd like to CHR. DAVID: Go ahead. Motion to Amend: Ms. Lee Loy moved to amend Bill 185 with the contents of Comm. 852.1. Seconded by Mr. Inaba. CHR. DAVID: Any discussion? Go ahead, Ms. Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: This was being advanced by Finance division, clearing up the account numbers to make sure that every single program is identified by an account number. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. That's a huge task and I want to thank you folks for doing that, for working on this and getting it on time. So, seeing no other discussion, all those in favor of amending Bill 185 with the contents of Communication 852.1,please say "aye." Vote on Motion to The motion to amend Bill 185 with the contents of Amend: Comm. 852.1 was carried by the following voice vote: (Approved) Ayes: Council Members Chung, Inaba, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Villegas, and Chair David—7. Noes: None. Absent: Council Members Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder and Richards —2. Excused: None. Page 12 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 Vote on Bill 185: The motion to pass Bill 185, as amended to Draft 2, on first Draft 2 reading was carried by the following voice vote: (Approved) Ayes: Council Members Chung, Inaba, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Villegas, and Chair David—7. Noes: None. Absent: Council Members Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder and Richards —2. Excused: None. ORDER OF The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business, Order of THE DAY the Day (Second or Final Reading). (SECOND OR FINAL READING): Bill 168: INITIATES AN AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE XIV, SECTION 14-5 OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CHARTER(2020 EDITION), RELATING TO THE BOARD OF ETHICS Increases the membership of the board from five to seven members. Reference: Comm. 783 Intr. by: Ms. Lee Loy First Reading: June 1, 2022 Second Reading: June 15, 2022 2/3 Vote: Third of three required readings, Section 15-1(a), Hawai`i County Charter Motion to Approve: Ms. Lee Loy moved to pass Bill 168 on third and final reading. Seconded by Mr. Inaba. CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Ms. Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: I just ask for my colleagues' continued support. CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Anyone else? Seeing none, all those in favor of approving Bill 168 at second and final reading, please say "aye." I'm sorry? Oh, third. Okay, sorry. Third and final reading. All those in favor, please say "aye." Page 13 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 Vote on Bill 168: The motion to pass Bill 168 on third and final reading was (Adopted) carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, Inaba, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Villegas, and Chair David—7. Noes: None. Absent: Council Members Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder and Richards —2. Excused: None. Bill 173: INITIATES AN AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE III, SECTION 3-18 OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CHARTER(2020 EDITION), RELATING TO THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY AUDITOR Adds investigations of reports of fraud, waste, and abuse within County operations as an authorized function of the Office of the County Auditor. Reference: Comm. 809 Intr. by: Ms. Kierkiewicz First Reading: June 15, 2022 2/3 Vote: Second of three required readings, Section 15-1(a), Hawai`i County Charter Motion to Approve: Ms. Kierkiewicz moved to pass Bill 173 on second reading. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy. CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Ms. Kierkiewicz. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chair. Just looking for everyone's continued support. We've had robust dialogue on this in Committee and at first reading. Thank you. CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Anyone else? Seeing none, all those in favor of approving Bill 173 at second reading, please say "aye." Vote on Bill 173: The motion to pass Bill 173 on second reading was carried (Adopted) by the following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, Inaba, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Villegas, and Chair David—7. Noes: None. Absent: Council Members Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder and Richards —2. Excused: None. Page 14 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 Bill 174: INITIATES AN AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE VI OF THE HAWAII COUNTY (Draft 2) CHARTER (2020 EDITION), BY ADDING A NEW CHAPTER TO ESTABLISH A DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING Creates a Department of Building to manage the duties and functions currently performed by the Building Division within the Department of Public Works. Reference: Comm. 810.3 Intr. by: Ms. Kierkiewicz First Reading: June 15, 2022 2/3 Vote: Second of three required readings, Section 15-1(a), Hawai`i County Charter (Note: Comm. 810.4, from Finance Director Deanna Sako dated July 5, 2022, transmitting a fiscal impact statement, was circulated.) Motion to Approve: Ms. Kierkiewicz moved to pass Bill 174, Draft 2, on second reading. Seconded by Mr. Inaba. CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Ms. Kierkiewicz. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chair. I see we have our Deputy Finance Director here. Ms. Nakagawa, if you could come forward. I want to call attention to the pinkie that we have in our folders. I requested a fiscal impact statement from the Finance Department so we can walk into decision-making with eyes wide open. But before we get to that, I just want to recognize folks that took the time to submit testimony online, to show up today via Zoom. These are folks that have had decades of experience going through the permitting process. So, I really appreciate their mana`o. At the end of the day,just trying to get to what government is supposed to be doing, and that's ensuring public health and safety. The Building Division helps to facilitate that with the permitting process. But what we've seen in the testimony—and I'm sure you folks have talked to folks in the community—over time this process has gotten more cumbersome, more inefficient, more expensive, just way more bureaucratic. So, trying to peel some of those layers back. And over the years, under multiple administrations, there have been attempts for multiple reboots, but the fact still remains Public Works is just way too massive. It's just simply too big. Yesterday, there were conversations that we were having that really underscored the myriad of issues that that department is facing: the lack of being able to implement Complete Streets and Vision Zero, Council Member Chung pointing out that the Waianuenue project not being on the STIP (Statewide Transportation Improvement Program) list for a number of years despite being told that it was, Kalanianaole still not in drivable condition. I'm concerned about all of the Federal money out there that we are just not in a position to be going after. Page 15 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 As the representative that is representing the community that was inundated by lava, I cannot tell you how much it pains me that my community still cannot go home. They are years behind schedule in restoring roads, not to mention all of the facilities that Public Works has to do in terms of maintenance. On top of that, we have the permitting process. The status quo is not working. There are just too many balls in the air that are being juggled by Public Works and things are dropping. In my mind, I see very different distinctions with what Public Works is supposed to be doing. These general services making sure that County infrastructure is taken care of, which requires a totally different skillset from overseeing the permitting and inspection process. When we had then Director of Public Works Ikaika Rodenhurst providing us an update on where we are with implementation of the EPIC (Electronic Processing and Information Center)permitting process, the Mayor also graced us with his presence. And I took note of something that kind of caught me off guard and that's when he said, "I'm on the phone with the Director twice a day to talk about EPIC." How many other functions do we have in County government? Many, many more. And to know that that much time and energy and resources was being spent on that one particular issue made me think about what is being neglected within County government. So, we need a change. We need a change. And what this Charter amendment proposes to do is provide very explicit focus on this incredibly important function of County government. It would also allow for proactive engagement within the community around these issues, as well as identify leadership that has actual experience in building and construction. With that being said, Deputy Director, I just wanted to have you kind of walk us through the fiscal impacts. I'll be honest: There was a little bit of a sticker shock on my end. But I know that this is coming from a place of experience when the functions of Environmental Management, Wastewater and Solid Waste, which were part of Public Works at one point in time, were peeled out via Charter amendment, and there were some initial start-up costs in terms of personnel and finding a place to put all of these folks. So, could you just give us a high-level overview of what we are reviewing here, and if it is at all possible that we can kind of phase in how we kind of make these investments should this Charter amendment pass. (Note: At this time, Finance Deputy Director Diane Nakagawa came forward to address the members of the Council.) MS. NAKAGAWA: Absolutely. So at the request, we did prepare a fiscal impact statement for the proposal of a new Department of Building. In the last couple of weeks, we've looked at historical moves that we've made, as Councilwoman has mentioned, as well as working with the Department of Public Works on an estimate for the build-out. So, they have provided some preliminary rough estimates, which we have in front of you today (see Comm. 810.4). Page 16 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 First and foremost, we looked at the addition of new staff, which would be 14 new positions: primarily the Director, Deputy Director, Private Secretary, and then the fiscal and human resource functions that are necessary in every department, along with the transferring of the staff in the existing Public Works Building Division. The total S&W (salaries and wages) increase is 1.7 million for the 14 new positions. And then we looked at space. So, a new department would require some additional space. Even if you're transferring the staff, they do need their space to operate. If we were to lease out space, we looked at square footage amounts necessary in both East and West Hawaii for this new department: approximately 4,000 square feet in West Hawaii and 8,000 square feet in East Hawaii. With market rates, we looked at approximately $396,000 per year for the lease rates as a rough estimate. And then we had to look at the build-out; so, the first year's cost to actually build- out these spaces. So, Public Works did provide an estimate based on a previous move of the Prosecuting Attorney's office that they did back in 2006 or 2008. Looked at some percentage for inflation cost. We all know that the costs are rising significantly. So, what they provided was the one-time build-out cost of approximately 3 million for East Hawaii and 1.7 million for West Hawaii. We looked at equipment that's necessary; one-time cost of approximately $455,000. So, what we're looking at is approximately $7.4 million for the initial first-year cost with an annual ongoing additional cost for staff of 2.13 million. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Deputy Director. And the Mayor and Managing Director both had other engagements, so they weren't able to be here today. But I just wanted to make sure that on the record that there is support from the Administration to move in this direction, and that we also have the financial capability to shoulder these costs should the voters decide this is in the best interest of Hawaii County. MS. NAKAGAWA: I do apologize that the Mayor and Managing Director had other commitments this morning, but we are very supportive of this initiative. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Deputy. Chair, I'll yield for now for questions/comments from my colleagues. Thank you. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kierkiewicz. Any—Mr. Inaba, go ahead. MR. INABA: Thank you. Ms. Nakagawa, who at DPW (Department of Public Works) was leading the estimate for the build-out? I know you said they used numbers, but was it a couple of people? Was there a team there? Or who in DPW was ? Page 17 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 MS. NAKAGAWA: Yes, there was a team there. Julann Sonomura was also, looks like, leading part of the estimate, as well as her team members. MR. INABA: Okay. And these 14 new positions, so we haveI mean, this is the intention on the Administration's side: Director, Deputy Director, Private Secretary, and then the rest of them just being MS. NAKAGAWA: We need a fiscal staff, like accountants and HR (human resources) staff, as well. MR. INABA: Okay. And any idea? So, I know we're looking for a new space. So, we'd be takingI mean, at least in Kona right now, we're centralized at the civic center, but we'd be anticipating that the Building Department would be located elsewhere? MS. NAKAGAWA: At this point, yeah. So, we think we need additional space. So, we haven't quite identified possible locations yet, but the thought process is that additional space would be required; space that we would need to lease. MR. INABA: Okay. That's a little bit concerning to me being that we finally got everything in one place. Again, I support what this is and I will support the bill no questions about it. I just worry and I think maybe we can take a second look to see what kind of shifts might be able to tap in. I'm not sure what the situation here is in Hilo, but if there's a way to keep things at the civic center. So, I'll just put that out on the record. But thank you for providing this impact summary statement. Mahalo. MS. NAKAGAWA: You're welcome. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Inaba. Anyone else? I'll go back to you after, Ms. Kimball. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: It was sort ofChair, if I might? CHR. DAVID: Go ahead. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: I just want to provide a little bit more texture to the conversation based on what Council Member Inaba was bringing up. I think at this point, like even without a new Department of Building, there is a need for more space for County in general. I think if we were fully staffed, it would be much more evident. I know that there's a need for space because the recovery team we're sharing with Research and Development for a couple of years—and it was getting very tight in there. Very, very tight. And so, I think the build-out of space is not necessarily just tied to the Department of Building, but there is a need Page 18 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 to support all the positions that exist within County government. So, it sounds to me like this is sort of the natural evolution of County government, is kind of growing that building infrastructure. MS. NAKAGAWA: We are going to need additional space. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kierkiewicz. Ms. Kimball, did youoh, Mr. Chung, go ahead. MR. CHUNG: If I could ask for some guidance from Ms. Lee Loy because she introduced and the Council passed the fiscal impact bill relating to—was it bills or ordinances? Or bills for ordinances? What was it? Because I know it's referenced here in Chapter 2, Section 12.7, Hawaii County Code. MS. LEE LOY: Bills for ordinances. MR. CHUNG: Bills for ordinances, okay. And it's kind of good that we get a lot of information in determining whether we should or should not vote for something, and this is a vital piece. But technically speaking, the fiscal impact statement for charters were intended for the voters, okay. I know that because I'm the guy who introduced that bill, all right. And hers only relates to ordinances, if what she's saying is correct. So, even if this is useful information for us, technically speaking it wasn't necessary, yeah. Because, you either prepare a fiscal impact statement for the voters so that they are fully apprised of what the fiscal ramifications would be of them saying yes or no. So, I mean, it's a good exercise that we're going through. It's a responsible exercise. But I just wanted to point that out, though. Really, technically, it'sI don't know where this came from. Yeah. Thank you. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Chung. Anyone else? Mr. Richards. By the way, Mr. Richards has joined us. Now you can go ahead. MR. RICHARDS: Okay. Thank you, Chair. Okay, so I apologize for my tardiness. I'm trying to catch up real quick as far as this fiscal. The numbers are not adding up for me, so could someone walk me through this? Because, I see the total of 7.4, but when I add what I'm seeing before me, it doesn't come up to 7.4 million. So, could someone walk me through that, please? MS. NAKAGAWA: Sure. I'd be happy to do that. We have your total S&W increase of 1.7 million. MR. RICHARDS: Yes. MS. NAKAGAWA: Then we have the 396,000 for your leased space. Page 19 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 MR. RICHARDS: Which is a combination of 264 plus 132? MS. NAKAGAWA: Correct, for East Hawaii and West Hawaii. And this is only for the first year. So, you have your one-time build-out cost of 3.13 million for East Hawaii and 1.69 million for West Hawaii. And then you have your one-time equipment cost of 455,000. MR. RICHARDS: Okay. I'm still not getting it to add up. And so, we have a one the first year start-up is what you're saying is 7.4, and then the annual cost after that would be MS. NAKAGAWA: 2.13 million. MR. RICHARDS: Okay. MS. VILLEGAS: Chair, if I may? CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Ms. Villegas. MR. RICHARDS: Okay, I got it. MS. VILLEGAS: Yes. I had a little bit of a challenge myself with that until I realized that when you take the one-time and add the annual, that's when you come up with the full first year. And then years going forward is the 2.13. MR. RICHARDS: Okay, I got that one. MS. VILLEGAS: Gotcha. MR. RICHARDS: So, I got the numbers to balance now. Thank you. MS. VILLEGAS: Great. MR. RICHARDS: Okay. CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Mr. Richards. MR. RICHARDS: Okay. And I'm listening very carefully to what's being stated and also what I'm aware of as far as what the challenge is going forward. The department is very supportive of this going forward? MS. NAKAGAWA: That is correct. Page 20 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 MR. RICHARDS: Okay. And I appreciate what Mr. Chung has said concerning the fiscal impact because that's one of the things that—the message we're getting: Do we expand government? Are we going to get the value of what we spend? So, that's where the conversation is. Okay, thanks. I yield. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Richards. Ms. Kimball, go ahead. MS. KIMBALL: Thank you. And thank you, Council Member Kierkiewicz, for bringing this forward so we can have the discussion. I have to say it is something that I've deliberated at length. And I'm in full agreement with the challenges that DPW currently faces and how that impacts a lot of the programs and things that we want to see happen, whether it be repair/maintenance of our roads; development of Complete Streets; building of housing, permitting and whatnot. And I realize that there's a sense of urgency to get on the next ballot. But I think where I am after several conversations is I'd like to put a pin in it right now. I think that we're only a year into EPIC. It remains to be seen if it's going to be the improvement that we hope it will be. I mean, there are some numbers to reflect that. As I think I've said in the first hearing on this, it's a rare case where more administration actually makes things better; more bureaucracy. And looking at some of the challenges we have in DPW with respect to building and permitting, I think it is more related to having the right people in positions. We still have a lot of vacancies there, and here we are proposing creating additional positions and additional vacancies and having to find people to fill those. And given the price tag, I kind of like to wait and see. Maybe do an audit to see if really breaking out this department would actually result in the changes that I think we all want to see. I'm definitely in agreement that there needs to be improvement. I'd also like to see the report of the Cost of Government Commission with respect to what we're charging for building permits. I think talking to folks in the industry, they'd be more than happy to pay more if it meant their permits were going to be done in a timely way, and with reasonable requirements and accommodations. So, I guess I'm not ready to make this commitment to a whole new department at this time. But it's something that I think we can still consider looking at doing in the future with some additional information. So, that's where I'm with it. Thank you. I yield, Chair. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Ms. Villegas and then Mr. Chung. MS. VILLEGAS: Thank you, Ms. Kierkiewicz, for putting this together, taking the initiative and a timeline that is kind of crunched with the Charter amendment opportunity, but for putting this together. And I also want to honor what Mr. Chung said, in that there wasn't a requirement for a fiscal impact statement, but that you took the initiative to get that because that was one of the big Page 21 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 questions I was going to have coming in today's discussion, was what was the cost because we are responsible to taxpayers for how we utilize their funding. And we happen to be in a year of a nice windfall, the amount of resources available for our local government. But I just am having some heartburn on it as well because, as I've said before, I'm not particularly confident that moving it at this time will solve the issues. I do agree DPW's too big. There's so much going on in there that, in the long run, I think that there is great benefit to our streamlining of our government to transition that, but I don't know that now is the right time. I concur with so many of the statements that Council Member Kimball said about Cost of Government Commission and, as we move forward,just rushing things for Charter amendments in this capacity. I also would have really liked to have heard something from DPW and the Building Department. I appreciate having somebody from Finance and then saying that the Mayor is behind this, but as we all know, there are these humans that make these departments work and sometimes make them slower because of capacity or training or lack of staffing, like you said. We already have a department that could use some more able bodies to help them process things. So, at this time, I am reluctant to move this forward. I do really like the opportunity for the people to have the choice, but I just feel like I'd like to—and, mind you, a number of the business members, we've heard the Kona-Kohala Chamber of Commerce very strongly testify in support of this, and that gives me heartburn as well. But I don't know that moving a department and adding more positions and adding more funding—it's still the same department with the same people, potentially, and the same processes but with a $7.4 million price tag. So, I have some hesitancy there. But I really appreciate the sentiment and the direction, and I think that it is, this conversation, is definitely the right way to be heading. I just—right now, I'm feeling a little hesitancy there. So, I won't be supporting this today but I appreciate the conversation. I would likeironically, it's an odd time to have our DPW Director position has just been—well, we have our Deputy Director vacated, terminated, however we want to say it. Yesterday's conversation was what, hunting versus tracking? So, it's a challenging time. So, I'll just be holding off today in supporting this but thank you again. I yield. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Villegas. Anyone else? Mr. Inaba, go ahead. MR. INABA: Thank you. I am having some messages come in from constituents regarding this. And I'm wondering if Corporation Counsel is available to kind of weigh in because there's support for the idea, and we want permits to go out Page 22 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 faster—no questions about that from any of this Council, I don't think. But are there other options beyond or besides a Charter amendment to set up a department when we maybe have things more ironed out, Corporation Counsel? (Note: At this time, Corporation Counsel Elizabeth Strance came forward to address the members of the Council.) MS. STRANCE: Thank you. Are you able to hear me okay? MR. INABA: Yes, we can. MS. STRANCE: Elizabeth Strance, Corporation Counsel. Under the Hawaii County Charter, and this is Section 4-2, there are two ways to set up agencies of the County. One is by Charter and the other is by ordinance. The Charter provision establishing the Department of Public Works is a fairly general Charter provision. And so, it may be possible to revisit this later via ordinance. So, there are two ways to establish departments. MR. INABA: Okay. MS. STRANCE: Asa policy. MR. INABA: Thank you, Corporation Counsel. The more we talk about it and with these costs, it is concerning. I don't know, Council Member Kierkiewicz, if that's something that we might consider, doing it via ordinance. That gives us more flexibility to amend. And even in the existing Charter, I know that the current Department of Public Works, all of its powers, duties, and functionsI think that's what we call it—are prescribed by ordinance, versus what's in the bill before us here. It lists certain things that would be locked into the Charter. You do include in No. 5 "and other functions as prescribed by the Mayor or by ordinance." But I'm just wondering if it would be better for us as a County to provide flexibility by establishing the department in Code, which allows us that flexibility moving forward, and as we try and set up a new department, that leeway, rather than locking in "for power, duties, and functions" into the Charter off of that. Just based on these discussions that have been going on and Corporation Counsel's advice. Have you thought about that at all? MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Chair, if I might? CHR. DAVID: Yes, you can. Go ahead. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: It's kind of a surprise to me to hear this from Corporation Counsel because this was reviewed by them. And the very deliberative discussions we had were around the creation of the Department of Building could Page 23 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 only happen with a Charter amendment, and the functions of the department could be spelled out in Code; but it was never an option that we could set up the department via Code. MR. INABA: Got it. Okay. It is a big move and, like I said, it's a move that I think we support because we want to be more efficient. We want to get things done faster. It's just a big price tag and it's very rigid. So, I'm not sure if the current I mean by Charter, then, we're saying that we can set up departments either way. And I'm thinking it might be better for us to do it in Code being that that's an option now. I'll leave it at that for now. Thank you. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Inaba. Mr. Richards, go ahead. MR. RICHARDS: Thank you. This is no secret because I've repeatedly stated this: I'm very leery of any Charter amendment. I understand the importance of it and I understand the importance of being able to do it, but I am leery of Charter amendments just because, again, it's the constitution of the County. And to Mr. Inaba's point, I have been supportive of going the ordinance side. Now, this is a little bit different in the fact that I think we have to do something to get things going forward, but also it comes with a price tag, as Mr. Inaba has articulated, that I am concerned. However, if we can get some of this backlog built, then I think we are going to actually see a return of our investment in actually getting this stuff and getting that tax base going forward. And the whole point is not to increase rates; increase to expand the economy so it actually works better for us. But that's where my angst is coming from because I'm leery of all of the Charter amendments because I'm not sure that is best directed, especially when we're in a time constraint to get that done. So, I'm hearing both sides of it and I do support doing something, but I'm not sure that this is it right now. So, I'm not decided as of yet. Thanks, I yield. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Richards. Anyone else? Ms. Kimball, go ahead. MS. KIMBALL: Yeah, thank you. I just wanted to, again, restate and kind of clarify my position, which is I have not determined comfortably that this is the solution to the problem that I think we all agree we have. To your point, Council Member Richards, if there was an offset for the cost of this because it meant we'd produce more building that we could tax, then it all balanced out, then yeah, I think there is an argument for that. But I'm not convinced that this gets us there. I'm not convinced that by breaking out this into a new department it would actually solve the challenges we have. And I think we need a little more time to figure out what are the levers. And I think there's probably more than one that needs to be pulled to improve the service delivery of the Building Division. That's where my hesitancy comes. So, Page 24 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 perhaps there are Code changes that actually are outside of creating a department but that can address the issues, address the concerns that have been raised which are legitimate, but in a way that is potentially more effective. And Council Member Villegas mentioned without DPW here or the Administration or anybody from the Administration other than the Finance Department—and thank you again for being hereI just still have so many unanswered questions, even from within the department, if they think this would actually achieve what I think they hear us saying we want, which is we want to make sure that we are delivering the services that we are supposed to be delivering to the taxpayers in terms of the Building Department. So, that's my position. I want to take some more time to figure out if this is the way to solve it; I'm not convinced that it is. And then I would also weigh in that we had the Charter Commission just in 2020, and this was not something that they brought; and they had serious deliberations about the organizational structure of County. So, I think there's a sense of urgency to get on the 2022 ballot. But I think if this ended up on the 2024 ballot after we've taken some time to figure out if this will actually solve the problem, that's a better solution for me right now. Thank you. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Anyone else? Seeing none MR. INABA: Chair, one more. I'm sorry. Just real quick. CHR. DAVID: Oh, go ahead, Mr. Inaba. MR. INABA: I mean, I did say that I would be voting in favor of this. But being that it was brought to my attention that the Code option is available, I won't be supporting this today. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Inaba. Seeing no other discussion, Corporation Counsel Strance, thank you for being here and for your input. Ms. Nakagawa, I just have a couple really quick questions. Thank you for this fiscal impact statement. And so, given what you have outlined in the fiscal impact, what is your estimation on getting this new Building Department up and running in terms of build-out, hiring people? What are we looking at? A few years? MS. NAKAGAWA: In terms of timing? CHR. DAVID: Timing-wise. MS. NAKAGAWA: I would really want to consult more with the team that's worked on it to look at what that timing would look like. Page 25 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 CHR. DAVID: Okay. I just thought that you had an idea. But for me, I see a few years in actually trying to establish this department. And also, the issues about the existing issues that DPW already is experiencing—inability to staff with people that can make this process move faster—creating another department or another division will probably look at the same issues on getting people staffing, etcetera, and then building out so that they'd be ready to roll. But what I do see is that this new process, in my mind, would take a heck of a lot longer than trying to figure out what's wrong with the new EPIC system or how we can get that working top-notch. They've already started it. I'd really like to see where we go with that one because we've been told that the EPIC system would resolve a lot of these concerns that we're talking about. So, as opposed to putting seven point some odd million dollars into a new department right now and getting this to the voters without, to me, a lot of the detailed information that they could make some informed decisions as voters on whether this is a good thing or not, I really think that we need to put on the brakes and not knee-jerk react to something that sounds very good. We really need a separate division. Whether we need it right now, given the EPIC system has just basically got off the ground, I'd like to see how that is successful or not before we look into going into a new division that's going to cost taxpayers additional money to the tune of seven point some odd million dollars a year, or two point something dollars after the initial. So, at this point, I thank Ms. Kierkiewicz for bringing this forward because if you didn't, we wouldn't be having this discussion. And I think this is the kind of discussions that really is helpful not only to us, but I think to our communities, no, in trying to make some really good decisions. And so,just speaking for myself, I think the time is not right now. And thank you for all your hard work and the department's hard work. MR. RICHARDS: Chair, could I just ask a quick procedural question of the Clerk? CHR. DAVID: Sure. MR. RICHARDS: Thank you, Chair. Mr. Clerk, if this amendment fails, the potential of introducing an ordinance to do this as opposed to a Charter amendment, being it's substantially the same thing, is that precluded in this Council and we'd have to wait till next Council, or is that possible? MR. HENRICKS: So, my understanding of how that would work is the Council would be the determinant of whether or not it's substantially the same. So, hypothetically, if someone were to introduce a bill to amend the County Code for a similar or substantially the same or similar purpose, the Chair would be the first to make the determination, I think, if it would be appropriate to place it on an agenda. And if the Chair did so, a member could object along those lines that it Page 26 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 was a violation of the Rules, and then it would be taken up as a body to determine whether or not that was the case. So, there is no—I think the Chair is the first arbiter of whether or not that would be the case. And if the Chair didn't find that to be the case, then a member could bring that as a point forward, and then we would go forward from there. MR. RICHARDS: Okay, thank you, Clerk. Thank you, Chair. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Richards. Anyone—oh no, that was it. So, Mr. Clerk,please, a roll call. Vote on Bill 174: The motion to pass Bill 174, Draft 2, on second reading Draft 2 failed by the following roll call vote: Failed Ayes: Council Members Chung, Kierkiewicz, and Lee Loy –3. Noes: Council Members Inaba, Kimball, Richards, Villegas, and Chair David–5. Absent: Council Member Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder– 1. Excused: None. MR. HENRICKS: The motion fails. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Clerk. All right,we can move on. Bill 175: INITIATES AN AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE V OF THE HAWAII COUNTY (Draft 2) CHARTER (2020 EDITION), RELATING TO ESTABLISHING A YOUTH COMMISSION WITHIN THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH Adds a new chapter to create a commission consisting of up to 15 members between the ages of 14 and 24 years old that would integrate its ideas and perspectives into County government. Reference: Comm. 812.2 Intr. by: Ms. Kierkiewicz First Reading: June 15, 2022 2/3 Vote: Second of three required readings, Section 15-1(a), Hawai`i County Charter Motion to Approve: Ms. Kierkiewicz moved to pass Bill 175, Draft 2, on second reading. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy. CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Ms. Kierkiewicz. Page 27 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chair. Looking for everyone's continued support on this to create space for our youth to have a better understanding of County government and to influence some of the policies going forward. Thank you, Chair. CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Anyone else? Mr. Richards, go ahead. MR. RICHARDS: In keeping with my conversations about Charter amendments, I am leery of all Charter amendments. However, we have this way forward for our County. And when it comes to addressing some of the youth and some of the concerns, we don't teach enough civics in school anymore, which is paradoxical because that's what runs our lives. And I think this is actually a way forward for that. And like I said, though I am not a big proponent of Charter amendments outside of the normal path, I think there's actually a lot of value in this Charter amendment going forward. Because if we can encourage the next generation to weigh in on things, I think that's actually a very good thing. So, I'm going to go against my usual and I'm actually going to be supporting this because it's actuallyI think it's a good direction for the next generation. And they can weigh in in a formal capacity that will actually be a goal. And I think it will help out the whole civics understanding. Thank you, Chair, I yield. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Richards. Anyone else? Go ahead, Ms. Villegas. MS. VILLEGAS: Yeah. Just because it had been a part of the conversation on another Charter amendment, what kind of costs are associated with this? Are we anticipating any additional ? MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Chair, if I might respond? CHR. DAVID: Go ahead. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Just recalling the last conversation at Council. The Managing Director did mention the need to identify somebody in the Executive Branch to take on this kuleana. So, a position within the Mayor's office would either be repurposed or created to support, I'm assuming, not just the youth commission but commissions in general. There's no line item in the budget to support any projects that this commission is suggesting. That would be something that we could make a determination around during budget time should this pass. MS. VILLEGAS: Okay, thank you. Just helps me understand the potential cost for additional, or perhaps this could land with—I believe that the Mayor has four executive assistants at this time and juncture. Page 28 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 I really appreciate the opportunity provided here to get our young people more familiar with how government works and the humans involved, because we are all at the end of the day just humans trying to do a job within parameters that were established way before our time. And to positively impact not only those parameters but the decisions made within them. So, I really support this concept of bringing young people in because they are being a Konawaena grad myself and a Wildcat, there weren't that many opportunities. And if there were,perhaps at that time I was busier on the soccer field. But it really behooves us, especially at a time in our Federal government where we are being inundated with, in my mind, poor decisions that are depleting our rights as women especially. So, I would like to see a lot of young women have the opportunity to participate. My only thing that comes to mind is wanting to try and ensure that this is young people that are here on island, as opposed to away in college and then participate remotely, if that makes sense. I just had some—for some reason, that just popped to mind. We have phenomenal young local kids away in college, but yeah,just really want to incorporate hands-on tangible relationship building to break down some of the intimidation that comes with walking into a room like this and engaging with people like us or people in positions of leadership. So, thank you for bringing this forward. I'll be supporting this today and look forward to continuing to engage with the young people here in the County of Hawaii; maybe my own mo`opuna. So, thank you, Ashley. I yield. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Villegas. Mr. Richards, go ahead. MR. RICHARDS: Yeah,just a quick comment. I was thinking about it. Ashley, I think you're going to be involved in this going forward. Is that one of your initiatives? MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Chair, if I might? CHR. DAVID: Go ahead. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Could you clarify that question? MR. RICHARDS: I was just talking story and helping. The reason being is because getting the next generation going forward and thinking back in high school days, I can think of County Council Members that were also at student council back in our ancient high school days. So, I think the involvement and there's probably some synergy between the student councils and maybe this thing. So, I'm just offering that as a suggestion to tie those together somehow. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Council Member. What the proposed ordinance, the Charter amendment,prescribes is that the Chair of the Council can Page 29 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 select somebody from the legislative body to serve in an advisory capacity on the commission. But I would say that it's going to take all of us working in partnership with the Executive Branch to lift this up, especially because it does provide every single Council Member the opportunity to hand-select an `6pio from their district to serve on the commission. So, there's a way in which we can all be involved. MR. RICHARDS: Okay. I think that's a great way to do it just to tie those together again, more civics building. Thanks. I yield. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Richards. Go ahead, Ms. Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Chair. I wasn't going to say anything only because I completely support this but Mr. Richards sparked something. And I just wanted to lift this piece up into this body as far as what this youth commission would look like. When I started at the Council, I was 22 years old. And we as legislative employees served as docents to the schoolkids that used to come and learn about government. And I see this youth commission as that piece where they can invite not only youth and their peers, but schoolkids, scouts who have to earn their badges. Talk about what we do here, across the street at the courthouse, next door at the State building. And that's the way I envision this youth commission. And so, I'm listening to all of what we're talking about. I just really envision this as that bridge for youth to really begin to talk about the functions of government and the three pillars of government: our administration, our legislative branch, and our judicial branch. So, that's where I really truly hope that this is going, and I will be supporting this for those reasons. Chair, I yield. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. Anyone else? No? Okay, before we take the vote, I just wanted to make a notation based on Ms. Villegas's comment. In her high school days, there were few and far between classes that even dealt as close to this kind of situation on legislation and government. And in my time, it was just totally nonexistent. And so this, Ms. Kierkiewicz, I can see while we talk about getting our young people involved, this actually starts that process and puts our money where our mouth is because they are going to be the decision makers of the future. And thank you, Ms. Lee Loy, for pointing that out because right now, even if you take some sort of governmental studies, it in no way can give you the hands-on idea of what we do and how we are connected in not only our own decision- making, but in decision-making on a Federal and State level as well. So, that's a whole new area, and I thank you for doing this for our kids. Mr. Clerk, do a roll call. Page 30 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 Vote on Bill 175: The motion to pass Bill 175, Draft 2, on second reading Draft 2 was carried by the following roll call vote: (Adopted) Ayes: Council Members Chung, Inaba, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas, and Chair David–8. Noes: None. Absent: Council Member Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder– 1. Excused: None. CHR. DAVID: Thank you very much. Bill 179: AMENDS ARTICLE XIII, SECTION 13-8 OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CHARTER (2020 EDITION), RELATING TO TERMS OF OFFICE OF DEPARTMENT HEADS IN THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH FOR THOSE AGENCIES UNDER THE MANAGING DIRECTOR Provides that within 60 days of the County Council term beginning on December 5, 2022, and within 60 days of the beginning of every alternate Council term thereafter, that all department heads appointed by the Mayor and approved by the Council appear before the Council for a vote to retain each department head. Reference: Comm. 818 Intr. by: Mr. Chung First Reading: June 15, 2022 2/3 Vote: Second of three required readings, Section 15-1(a), Hawai`i County Charter (Note: Comm. 818.1, from Council Member Heather L. Kimball dated July 6, 2022, transmitting proposed amendments to Bill 179, was circulated.) Motion to Approve: Mr. Chung moved to pass Bill 179 on second reading. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy. CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Mr. Chung. MR. CHUNG: Thank you. During the course of discussing this vote at the Committee level and on first reading, I and others made comment about this particular bill not quite being ready for prime time. And I explained the reason why I rushed this through at the very end, so that it would hit this critical timeline to get it on the ballot. I've been really grappling this thing because there's a lot of philosophical issues involved in this as well, the intention, as I've stated before, the intention of the original framers of the Charter to create a strong Mayor, weak Council—not saying that the Council should be absolutely weak. But I wanted to try to at least respect the intent of what the framers had sought. At the same time, try to address Page 31 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 some of the practical issues that had come up by virtue of subsequent Charter amendments, most particularly the two-year terms for Council Members in a single-member district, which made us basically, as our County Clerk, the term he uses, ombudsman for the public. One thing that I didn't mention to all of you that really weighed heavily on my reason for holding back on this matter until the very last minute was the effective date. There was a part of me that felt that even if I didn't like the current setup of just going ahead and approving department heads and letting them go for four years, something had to be said. I thought we needed to at least respect their reasonable expectation when they did come up for appointment that they had or they were going to be in for four years. That is pretty important too. And of course, as you can see, the effective date on this would actually make all of the current department heads subject to a reappointment process. There's an amendment that was prepared by Ms. Kimball and it's a good one. I will say that. It's almost exactly what Mr. Henricks and I were looking at: super majority weighing in on the retention of department heads midterm of mid- mayor's term. So, it's a good one. If it gets to that point, if Ms. Kimball makes the motion to amend this bill with her amendment, I will be supporting it. I think it's solid. It's within the context of the title. But having said that, I will also tell you right now that I have two options that I would like to see. One is either scrap this or defer it. In other words, it's not going to be going to the voters this election. I think we've talked a lot about it, and I think, at least whether you agree with the concept or not, I think all of you recognize the need to discuss it further. And whether it's two years, four years, that's something that all of you should maybe think about. I, personally, think two years is good, or what Ms. Kimball is going to be proposing. I think it's a fair trade-off. It really balances the interest. And one more thing: Within the context of that amendment, which you guys have and Ms. Kimball's going to bring up, it could also be a situation where the Council adopts a rule of practice—what do we call it, our procedural whatever it is, yeah but which would make the burden less onerous. We went through some really heated discussions during the course of the appointment process, which is how it should be. But to avoid that kind of stuff and really to avoid any kind of possibility of politics interfering with the midterm decision-making. It could be considered by the Council to adopt a rule whereby these reappointments would be fast-tracked. You don't go to Committee first or anything. It goes straight to the Council one time and you're finished already. But having said that, I'd like to hear Ms. Kimball's proposal first. As I said, I'll be voting in favor of that. But then I'm also going to be asking to have a deferral, if that's okay. Thank you. Page 32 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Chung. Go ahead, Ms. Kimball. MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Chair. Motion to Amend: Ms. Kimball moved to amend Bill 179 with the contents of Comm. 818.1. Seconded by Ms. Villegas. CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Ms. Kimball. MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Chair. Council Member Chung, again thank you for putting this bill forward for the purpose of discussion. And I wanted to kind of honor your request of us to provide some feedback, share some ideas. So, I took a look at this from the standpoint of, okay, what would make this palatable for me. And I have the same concerns as you with regard to the commitment the directors make in terms of the appointment. It is very difficult in some cases to fill these positions with qualified people. And it seems reasonable to give them some assurances that they're going to have that position for four years, especially when they look at some of the department heads needing to forego working in a professional capacity afterwards. So, what I basically considered in terms of a proposed amendment would be this is not an automatic thing but this is something that we may choose to do. So, at the interim terms between appointments, if we choose to not retain a director, it's not a given. So, we're not going through every director and renewing their appointment. It's only something that is an option for us. And the bar should be pretty high. It should not be just a simple majority. It should be a two-thirds majority. And I also, based on some of the conversations we had, proposed excluding the Managing Director and Corporation Counsel from this potential process. I still think it needs work. But those were some things that I thought would make this idea palatable. I think the idea that, yes, we were designed as a strong mayor county with a weaker legislative branch, that was probably the intention of founders; however, we are a maturing County. And I think that it makes sense to, as we grow and mature, to bring greater balance between the Administration and the legislative body and having some mechanism, whether it's this or some other one that we design, to check department heads I think is a reasonable tool for the legislative branch to have. Again, I thinkI wanted to throw this out for purposes of discussion today. I don't think this is even ready for prime time either, but again just trying to support this idea that the legislative branch should have some way to check and balance. Just like you would have a probationary period for somebody, we may have buyer's remorse after an appointment, and we'd need some very high-bar mechanism to make that known. That was my thinking behind this. So, thank you, Chair. I yield. Page 33 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Anyone else? Mr. Richards, go ahead. MR. RICHARDS: Charter amendment. Again, same concern. I appreciate what—and I actually totally appreciate what Mr. Chung brought forward to have this conversation. And to Ms. Kimball's point, I do like it's not a reconfirmation; it's actually a vote against at a high bar. And I can see wisdom in that because personalities personalities that clash and we shouldn't subject that too. I'm deeply concerned about being able to attract the right talent to fill these positions. And if we make it so onerous to have that, we're not going to get anybody. And I don't think that's the intent. But I do like the conversation of making it a high-bar of a vote of no confidence essentially is what it's going to be. And I think there is some merit to that, but I also agree it's not ready for prime time quite yet. But I like where the conversation is going. I yield. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Richards. Mr. Inaba, go ahead. MR. INABA: I'll just state for the record I do like having the Managing Director and Corporation Counsel removed in whatever form this ends up being because I think those should be two constants that keep us going. On the other hand, I do like that we would hear everybody every two years because this puts us at somebody has to introduce to have somebody removed, and it just makes it so pointed at one person rather than just a general review. On the flip side, I do think it should be a two-thirds vote to have somebody removed. So, that's my feedback. And just a housekeeping matter: "corporation council." I think we just need to amend the spelling so it's "counsel" instead of—"counsel" as in corporation counsel, instead of"council" as in county council. But I think that can just be a floor amendment. But yeah, thank you, Council Member Kimball, for kind of incorporating these ideas into Council Member Chung's bill. Mahalo. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Inaba. Ms. Lee Loy, go ahead. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Chair. And thank you to both Mr. Chung and Ms. Kimball. I do have a question for Judge Strance if she's still on. And my question is, Judge Strance, this is applicable to our department heads, correct? (Note: At this time, Corporation Counsel Elizabeth Strance came forward to address the members of the Council.) MS. STRANCE: Liz Strance, Corporation Counsel. Yes. Specified counsel heads within the specified chapter. Page 34 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 MS. LEE LOY: And we've had some new developments. And I just had a question around a temporarily assigned director, which we're kind of currently under right now. How long could that be extended to? And I am asking this question because if that particular temporarily assigned director does not get advanced to the Council for vetting, I don't think this body gets what it actually deserves, which is an opportunity to vet, hear from that applicant, and vote he or her up or down. So my question, Judge Strance, is how long could a deputy and/or a temporarily assigned director sit for? MS. STRANCE: I would have to get back to you on how the Charter handles vacancies of department heads. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Judge Strance. I would love to hear that. I support this because we have our own checks and balances, and part of that work that we do is in partnership with the various department heads. And so, I like this opportunity for a vote of no confidence. I like what Mr. Inaba is advancing or talking about where it's not so pointed: "We're not liking where you're at." So, those are some of the things I would love to see. I'm going to support this, but I would love to hear from Judge Strance about that one piece. I would not want to advance this to the voters when there's actually a little work- around that any administration could take advantage of in the future, and the legislative body doesn't get to vet them as what we're seeking to do. Thank you, Judge Strance. I look forward to that information at our next reading. Chair, I yield. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. Go ahead, Mr. Chung. MR. CHUNG: All right. Yeah, and I don't know. This is something that's probably going to be taken up further in the next term, so I don't know exactly how it's going to look if and when it reaches a final form. But I will say there was one concern about there being a public—well, first, I think one of the criticisms of this whole idea was that it would involve a public vetting or become a performance review of a department head. I don't see anything wrong with that, quite frankly. And in terms of the public nature of it, as long as you don't go into personnel matters, I think it's A-OK. I think it's a far better arrangement than the Mayor unilaterally dismissing a department head and leaving it up to the public's own imagination as to what happened, right. So, you know, talk about transparency, this is a more transparent method albeit with a certain body, right. So, yeah, I just want to thank Ms. Kimball for putting this forward and making it better. I don't know, as I said, if it's a perfect thing right now. You guys can have it evolve over the next several months or next year. Thank you. Page 35 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 CHR. DAVID: Well, Mr. Chung, I think you're going to have one more chance at this. This is only the second of three readings. But if we amend it then, you know, I don't—we're going to vote on it anyway. MR. CHUNG: Well, but my intention is to have it deferred, though. CHR. DAVID: Okay. MR. CHUNG: For later. CHR. DAVID: For later, okay. So, we're on the amendment. Okay, everybody ready? On the motion to amend MR. HENRICKS: Madam Chair, can I ask that the Council move to correct the spelling of"council"to "counsel" in Communication 818.1? Vote on Motion to Ms. Kimball moved to amend Comm. 818.1 by changing Amend: "council"to "counsel." Seconded by Mr. Inaba and carried (Approved) by the following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, Inaba, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas, and Chair David–8. Noes: None. Absent: Council Member Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder– 1. Excused: None. Vote on Motion to The motion to amend Bill 179 with the contents of Amend: Comm. 818.1, as amended, was carried by the following (Approved) roll call vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, Inaba, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas, and Chair David–8. Noes: None. Absent: Council Member Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder– 1. Excused: None. MR. HENRICKS: The motion passes. Bill 179 is amended. CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Back to Bill 179, as amended. Discussion, Council Members? Mr. Chung. MR. CHUNG: At this time, I'm hoping to get the Council's indulgence in this matter, but I'm going to be asking for this matter to be deferred—and at the call of the Chair or whomever wants to see this come up. There's some thought that Page 36 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 needs to be put into this, and I think brighter minds than mine will be able to come up with something. So, I'm hoping I can get the support for a deferral. I make that motion. Vote on Motion to Mr. Chung moved to postpone Bill 179, as amended, to the Postpone: call of the Chair. Seconded by Ms. Kimball and carried by (Approved) the following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, Inaba, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas, and Chair David—8. Noes: None. Absent: Council Member Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder— 1. Excused: None. CHR. DAVID: This matter is postponed to the call of the Chair. OTHER The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business, Other BUSINESS: Business. Comm. 721.42: MAYOR'S VETO MESSAGE REGARDING BILL 152, DRAFT 2, RELATING TO THE COUNTY HOUSING PROGRAM REVOLVING FUND From Mayor Mitchell D. Roth, dated June 13, 2022, returning Bill 152, Draft 2, and stating his reason for disapproval. ; and Comm. 721.43: REQUEST TO RECONSIDER BILL 152, DRAFT 2, RELATING TO THE COUNTY HOUSING PROGRAM REVOLVING FUND From Council Members Holeka Goro Inaba and Heather Kimball, dated June 20, 2022, requesting that Bill 152, Draft 2, be placed on the July 6, 2022, Council agenda for reconsideration and a potential override of the Mayor's disapproval. and Page 37 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 Bill 152: AMENDS CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE 13, DIVISION 3, SECTION 2-75 OF THE (Draft 2) HAWAII COUNTY CODE 1983 (2016 EDITION, AS AMENDED), RELATING TO THE COUNTY HOUSING PROGRAM REVOLVING FUND Repeals existing provisions in their entirety and establishes nine specific uses for expenditure of the funds to support the County's housing needs. Reference: Comm. 721.18 Intr. by: Mr. Inaba and Ms. Kimball First Reading: May 4, 2022 Second Reading: June 1, 2022 Mayor Veto: June 13, 2022 Note: Requires 2/3 vote of the entire membership to override the Mayor's veto, pursuant to Section 3-12, Hawaii County Charter Motion to Mr. Inaba moved to reconsider the vote taken on Bill 152, Reconsider: Draft 2, on June 1, 2022. Seconded by Ms. Kimball. CHR. DAVID: Discussion? Go ahead. MR. HENRICKS: I just want to describe the protocols as we understand the Charter. The Charter in 3-12 says the Council may—when the Mayor should return any bill as disapproved, the Council may reconsider the vote on that bill. And then it says, if upon such reconsideration it votes in at least two-thirds of its membership, the bill will become a law as if the Mayor had signed it. So, we're looking at a one-motion, two-vote process. The motion on the floor now is to reconsider the vote on that bill. That requires a simple majority. If that motion succeeds, the bill will essentially be live on the floor again, at which point it would require at least six votes of the Council to override the Mayor's disapproval of Bill 152, Draft 2. Thank you. CHR. DAVID: Thank you very much for that detailed explanation. I think we all understand it now. So, Mr. Inaba. MR. INABA: Thank you. I think being that we're just trying to have the discussion, it would be helpful and appreciated if the Council can support the measure or the vote for reconsideration so we can have discussion. CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Anyone else? Seeing none, on the motion to reconsider Bill 152, Draft 2, all those in favor please say "aye." Page 38 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 Vote on Motion to The motion to reconsider the vote taken on Bill 152, Reconsider: Draft 2, on June 1, 2022, was carried by the following roll (Approved) call vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, Inaba, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Villegas, and Chair David—7. Noes: Council Member Richards — 1. Absent: Council Member Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder— 1. Excused: None. MR. HENRICKS: The motion is adopted and Bill 152, Draft 2, is live on the floor. CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Go ahead, Mr. Inaba. MR. INABA: Mr. Clerk, do I need to make a motion to approve Bill 152 ? MR. HENRICKS: It is live on the floor. So, essentially, it's available for a vote and again it requires, as opposed to a simple majority, it requires a two-thirds vote in order to become law without the Mayor's signature. CHR. DAVID: Okay. Ms. Kimball, go ahead. MS. KIMBALL: Thank you. I'm going to kick us off here. And to start, I want to acknowledge a conversation that I had with Administrator Kunz and the testimony made previously today. I think it's wonderful that we're in a position where we are discussing mechanisms to provide affordable housing, not whether or not we should do it. And I think that we all share a desire to address this problem to make sure that the people that are critical to our communities have a place to live and a place to call home. So, let's start from that place of goodness for all of us. When you step back, then, from that shared objective of all of us, a veto vote is in some ways mostly about process. It's about who's responsible for the decision- making, about careful deliberation on our end, and careful deliberation by the Administration. And so at this far into my first term, I thought, "Wow, I'm never experiencing something new,"but yes, here we are; we're vetoing and the overriding veto. New things happen all the time. So, in reviewing the language in the letter presented to the Council, there are really two things that the Administration represented as reasons for vetoing Bill 152. The first was, I think, a fundamental disagreement that we have about whether or not 152 is intended to limit or intended to expand. It was certainly intended to expand the uses of the funds in the Revolving Fund from Council Member Inaba and L And to that end, I just wanted to make very clear that the previous language lists two utilizations of the Revolving Fund: the development Page 39 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 of housing as A; and B, to exercise the buyback option running in favor of the County contained in any conveyance document, and to pay the cost of maintaining, repairing, renting, or reselling units purchased by the County or the pursuant thereto. And so just again, those two, A and B, are Items 1 and 2 in the list of things that Housing can use these funds for. And so, we've added seven additional items to those two that were in the previous language. So, in my mind, we have increased the usage. And these were not pulled out of thin air. Holeka and I just didn't sit around with a beer and say, "What can we add? Let's do something fun!" We actually spent a lot of time researching and evaluating various housing plans. Maui's housing plan was a big contributary to this, but also other municipalities. We looked at their housing plan. What are the things that get people into homes, keep people in homes, make affordable housing possible? It's infrastructure. It's those up-front costs. It's things like that. And so, that's where we first disagree with the Mayor's position. We do believe that this expands the uses. And I hope you don't mind me, Administrator Kunz, sharing our private conversation, but part of it was there may be other uses that our brilliant minds couldn't think of. And that's entirely possible. That may be, that there are other solutions that we learn about that need to be part of this list. That's why the nice thing is that it's a bill, it's an ordinance, it's Code, which means if there are other ideas, we'd come back. We amend the Code again. But it gives this Council the opportunity to vet that idea before it is included. And I think that's important. That's important in the context of the discussion we just had, but important in terms of our responsibility as the legislative branch. The second point in this letter—and, Chair, I see my time is limited, so I hope you'll give me a little bit of leeway—careful deliberation, careful consideration by the Administration. I have read the fourth paragraph of the Mayor's letter multiple times. It says, "I also have concern about whether the proposed amendment to the uses of the Revolving Fund contained in Article 2 of the Charter was the appropriate vehicle to carry out the intention of the bill, as opposed to setting policy in Article 11 or by administrative rule." And I hate to do this, but if you're going to come back with a detailed notice, it should be understandable. I've read this multiple times, and I'm not sure what is being referred to. I don't know if we have anybody from the Administration. I don't think this was your language, Susan, so I'm not expecting for you to respond to this. But this concern of amending Article 2 was not something that was brought up in the deliberations of this bill. And so, I would like to have the Administration explain what the objection is in that particular piece of the letter that came back to us. Thank you. I yield, Chair. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Anyone else? Mr. Inaba, go ahead. Page 40 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 MR. INABA: Yes. Since Council Member Kimball's time is up, is there somebody from the Administration who can answer that question? Okay, there being none, then I'm just going to continue for now. Maybe if somebody from the Administration wants to jump on. Judge Strance, are you speaking on behalf of the Administration right now in regards to this veto letter from the Mayor's office? (Note: At this time, Corporation Counsel Elizabeth Strance came forward to address the members of the Council.) MS. STRANCE: I can tell you that I proofread that part. And if there is an inaccuracy because the reference is to the Charter and not to the Code, that would have been the error that I would need to own. MR. INABA: Okay. And then in reference also to Article 11, are we speaking about Chapter 11 of the County Code here as well? MS. STRANCE: Yes. MR. INABA: Okay. So then, that's just a, againI want to go back to making sure that our reasons are accurate and on point here. But to further support the need to pass Bill 152, right now we have approximately $945,000 sitting in the County Housing Revolving Fund. Administrator Kunz, can you share a little bit about our Housing Preservation account and what that's being used for currently? (Note: At this time, Housing Administrator Susan Kunz came forward to address the members of the Council.) MS. KUNZ: Good afternoon. My name is Susan Kunz. I'm the Housing Administrator for the Office of Housing and Community Development. The housing preservation or HPG (Housing Preservation Grant) line item that's in the Revolving Fund is an older loan program that was a HUD (United States Department of Housing and Urban Development)program. It was to provide resources for rehab for eligible households. It is no longer in play. So, we have been utilizing this pot of money to provide resources for our newly developed well, it's not new actually. It's been in play for a few years. But it's our Residential Repair Program, a very similar program. It's a low-interest loan program for households for renovation. MR. INABA: Okay. And for this program, the Residential Repair Program, those are for existing units whose families are occupants and meet certain AMI (Area Median Income) qualifications, that they use this loan to repair their homes. Is that correct? MS. KUNZ: Correct. Page 41 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 MR. INABA: Okay. So, what I'm trying to get at here to my colleagues is that we support these types of programs. Unfortunately, the Code currently reads, "the development of housing." Do we want to support people being able to stay in their housing if it's deemed unsafe, whether it's a roof collapsing in drywall yes. Because, the question posed earlier by Kristen from Community Alliance Partners was, does it bring more people off the streets into housing? Potentially, yes. But what Bill 152 also does is keep people in the houses, in the houses. Because some of these programs like this, it's questionable whether it's actually an allowable use of funds in the County Housing Revolving Fund right now. If Bill 152 passes, the rehabilitation of units of existing structures is going to be allowed. So, I think we are broadening the uses. And I want to make sure that, in certain cases, there are certain line items within the County Housing Revolving Fund that are tied specifically to developments who paid out of developing their affordable housing requirement. Some of these, like Waikoloa Affordable Housing, for example, has only $9,500 in it. That's not enough to get us anything, but that is enough to keep somebody in their home if they're not able to afford their rent or their mortgage. We can't offer them that option right now based on existing Code, but we would be able to keep them and help them if Bill 152 is passed. So, there are certain parameters. And some of these project-specific accounts have to be spent within 25 miles of the development. We might not see another development happen within 25 miles, but we might be able to help somebody who's in that AMI category to stay in their house. We can also help people with their first mortgage or rental payment, according to Item No. 7 in Bill 152. So again, it's broadening the uses. And we want to help our community, and we want to continue programs like the repair program. So, this is why we need to pass Bill 152. I'm happy to answer any other questions that the Council may have right now. Thank you. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Inaba. Ms. Villegas, go ahead. MS. VILLEGAS: Yeah, thank you, Mr. Inaba and Ms. Kimball, for bringing this back and for the opportunity to reassess. I also really appreciate the example that you brought forward of a current practice with housing that then it highlights a questionable—is that questionable based on what the current rules say. So, I'm going to be supporting this. I appreciate broadening the spectrum and identifying other opportunities and ways that we can support the vision and the goal of not only providing housing, but ensuring that those who are currently housed stay in that housing. And I feel confident that the changes that you've made to this and have brought forward are moving us in the right direction. So, I will definitely—I'll be supporting this today. And I just appreciate the efforts that it takes to walk through this process after a veto. So, thank you. Page 42 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Villegas. Ms. Lee Loy, go ahead. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you. Absolutely support everything that Council Member Kimball and Council Member Inaba is doing to create this fund. And as Mr. Inaba mentioned, how does that money get poured into this particular fund? It's through development or these other mechanisms that we as a body have to decide on. And if that's the case, then when there are those opportunities to provide those changes of zone or development that pours into this fund, we as a body need to support it so that this fund can grow and help,just like what Council Member Inaba is talking about. Absolutely. My heartburn with this one is what happened during our budget cycle when there was an amendment to take money out of a different fund and put it into this fund, which was not the intention. And that is where these work-arounds, rather than take the pathways that are available and fill them up is where I would like us to go. I really hope this goes forward. I just, having walked through the budget cycle when we were trying to provide for our community, there was this one amendment that took a different pathway. And I cannot support that because it's a process that we advance these things and demonstrate that to our constituents. That's where I'm at. And I really want to see this go forward. But based on my experience just a few months ago, the fund and what it's intended to do and how the money gets poured in is one process. What happened during our budget process was just out of bounds a little bit for me. So, thank you, Chair, I yield. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. Ms. Kimball MS. KUNZ: Can I make some comments? CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, yes, Administrator. MS. KUNZ: Okay. So, before we get too far down the conversation, I wanted to address a couple of things. So, talking about some of the comments that Council Member Kimball made, I really don't feel that it's the number of eligible items that makes it more broad, the content of those eligible items. So, when we say the existing language talks about the Revolving Fund can be utilized for housing development, in my opinion that is the broadest language that you could provide me to do this work. Having a closed list of eligible activities is not expanding use. It's providing a total of nine eligible uses, but it's still limiting, in my opinion. At a Council meeting several Council meetings ago, there was discussion about the housing production fund and there was a concern that the Council Members wanted to limit my access to that pot of money until I could develop administrative rules. I'm in total support of that, and I very much understand that. But what happened was, my concern to the Council Members was that the Federal funding that I have in play would not allow me to do that type of activity for the Page 43 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 housing production. So, the suggestion was that we access the Revolving Fund to pay for the administrative costs. Well, the list of eligible activities doesn't include that. So, very quickly we were already starting to experience the unintended consequences. So, this body was not able to consider the use of the Revolving Fund to pay for my administrative cost to develop an administrative plan. So, the Council then had to reel that back and give me access to the housing production funds in order to develop these. So, it's just an example of what can happen, right. And I couldn't possibly think of all the potential activities that could be limiting. But that's why they're called unintended consequences. And I want to limit that, right. If we agree—and we do; I think we do—on the goal of trying to achieve the most amount of housing units for this community, then we need to broaden our ability to partner and to consider all options for housing production. The second item that I wanted to address was we could put this language in place and make amendments later if we come up with a potential consequence or unintended consequence. A lot of situations are urgent. It's based on timing, for the developer's timing is always money. To come back to Council to do an amendment will take time. And in a lot of cases, I would probably not be able to provide support to the developers who urgently need the funds. So, I'm concerned about that. Although there is an ability to come back and amend, it would take that time. And then regarding HPG, we've had this discussion before that housing preservation is important to maintain our existing inventory of housing units. And housing preservation is, in my opinion, maintaining housing production. To be able to access the funds, you know, there are different pots of money within the Revolving Fund. These sources were generated from different programs over the years. The in-lieu fees is one of the things that Council Member Holeka brought up. That is the situation where in-lieu fees was an option in Chapter 11. And that is where the language for the 25-mile radius use has to be considered. So, that only applies to some of those line items. It doesn't apply to the HPG line item. That in-lieu fee is no longer there. That language in Chapter 11 is no longer there. Is there a consideration that it might get put back? Yes. And I think that's the process that we're engaging in right now with the consultant, right, to relook at Chapter 11. In our discussion, Council Member Kimball, we talked about the intent, right. And the reason for broadening your language is to prepare for other revenue sources. Well, the initial revenue source did not come to fruition; that was Bill 153. And the fact that we're relooking at Chapter 11 now, I think it's a good opportunity for us to consider the continued use of the Revolving Fund, but I really think we need to give thought to whether or not this is the proper vehicle to Page 44 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 house those kinds of monies. And we don't know yet what the consultant is going to be providing us. They're still on time. So, we are looking to have a report from them in the fall. I think it was October that I told this group we would get back to you. I think that creating this restrictive list of activities is premature. I think that we should be patient, and we should perhaps wait until the consultant has developed their list. So, thank you very much for this consideration. I really appreciate that opportunity. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Administrator Kunz. Mr. Richards and then Mr. Inaba. MR. RICHARDS: Thank you, Chair. Listen very carefully. I am fully supportive of affordable housing. I don't always agree with the Director as far as how we're going to get there, and that's no secret because I keep pushing for it. I think we are obstructive as a County because we're not pushing hard enough for affordable housing. But that being said, this bill is more restrictive in my reading. And we dropped the language of"such as" and put in "shall"; and to me, that limits it right there. I think we need to have as much latitude in there. And so again, I cannot support this; but this is the same argument I had when I didn't support it previously. So, thank you. I yield. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Richards. Ms. Kierkiewicz, go ahead. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chair. I'll make it quick. Really appreciate the intention of Council Members Inaba and Kimball in putting this forward, but I'm going to be maintaining my "no"vote on this particular measure. I had concerns during Committee and Council in articulating these very explicit and specific uses and how they would be hamstringing the ability of the office to be able to act. I'm also concerned of no ongoing funding stream to kind of support this Revolving Fund. And I do know that work is happening by a consultant to take a look at all of the different tools that we have at our disposal in the County and really evaluate: Do they make sense right now? Are these the right-sized solutions? And then from there, being able to identify what we actually need. So again, appreciate the intention. I think we all agree that affordable housing is an issue and are eager chomping at the bit to kind of put forward solutions, but this is not something I can be supporting today. Thank you, Chair. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kierkiewicz. Anyone else? Mr. Inaba, go ahead. MR. INABA: Thank you. And I think just to boil it down even further, Corporation Counsel, in your reading of this bill, uses five, seven, eight, and nine Page 45 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 with regards to rehabilitation subsidies and grants to help with up-front costs of rental units or mortgage financing, subsidies or grants to keep people in their homes if they're going to be houseless due to foreclosure, and any deed restrictions. Are those allowed currently in the Code according to what's there right now? MS. STRANCE: Elizabeth Strance, Corporation Counsel. I had not looked at those specific matters, and I hadn't been asked to do that beforehand. So, the answer is, "I don't know." MR. INABA: Okay. Well, I'm going to make—my take and Council Member Kimball's take, again those are five, seven, eight, and nine are not covered right now. And maybe one more question for Corporation Counsel: Do programs like the rental repair program fall under development of housing? Because, there are existing units that people are living in. MS. STRANCE: (Inaudible.) MR. INABA: Sorry, I couldn't hear your question. MS. STRANCE: I would have to sit down with the bill and look specifically at the subsections. As you know, the legal concerns that I raised previously had primarily to do with whether this was an appropriate use of a revolving fund. And so, I have not gone through the specific items, and those I don't think were specific items of discussion or requests before. MR. INABA: Okay. With that, I'm going to call into question whether the uses that have been happening with this rental repair program—Residential Repair Program are allowed according to the current Code. And we should be passing this if we want to support people staying in their houses through rehabilitation of those houses or those units, and making sure because if we don't support this, we're not supporting people who are going to be homeless because they can't afford their mortgage or their rent. We're going to see people perhaps on the street because their house might go or be condemned because it's unsafe. And that's what the programs, like Residential Repair Program, are for. And that's what Bill 152 explicitly allows and which is currently, I would say, not allowed in the Code. And I can't express that any more clearly to this Council. We need to support these types of programs that the Office of Housing and Community Development is currently doing. Whether it's allowed right now or not is questionable. So, we should be allowing it, and we should be passing this bill. Thank you. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Inaba. Ms. Kimball and then (inaudible). Page 46 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 MS. KIMBALL: Thank you. I'll be brief. I want to speak briefly to Council Member Lee Loy's comments. I remember at the time we were having that discussion the idea of bait-and-switch was thrown out there. And I appreciated where you were coming from with that, and I want to again express that that was not my intention. Like so many things that we've discussed in recent days, it is about, more broadly, our, the legislative body's, responsibility to observe and vet processes that are implemented by the Administration. And well, at this point in time, Susan, I like working with you. We have a good relationship, of course. When we talk about legislation, this is stuff that is put in place for the long-term for times during the year when things—again, unintended/unanticipated situations, which is also something that happens. And so, I just want to once again speak to this idea that by implementing these options with the Revolving Fund, we are trying to say very clearly we want this broad set of uses, including the uses that exist now with housing and affordable development, the ability to convey. And there is a possibility that there are things that we haven't thought of. But that ability to say, "add on to this list and have this Council have that discussion," I think that's important. I think that's an important part of what our role as a Council, as a legislative body, is. And I asked Council Member Lee Loy. I said, "Here are some TUMS. Please get over your heartburn." It allowed us to have the conversation again about all these fundings. We have provided your office with the funding for homelessness, the funding for housing production. I think there were very important discussions had because of the things put forward about the type of accountability we wanted to see. And it's not about distrust because we all know we are on the same page. It is about our role in response to what's the role we serve for the taxpayers. So, I encourage folks to just, again, think about this one more time. The idea here is to expand the uses to meet some of these other needs because there are little bits of money in there. And yes, there was forethought with this about what modifications might happen later to Chapter 11, but Council Member Inaba and I held off on that because we know that there is this analysis coming and there's time to massage that. Similarly, you asked me to be patient with your rules for the housing production fund, and I'm going to be patient. I'm going to hold you to it. I'm just going to keep reminding you. But I think there's opportunity for us to all work together, but it's important to understand that part of this process. And I don't want us to get so exuberant about spending money or the urgency of an issue that we are willing to give up a certain level of oversight to the process. So, that's kind of my thinking. And I hope that the majority of you can continue to support 152. Thank you. I yield, Chair. Page 47 Hawaii County Council-44 July 6,2022 CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Anyone else? Seeing none, Ms. Kimball and Mr. Inaba, thank you for your explanation and I understand totally. I also understand Ms. Kunz' concerns, not necessarily about what the request is here and your amendment to this ordinance, but I believe hers is more of a logistical unintended consequence, no. And so, I'm asking just from what I'm hearing, Ms. Kimball, as you continue your discussions with Administrator Kunz if it becomes apparent that a further amendment to thisI sense that you folks are willing to accommodate in case we do come up with some really dire situations that Ms. Kunz is trying to explain, but we'll have a better opportunity later on that this can be further amended to address some of those needs and move this forward. MS. KIMBALL: Yeah, absolutely. CHR. DAVID: Thank you. MS. KIMBALL: I know that is the conversation we've had CHR. DAVID: I just wanted to make sure that that was what I'm hearing, and actually give Ms. Kunz some sort of assurances that this is not the last end-all. And I probably won't—no, not probably but this will probably continue long after Vice Chair and I are gone. So, it's up to you folks to work it out so that everybody's concerns are addressed. So, Mr. Clerk, roll call please. Vote on Bill 152: The motion to pass Bill 152, Draft 2, on second and final Draft 2 reading was carried by the following roll call vote: (Adopted) Ayes: Council Members Chung, Inaba, Kimball, Lee Loy, Villegas, and Chair David–6. Noes: Council Members Kierkiewicz and Richards –2. Absent: Council Member Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder– 1. Excused: None. MR. HENRICKS: The Mayor's disapproval of Bill 152, Draft 2, is overridden by the Council. The bill is now an ordinance. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Clerk. I think that takes us to the end. ANNOUNCE- The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business, MENTS: Announcements. (There were none.) Page 48 Hawai`i County Council-44 July 6,2022 ADJOURN- There being no further business, at 1 1:39 a.m., Mr. Inaba moved to adjourn the MENT: meeting. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, Inaba, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas, and Chair David— 8. Noes: None. Absent: Council Member Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder— 1. Excused: None. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, everybody. We are adjourned. AUG - 3 2022 Council Approval: /11-11111.M.Z.e.t.......-4A COUNTY CLERK JH/dg Page 49