HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN PWMTC 2022/10/19 2020-2022 Committee on Public Works and Mass Transit
28th Session
West Hawaii Civic Center
74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Highway, Building A
Kailua-Kona, Hawaii
October 19, 2022
CALL TO The regular meeting of the Committee on Public Works and Mass Transit
ORDER: was called to order at 10:32 a.m. in the Council Chambers, Kona, by
Ms. Susan L. K. Lee Loy, Chair.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Ms. Susan L. K. Lee Loy, Chair
Mr. Matt Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Vice Chair(via videoconference from Hilo
Ms. Maile Medeiros David, Member
Mr. Holeka Goro Inaba, Member
Ms. Ashley L. Kierkiewicz, Member
Ms. Heather L. Kimball, Member
Mr. Herbert M. "Tim" Richards, III, Member
Ms. Rebecca Villegas, Member
Absent& Excused: Mr. Aaron S. Y. Chung, Member
STATEMENTS The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business,
FROM THE Statements from the Public on Agenda Items.
PUBLIC ON
AGENDA ITEMS: (There were none.)
CHR. LEE LOY: Mr. Clerk, if you could take us to Bills for Ordinances.
BILLS FOR The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business,
ORDINANCES: Bills for Ordinances.
Bill 221: AMENDS CHAPTERS 17 AND 26 OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE 1983
(2016 EDITION, AS AMENDED), RELATING TO FIRE
Updates and revises the Hawaii County Fire Code to incorporate the 2018
National Fire Protection Association standards and adopt the 2018 Hawaii State
Fire Code.
Reference: Comm. 1029
Intr. by: Ms. Kierkiewicz (B/R)
PWMTC-28 October 19,2022
(Note: Comm. 1029.1, from Council Member Ashley L. Kierkiewicz dated
October 17, 2022, transmitting proposed amendments to Bill 221, was circulated.)
(Note: Comm. 1029.2, from Council Member Ashley L. Kierkiewicz dated
October 17, 2022, transmitting proposed amendments to Bill 221, was circulated.)
(Note: Comm. 1029.3, from Council Member Ashley L. Kierkiewicz dated
October 17, 2022, transmitting proposed amendments to Bill 221, was circulated.)
Motion to Approve: Ms. Kierkiewicz moved to recommend passage
of Bill 221 on first reading. Seconded by
Mr. Richards.
CHR. LEE LOY: Ms. Kierkiewicz, please lead our discussion.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chair. So the County of Hawaii is currently
operating under the NFPA-1 (National Fire Protection Association) Fire Code
from 2006, and this particular bill is incredibly critical in ensuring that our County
is in line with the most current Fire Code regulations which were adopted by the
State Fire Code Council in 2018. The body also adopted the 2021 NFPA last
month, but our County has two years to kind of review and embed that into our
Code and adopt to the Ordinance. So, this particular bill helps to set up a
framework for us to do that particular action.
I do want to call up our Fire Chief Kazuo Todd and Battalion Chief Palani
Kurashige, who were principle in pulling this together. We also have Deputy
Corporation Counsel Cody (Dakota) Frenz who helped craft this legislation. And
a big shoutout to Leslie Chow in LRB (Legislative Research Branch) for helping
to make sure that all of this aligns and syncs.
Just a high-level overview of some of the changes that are being considered today.
One involves a proposed plan review fee; the other is an increase in increment
fees because that hasn't been done for some time now; and the requirement for
certificates of fitness, installing systems.
And I just want to point out to my colleagues that there are a few amendments
that I do want to bring forward. Some are grammatical and others are related to
the section on the violation. I don't think we're there yet. I think we need a little
bit more time to at least critique, and to what that particular process might look
like. And so, Chair, when you're ready, I would love to be able to move those in,
but do want to provide Fire the opportunity to just talk globally of this bill. Thank
you.
CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Ms. Kierkiewicz. Mr. Todd, please.
Page 2
PWMTC-28 October 19,2022
(Note: At this time, Fire Chief Kazuo Todd and Battalion Chief
Palani Kurashige came forward to address the members of the
Committee.)
CHIEF TODD: Okay, so right now what we're trying to do is just bring us up to
the current Code status. Under the Hawaii Revised Statutes, under 107-25, 24,
and 28, basically we have a revolving Code cycle for the Fire Code we just
adopted by the State Fire Council, and then sent over to the State Building Code
Council. Essentially they have a two-year timeframe from when the bill is
officially published to adopt within two years. So as you mentioned just briefly
before, the 2021 Code has already been adopted at the State level, by basically
de facto adoption, because they did not actually get around to doing amendments
on the State level because the Code started coming that quickly.
We've also had a lot of change over on the State Fire Council, as they're all new
chiefs in the County positions at the moment, so there have been some hang-ups
because of that. But essentially, we'll be back in front of you within the next two
years with the next version of this Code, and thereafter every three years we'll
just be in front of you bringing updates.
Now the majority of the Code updates that are placed before you are
continuations of essentially what we've had in the past. As Council Member
Kierkiewicz mentioned, basically we're updating our fees because we haven't
touched those in over a decade. The cost of going out and doing inspections has
increased, so we're trying to basically capture that cost.
And the other thing is that we're looking to capture basically a cost to establish a
process of reviewing certain types of plan sets. So currently, you know, plans are
coming through the system, into EPIC (Electronic Processing and Information
Center), and we are tracking all of those through DPW (Department of Public
Works). But one of the things that aren't actually coming through right now is the
specific plans for Fire protection systems. So essentially, you know,plans come
in and they have theoretical fire drawings for sprinklers, or fire alarms, or things
like that. But all those drawings that are getting accepted in the EPIC system
right now are theoretical drawings. The reason for that is that the person that's
putting together the plan set has not hired, you know, often a general contractor or
subcontractor, and the person who does the specialized plan sets for a fire
sprinkler system or things like that, that's all they do.
So there are companies that do, let's say fire sprinkler systems. So what would
happen is when the general contractor comes on, they hire a subcontractor, and
then the real plans get made. But those real plans are never actually coming
through the EPIC system, so there is no actual documentation. Oftentimes and
occasionally, that's running into issues in the field, where we're going out to our
job site,just trying to get their seal, and we're running into problems. And some
of these things were just not documented initially because we said, "They
Page 3
PWMTC-28 October 19,2022
followed the Code," and they said, "Yeah, we'll follow the Code," and then the
plan sets come later on and we're like, "Whoa, why are you designing it like
this?" It would have been a lot better to capture that ahead of time, but they
haven't hired a subcontractor, or they haven't gotten those designs to us. So part
of the premise of it is to have a system that allows us to capture those plans, log
them off as approved or not approved, and have a digital documentation of that
process.
And so we're looking to basically tack in a small fee there on top of the
20 percent, I believe is currently charged, that would be 15 percent of the
20 percent, so maybe an additional three percent total in terms of the fees that we
get charged. That would support the process of bringing in those extra plan sets
so that we have official documentation that they were reviewed.
We do actually in turn meet the Fire Code, whichever one they're applying to, and
they had gotten the approval to move ahead with that plan set, and hopefully we
can cap some of the things that are slowing things down. So that's the idea
behind that.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chief. And I just do want to recognize that our
office, and Fire, and Corporation Counsel have had some communication from
the Department of Public Works, Building specifically,just concerns about how
this particular Code, because it impacts Building in their process, would be
administered. So Chief, if you could just kind of share with us? You did bring up
these specialized plans, and how they could be handled within the EPIC system.
We certainly don't want to be burdening, inundating Building with additional
work because they have a lot going on, and so wondering if there is consideration
around the way Planning does it, where you guys can be having your own clerk to
kind of manage the intake and review of those plans. Could you speak to that,
please?
CHIEF TODD: Yeah. So actually, DPW has reached out and mentioned that
they were a little concerned because obviously Magnet as it isoh, not Magnet,
EPIC now, as it is, it's already somewhat a difficult system, and they're a little bit
low-staffed. So the ability to add more work on top of their current work is not
something DPW was really ready to tackle at the moment.
In talks with Zendo (Kern) from Planning, he mentioned the possibility of
potentially having a separate section within the EPIC system for us, similar to
how Planning does it, and then we just managed internally. So that's one of the
options we're looking for in terms of moving that forward.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chief. And because we have our Building
Division Chief here, Julann Sonomura, if I could just call you forward. I certainly
don't want to put any words in your mouth; but just for the record, if you want to
just share your insights on this particular bill.
Page 4
PWMTC-28 October 19,2022
(Note: At this time, Building Division Chief Julann Sonomura came
forward to address the members of the Committee.)
CHR. LEE LOY: Thanks, Ms. Sonomura. Introduce yourself for the record and
go ahead.
MS. SONOMURA: My name is Julann Sonomura. I'm with the Department of
Public Works. I'm Building Division Chief. I'm here today to just say that we
are in support of adopting the current Fire Code. We do have some concerns
about the implementation and the wording in the bill, where theI think it's an
AHJ(Authority Having Jurisdiction) authority, being the Fire Chief overseeing
and administering the program; and how it may or may not affect Public Works,
and our challenge is that we're experiencing with the EPIC program that we are
trying to get up and running.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Okay, thank you. Sounds like there's a need for Building
and Fire to connect after this meeting to just kind of work out any differences.
Thanks again for being here.
MS. SONOMURA: Okay, thank you.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Chief Kurashige, did you want to speak to any of this? I
know that you were really principal in driving this Code update.
MR. KURASHIGE: Okay, I came into this position last year as an Acting
Battalion Chief, starting from October, and I know this has already been started,
but I was just tasked with trying to finish it the best way we could to get this thing
forward. You know, I was tasked with this you know, coming up with the
adoption of this 2018 Fire Code, is because we've been operating on a previous
version for so long.
So again, without the help of Leslie Chow along with Fire Chief Todd, this
wouldn't have been possible at this time. But we've been—especially with me
working on this, it's been tirelessly—and I spent a lot of hours on this. Again, the
intent of this was so that we could move forward and not operate off of an old
Code for so long.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chief. All right, I'm going to defer to my
colleagues for questions and comments. And Chair, when you're ready, I'm
happy to move in the amendments. Thank you.
CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Ms. Kierkiewicz. My colleagues, any questions,
comments? Mr. Richards.
MR. RICHARDS: Yeah, thanks, Chair. Based upon what Ms. Kierkiewicz said
and what I heard from Public Works, sounds like we need to have a talk story
Page 5
PWMTC-28 October 19,2022
before we really advance this, so I think it's a good time to have some conversation
on it. But I'm thinking we're going to need to ask for a postponement so that gives
them some time to get things worked out. And I don't disagree, we want to keep
this thing rolling. We also want to make sure we're rolling in the right direction. I
think I will ask for that, but I'll ask for it after we have a bit of a conversation. So
at this point, I'm going to yield.
CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Mr. Richards. Ms. Kimball.
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Chair. And thank you, Council Member Kierkiewicz,
for your work on this, as well as the department; and Leslie (Chow) and Deputy
Corp. Counsel Frenz. I'm sure this was a big project.
I just actually have a question about the cadence and the timing of the adoption of
the State Fire Codes. And thenI'm sorry, the other acronym, NF
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Yes, NFPA.
MS. KIMBALL: NFPA, thank you.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: National Fire Protection Association.
MS. KIMBALL: Appreciate it. What is the cycle that those are getting—we're
trying to catch up to at this point?
CHIEF TODD: Okay, so under Hawaii Revised Statutes 107-24, essentially the
local the State has two years from the time a Code has basically been put out in
order to adopt that Code with amendments. I don't know that the Building Code
and other areas have been able to keep up with some of this stuff, but that is what
the State is saying.
I know on the Fire Code side, at least with the Fire Council, has not been able to
keep up with that section in the Hawaii Revised Statutes. But basically, Section 24
says you got two years after the Code has been published. So for example, the 2021
Fire Code, NFPA-1, was published in August of 2020. So as of August 2022,
several months ago, that Code needed to have been adopted at the State Fire
Council level, with amendments. It was not, and part of this is because we had an
entire changeover.
At this moment, I am the longest-sitting County Fire Chief in the State of Hawaii.
All the County Fire Chiefs have changed in the last year. So there's a new
Honolulu Chief, a new Maui Chief, and a new Kauai Chief, and I'm actually now
the leader of the State Fire Council, as of one meeting.
So we're actually working on those State amendments to push through for the next
version of 2021, even as we're still trying to catch up on the 2018 version. And I
Page 6
PWMTC-28 October 19,2022
do want to make a correction, technically per that HRS, we are on the 2012 Code,
not the 2006. Our language in the Hawaii County Code says "2006,"but the way
the Code is written on the Hawaii Revised Statutes, it was actually overrun by the
2012 version when we failed to adopt the amendments the last time around. So, this
is us trying to catch up on it.
You know, basically when Chief Kurashige was appointed into the position of
Battalion Chief of Prevention, the first task and the one I said is the one that needed
to happen was we needed to come current with our Code systems and we needed to
get this going. He's been working diligently with Leslie, in Administrative
Services with the County Clerk side, to get this formatted, and get the proper
language in there. It has gone back and forth for months now, as we tweak certain
wordings and still missed a few things in that final version, I think because we went
over too many versions. But a lot of the language that existed from 2012, when
we've been working on it to get brought up into this Code, it just hasn't happened
when it should have.
Basically, on the Fire Code side, the State Fire Council itself gets the choice of what
is our Fire Code going to be, and then we submit that to the State Building Code
Council. The State Building Code Council then under HRS 107-25 will adopt and
then send it down to the Counties. The Counties can then amend without—the
State Building Code Council is allowed to adopt that without Council approval.
But what that means, is at the State level they can just adopt the Code, and they
don't have to run it through the Legislature.
On the County level, we still have to run it through the County Council for
amendments to the Fire Code, and hence, the reason we are sitting in front of you
today. That make sense?
MS. KIMBALL: Oh, yeah. Clear as mud, thanks. No, it does. I think—my
questioning along this was really going to go to I'm a developer building a
building, is it clear what Code I am trying to develop to at this point, which it
sounds like a 2012?
CHIEF TODD: Yes, it is confusing as mud, unfortunately. So we've been on the
NFPA-1 since 2006, and ultimately even 2012, 2018, and 2021 are very, very
similar Codes. There are updates; there are additions. One of the things that we sat
last month for, in front of the State Fire Council, was they wanted the section, under
the refrigerant storage section, changed. The reason is that due to global warming,
and hose and issues and stuff like that, they're changing the types of refrigerants
that are going into refrigerating systems, and the Code hasn't kept up.
So the reason for Code updates on a pretty regular basis, it isn't that the Code
changes particularly a lot, it's because there are new technologies that need to be
adopted for. And sometimes we're putting in, you know, slight changes, you know,
saying, "Hey, instead of four feet, it should be three feet," or something like that.
Page 7
PWMTC-28 October 19,2022
And for that reason, we're just trying to keep current. But if you were to build
something on the island and you were running off of the 2006 Code, the odds of
anything in there being critically different from 2012 or 2018 are infinitesimal,
honestly.
Mostly, the changes that we are pushing for adoption, or what is the County
specifically going to be permitting in terms of what we are charged fees for, and
what are we enforcing in terms of our personnel and inspectors going out and
checking things? That's the primary reason that the Code comes up for adoption,
otherwise, 99.9 percent of the Code stands as is. We're just getting the newest
version, which is accuracy for new technology changes or changes in the industries
and things like that. Otherwise, the Code is much the same.
MS. KIMBALL: Yeah, and my angle of questioning was kind of to get to, is there
anything that we can build in that the State should make future updates more
timely?
CHIEF TODD: That is a very good question, one which I do not have an answer
for at this time. If the County wanted to run the same as the State and pass
something that just allowed folks to automatically go through, that might be
something to consider. But that is a bigger topic, I'm assuming. The State—it's
kind of a weird thing.
As far as like the State Building Code and the State Fire Codes and things like that,
they're not enforced at the State. It gets into those weird gray areas where, you
know we have this State Fire Code, but there isn't a single building in the State
that's being enforced at the State Fire Code level. Even the State's buildings fall
under the County jurisdiction, sort of.
Even that's kind of weird when we get to schools and such like that. Because
we've got a lot of schools on the island that doesn't have like working fire alarms
and such. They're on a different jurisdictional level, so we'll tell them that they're
not in compliance with their own Code, but it's up to them to actually kind of
follow through and do something about it. But even for them, they're following
whatever the local County is. So if you have a State airport on this island or a State
airport on Maui, they follow the Maui County Code, or the Hawaii Code,
depending which island it's on, which is based off of that State Fire Code or
Building Code, which doesn't directly apply to anything in the State. Did I make it
more confusing? I feel like I made it more confusing.
MS. KIMBALL: No, no, no, I think that—let's take this discussion outside. You
know, I think this is a discussion at a later point. I mean, as you mentioned, some
of the differences are probably not significant enough to be really consequential or
they're pertaining to specific things that have changed. But just maybe something
to think about, to Council Member Richards' point, obviously, there's a little more
Page 8
PWMTC-28 October 19,2022
work to do in terms of the alignment and the arrangement with the Department of
Public Works.
You know, I think one of the benefits that we foresaw with the EPIC system was a
single repository for documents in a digital format related to permitting. And so if
we create this second stream that's maybe not tied in, I have a little bit of concern
about one duplication or a failure to represent the full picture of documents and
permitting for a given structure. You know, as we've discussed this, I'll be just
supporting holding this until those discussions could be had. Maybe we can come
to some resolution there. Thank you, Chair. I yield.
CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Mr. Inaba.
MR. INABA: Thank you. Yeah, I think we're going to have a lot of discussions,
it's kind of deja vu with the Building Code. But we have amendments and I think I
would like to get through the amendments, and we could have a bigger discussion
later. Thank you.
CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Mr. Inaba. Ms. Kierkiewicz, if you would, so we can
round out the bill?
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Sure.
Motion to Amend: Ms. Kierkiewicz moved to amend Bill 221 with the
contents of Comm. 1029.1. Seconded by Mr. Inaba.
CHR. LEE LOY: Ms. Kierkiewicz.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chair. If Council Members would look to
page two of the bill, at the top Section 17-1-5, Permits; and then below that,
Section 17-1-21, NFPA 1, Fire Code, State Fire Code, at the bottom in brackets
you see [2018 HSFC] and their numbers. The first is five, the second is four, and
so there was typo on this side. We are trying to ensure that there is the correct
ordering of numbers here. So just simple housekeeping fix. Looking for
everyone's support on it. Thank you.
CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Ms. Kierkiewicz. Any discussion? Mr. Inaba.
MR. INABA: Yeah, and looking through the numbering in the Hawaii State Fire
Code, I understand the ordering might be wrong, but it seems like the language is
correct. Fire, do you have any thoughts on this amendment, 1029.1?
MR. KURASHIGE: Correct. The language is correct, but the numerical of the
numbering is incorrect.
Page 9
PWMTC-28 October 19,2022
MR. INABA: So are we reordering it or are we just changing out the number,
Ms. Kierkiewicz?
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: We are swapping the numbers. Right now, it says five,
four. It should be four, five, that we're going in numerical order.
MR. INABA: If I'm looking at Section 17-1-5, it references Section 5 from the
Hawaii State Fire Code; and when I look at Section in the Hawaii State Fire
Code, that is the correct corresponding language. So I understand that the
numbering might—the order might be wrong. But if we swap the numbers, then
the language referenced is incorrect.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Okay, I'm going to defer to Chief Kurashige because this
is an amendment that he had requested our office to process.
MR. INABA: Numbers four and five. Okay, let me explain. So at the top of
page two, it says, "A permit"this is Section 17-1-5, Permits, "A permit from the
AHJ may be required for any area regulated by this article," and it references the
language from Hawaii State Fire Code, Section No. 5. When you look at the
Hawaii State Fire Code, it's County permit authorization, "Each county may, by
ordinance, require that a permit be obtained from the AHJ for any area regulated
by this chapter." That is the correct corresponding number, five to five.
So if we pass this amendment and swap the number for four, it's referencing
adoption of the 2018 NFPA-1 Fire Code, in the Hawaii State Fire Code. It's not
the correct—it doesn't reference the same section. So I don't I think we have to
not approve this amendment. I think the language as it stands is correct. The
numbering is correct. So the order, yeah it's not numerically in order, but the
walkover is correct. I won't be supporting this because I think the language is
correct as it stands.
CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Mr. Inaba. Fire Chief, you want to take a few
minutes to clarify if the crosswalk is actually correct?
MR. INABA: And I would like to add, Chair, if I could? Number two of this
amendment speaks to Section 17-1-21, which immediately follows that permitting
language, and it speaks to adoption of the 2018 NFPA Fire Code. Number 4 in
the Hawaii State Fire Code is correct, and that is the correct reference in the bill
right now, Hawaii State Fire Code, Number 4.
CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Mr. Inaba. We'll give Fire a few minutes. A little
follow-up, Mr. Inaba.
MR. INABA: Thank you. I think just for the Council, I don't know that we all
have all the tools, so if we just google Hawaii State Fire Code 2018, we can pull
up what document Bill 221 is cross-referencing with; and the numbers that we
Page 10
PWMTC-28 October 19,2022
see, for example, 2018 HSFC No. 2, is No. 2 in that document. So we can see
that cross-over.
CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Mr. Inaba. Deputy Director Frenz, please.
(Note: At this time, Deputy Corporation Counsel Dakota(Cody) Frenz
came forward to address the members of the Committee.)
MS. FRENZ: Good morning, everyone. Deputy Corporation Counsel Cody
Frenz, attorney for Fire Department. I'm guessing that both Chief Todd and
Chief Kurashige don't have access to the internet. There were a lot of moving
parts, I know. So if we're going to be tabling this conversation either way for
further discussion with Building and how the two Codes are going to be
intersecting, I would recommend we table this as well, so we can double-check
and I can have a conversation with the Chief about this, if possible.
CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Ms. Frenz. Ms. Kierkiewicz.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chair. Rather than table this measure, I don't
know if these folks have they don't have all the tools in front of them right now.
So I'm just going to withdraw this particular motion. And I have a feeling that
we're going to be continuing to have a conversation about this bill in Committee.
If there is a need to make any other fixes, we can bring it up at the next
Committee meeting. But at this time, I'll be withdrawing that particular
amendment. Thank you.
Withdraw Motion Ms. Kierkiewicz withdrew her motion to amend Bill 221
to Amend: with the contents of Comm. 1029.1.
CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Ms. Kierkiewicz. Would you like to entertain any
of the other communications?
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Yes, please.
CHR. LEE LOY: Go ahead.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you.
Motion to Amend: Ms. Kierkiewicz moved amend Bill 221 with the
contents of Comm. 1029.2. Seconded by Mr. Richards.
CHR. LEE LOY: Ms. Kierkiewicz, go ahead.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chair. This is related to the permit fee table,
and so we are looking to strike the contents related to flammable and combustible
Page 11
PWMTC-28 October 19,2022
liquid tanks because that is already included later in the table, under storage tanks
above ground or underground. Pretty straightforward.
CHR. LEE LOY: Pretty straightforward.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Jumping around, the second amendment, related to
permitted fees. Thank you, Chair.
CHR. LEE LOY: Any comments, questions? Seeing, let's go ahead and
take the vote. All those in favor of amending Bill 221 with the contents of
Communication 1029.2,please say "aye."
Vote on Motion The motion to amend Bill 221 with the contents of
to Amend: Comm. 1029.2 was carried by the following voice vote:
(Approved)
Ayes: Committee Members David, Inaba,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz, Kimball,
Richards, Villegas, Chair Lee Loy —8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Committee Member Chung— 1.
Excused: None.
CHR. LEE LOY: Ms. Kierkiewicz.
Motion to Amend: Ms. Kierkiewicz moved to amend Bill 221 with
the contents of Comm. 1029.3. Seconded by
Mr. Inaba.
CHR. LEE LOY: Ms. Kierkiewicz.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chair. This particular amendment is related to
striking everything related to the Notice of Violation (NOV) section. You know,
in my discussion with the Fire Department, I think we're a little bit premature in
this section right here. I think this is something we can entertain once this
particular ordinance is adopted or as we take a look at adopting the 2021 Code.
There is a reference here to a body that doesn't exist, the Fire Board of Appeals,
and so rather than creating more government bureaucracy, let's see what sort of
Boards and Commissions might be able to handle some of the appeals once the
NOV process has been established.
But I do think we need a little bit more time to kind of work everything out
internally. So I hope my colleagues can agree that we can put a pin in this for a
little bit before moving forward. Thank you, Chair.
CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Ms. Kierkiewicz. Mr. Inaba.
Page 12
PWMTC-28 October 19,2022
MR. INABA: Thank you. Within the Fire Department right now, we have a
process for Notice of Violation, currently?
CHIEF TODD: Yes, that is correct.
MR. INABA: And does that process change at all if we remove the language?
CHIEF TODD: No, it does not. Essentially, that was adding fines and fees and
other things in there. Generally, our current Notice of Violation issues will let
you know that you're in violation, then we have the ability to shut a business if
we deem it to be basically a hazard to the public health or safety. But we don't
have any tie-in system within our current remedies.
MR. INABA: Okay. So that practice will be able to be continued. Thank you,
Chief.
CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Mr. Inaba. Anyone else? Seeing none. Oh,
Ms. Kimball, go ahead.
MS. KIMBALL: Sorry. I hadn't fully formed the thought in my brain. I'm
wondering if the Notice of Violation, any fees, and appeals for this part of the
Code, could actually be moved to function under another department like DPW or
Planning, that already has those components. No, with a big red flag over there
from DPW. Oh, Planning's not here. We can give it to them. They can't say no.
Okay, I see there are some things that we need to do actually with Notice of
Violation outside of this Code that I've been reviewing. So maybe there's an
intersection here between some of that administrative function, but maybe
doesn't need to be living isolated in the Fire Code but can be at a higher level
across multiple agencies.
I guess, yeahI'm happy to support this amendment to take it out right now, and
then maybe we can go for one of these other mechanisms. Okay, thanks. I yield,
Chair.
CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Anyone else, on the amendment?
All right, seeing none. All those in favor of amending Bill 221 with the contents
of Communication 1029.3,please say "aye."
Page 13
PWMTC-28 October 19,2022
Vote on Motion The motion to amend Bill 221 with the contents of
to Amend: Comm. 1029.3 was carried by the following voice vote:
(Approved)
Ayes: Committee Members David, Inaba,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz, Kimball,
Richards, Villegas, Chair Lee Loy –8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Committee Member Chung– 1.
Excused: None.
CHR. LEE LOY: Ms. Kierkiewicz, to the main motion. We're good? All right.
My colleagues, any discussion on Bill 221, as amended? Ms. David.
MS. DAVID: Thank you, Chair. I just have one general question, given the fact
that DPW needs to continue its work with you folks and kind of meld these two
processes together.
Currently when applications come through the Fire Department for review, what
are you using as far as your approval standard for—now that we're in this limbo
area and the Code is not updated, what Code are you using to approve and review
applications that have to basically get your approval? What are we using now?
CHIEF TODD: So technically, right now we're under the 2012 Code, and that's
technically what we're supposed to be using to enforce, however, we do offer a
concurrency up to the current Code. So potentially speaking, if you had said,
"Hey, 2012 doesn't cover this area, but in 2018, this gets allowed" or something
like that, we would consider that. So there are options in there to just come
current from whatever the current Code system is. And so that's essentially how
we're looking at stuff. Does that make sense?
MS. DAVID: Yeah. So you're using a combination of both; if it's not covered in
2012 then it might be covered in 2018, and that's how you make your decisions
then.
CHIEF TODD: That will be correct.
MS. DAVID: Okay. Okay, that's all I have. Thank you.
CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Ms. David. Anyone else? Mr. Richards.
MR. RICHARDS: I think we've gotten to the end of the conversation here, so I
would move to postpone Bill 221 to the next Committee meeting. Is two weeks
going to be enough?
CHR. LEE LOY: Mr. Richards, if you don't mind, I did have a couple of
questions before we do that.
Page 14
PWMTC-28 October 19,2022
Withdraw Motion MR. RICHARDS: I don't mind at all, so I will retract, and withdraw.
to Postpone:
CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you. If there are no more comments from my
colleaguesChief, thanks for being here. I think we've had that discussion. I
actually had some questions around the permit fees, and I know that these
numbers weren't just magically kind of placed in this chart. If you wouldn't mind
kind of expressing how you arrived at those numbers, and that there was some
thought process that went into not just a nice round number.
CHIEF TODD: Well, we put it in there because it was a nice no. So
essentially, it's based on what it costs us now. Sometimes we send someone
overtime to visit a site, and because of the size of the island, then drivetime we
you know, it really does depend. There are some inspections that cost less than
that, and there are some that end up costing us more. And to some extent, it is a
nice round number that basically is where we thought our average price point was
in terms of getting an inspector out on overtime to go visit and do things like that,
in terms of inspections.
CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you. I do have a question on the carnivals and fairs
permit. My understanding is this would be something that would be done under a
temporary building permit or the like. And then, there's this fee. So it would be
an additional fee, the $25 for the temporary building permit, and then $200, so,
the total cost of$225.
CHIEF TODD: Yeah, so that particular fee I think kicks in about twice a year.
Once, when we would do a Kona festival, you know, when EK Fernandez is
coming in, and once in Hilo. It's actually one of those few that had cost us more
than $200, because there are usually meetings that come in, where we go and
speak out at the vendors that are coming in to do cooking, we're doing
inspections, and we have using multiple inspectors out there.
So while it isn't just a right, nice, round number,part of the reason is we kind of
average out our inspections. So in that particular one, it does cost us more on the
County side,just to be there and present, as we educate vendors. We put in the
time to explain what kind of fire extinguishers they need to use, because some fire
extinguisher's classes sometimes—and the reason is, is we're bringing in a lot of
people into a small area, and the potential exists there for something to go wrong.
And we also usually drop large tents, and so there's some inspections on that as
well as the equipment operations that go in.
CHR. LEE LOY: Okay, great. Thank you. And thank you for elaborating on
that. I just wanted to demonstrate that there was some thought.
I had a question regarding water. The conversation came up around sprinklers
and sprinkler systems and how they're evaluated. My question is if this Code
Page 15
PWMTC-28 October 19,2022
addresses that issue related to water; because if their construction requires
sprinklers, I'm not sure if I'm using the right term, but there's not enough water
capacity, how are we addressing that in the Code?
CHIEF TODD: So NFPA-I actually does cover, in terms of water supply and
how to supplement it should there not be available, like water from that system, so
that could be done with tanks. It can be done with all permitting extinguishing
systems. It could be a value that the pressure in the system nearby is too low, and
so essentially what you do is you have a larger pipe size to reduce friction lost
issues, and that might be one of the outcomes to that particular thing. But the
options are in the Code in terms of how you would deal with a lack of water, from
either having your own water supply, such as tanks outside the building, or larger
pipe sizes or things like that. Does that make sense?
CHR. LEE LOY: Absolutely. And I'm asking that question because I think for
our design professionals, which is something Ms. Kimball is touching upon, you
know, we just went through a huge Code update with all of our Construction
Codes, and so we just want to make sure that our design professionals are
knowing what to design too, and if there are tools in future Codes that they can
actually utilize some of that. And back to the cookbook, right? This is a
cookbook of recipes, and you can substitute honey with sugar, and all of those
options are still available.
And the follow-up to that, and maybe this is a questionoh, Mr. Richards' light
is on—on our ag structures, that was another concern about needing water as it
relates to our ag structures.
CHIEF TODD: Is that a question?
MR. RICHARDS: Yeah, is that a question?
CHR. LEE LOY: Yeah. I mean, because we have structures in ag zoning and
have limited water that's available in ag, and if meeting those Fire requirements
are permitted under this Code?
CHIEF TODD: You know, it's been a long—since I did plan review. I know
when we were running a lot of the ag structures that were out there, they didn't
really fall under our purview, as far as needing water or things like it. It kind of
depends because there are a lot of different kinds of ag structures.
I remember we did a coffee farm processing plant, which, you know, they're
saying it's an ag building. It's basically a roof, and then we got all this processing
happening underneath it, but because they have equipment and machinery and
potential sources of fire, they're roasting and other things, and they didn't have
water, the solution for us was a water tank on site. And the Code does allow us to
kind of figure out, or allow for alternatives if it's not specifically in the Code.
Page 16
PWMTC-28 October 19,2022
And we work with people basically to figure how we're going to supply those
needs.
Oftentimes if you're out in the middle of nowhere, and we're saying, "Hey, that's
a potential fire issue," or things like that, the simple issue is just the water tank
that you normally are using to supply for the building gets a little bit bigger, and
then there's a connection for the Fire Department to be able to suck some water
out of it, if there is an issue. That's generally how we're dealing with those
issues.
Needless to say, if someone is having problems going on, come talk to the Fire
Department. We are going to make sure that you're taken care of and still safe.
CHR. LEE LOY: Excellent answer. All right. Those were my questions.
Mr. Richards.
MR. RICHARDS: Yeah, thanks. This conversation reminded me of some stuff.
I don't fully expect an answer on some of this right now, but since we were—my
intention is to postpone in a little bit. A couple of things then, to Ms. Lee Loy's
point when it comes to the agricultural side, I have a situation where we get a
little structured around Fire Code. And I understand the Fire Code, but the
question has come up repeatedly, is implementing a new Fire Code, is that going
to increase construction costs because of safety concerns?
And going forward, and this is probably a general question across what barometer
are we using when we say that we have enough? I can think of one ag
construction, greenhouses, where nothing is flammable there, but we had to
comply—or they had to comply with the Fire Code to get a fire truck in to take
care of a steel building where there's no human, I mean it's soft walls and all that.
So there are some concerns from the agricultural standpoint that we're being very
specific, and I get it, but the application of that I don't expect the full answer
right now. The point is I think the temperance and the ability to recognize that
this is agriculture and nothing can burn here anyway, that was on one side.
Then we had another situation where a house did not qualify to get a water meter,
and the recommendation was to then put in a water tank like you've described for
fire safety, fire mitigation, and fire suppression, but the hydrant was less than 40
yards away, but they still required a water tank for water accumulation.
And so again, some of our Fire Codes I get it to a point, but I want to be sure that
we are being very mindful of tampering with the interpretation, so we recognize
that some of these things are probably a little bit of an overreach. Again, I don't
expect full answers, but I understand that the concerns of my constituents have
raised.
Page 17
PWMTC-28 October 19,2022
CHIEF TODD: All right. So let me address to the best of my ability. One
hundred percent we're on the same page. I've already sat down witha meeting
with the Water Department over their standard, as well as Zendo, on Planning, for
variance, and you know, people didn't want to split their properties or things like
that, and rein back what the Fire Department was getting involved in.
So our goal is to stick to the Fire Code, and there are options within the Fire Code
to have a variance based on specific needs. And we are not here to put a kibosh
on developing property or mandating really harsh requirements to come andI
know that in the past, the Fire Department has gotten pretty stringent on things. It
is not policy; and should there be any issues, feel free to come and see me and we
can have that conversation. My goal is that we provide for a reasonable level of
safety, and in fact, we fit within the Fire Code. That is the goal.
We're not going to be stretching out to look at the State Water System standards,
and tell people that, "Hey, there's a section in there for fire that you need to"no,
the State Water System's standards are going to be managed by the Water
Department. The Fire Department is restricted to managing from the Fire Code,
and that's when the building plans are coming in, and we'll talk about how we
either meet the Code or how we allow ourselves the ability toa variance, or
work around the Code to get to where we need to be for generalized safety.
A good example of this was TMT (Thirty Meter Telescope). I don't know if it
will ever be built, but it is a specific type of building that is not something we can
access, right? It's up on the mountain. I'm not going to get fire trucks up there in
any reasonable amount of time, should the building go up. And so they've come
in when they're doing design plans, about how do we meet safety. And there are
opportunities there.
In many ways, you know, you have these agricultural buildings or ranch buildings
that could be way out there. The reality is my ability to get to what is on a horse
path out in the middle of nowhere, may not exist. And so trying to establish like,
hey, this building, or this farm structure, or something like that, needs to meet a
Fire Code, when a firetruck is never going to be able to get there in time is kind of
ludicrous.
So definitely, we understand that there are going to be things that are coming
across in the Code that just are not your typical thing. The Code is not really
designed for that, in concept. We'll find away to make that work. We're not
here in the way of Building or to slow things down; if anything, there are new
sections in the Code, in this current version, that link to ways that you can meet
those water requirements, and they're more flexible than they were in the past.
And also, we removed sections in the previous 2006 one that we're mandating
things that I thought were maybe a little too stringent, in terms of residential water
supply and things like that. So for that reason, I think it will actually lower cost
Page 18
PWMTC-28 October 19,2022
and hopefully speed up the process for the plan review and make it easier to do
building in Hawaii.
MR. RICHARDS: Chief, thanks for that. And I ask the question,just again from
people watching this as much as anything else to get the intention. The intention
is to maintain safety. I get that; I think the whole Council appreciates that. But
it's in temperance, and it doesn't make any common sense to do that, the strict
interpretation. So, I appreciate that. I think the community and I know the
agricultural community, will definitely appreciate that interpretation. So, with
that—
CHR.
hatCHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Mr. Richards, but I do see our colleague in Hilo,
Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, his light is on. Mr. Kleinfelder.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Chair Lee Loy. Thank you for
being here today, Mr. Todd. Thank you, Ashley, for bringing this forward. My
question is going to go back to any changes that were made to roof additions,
because being my background is solar, I cannot help but ask the question. Are
there any changes to the use of roof space, clearances from ridges, vent caps, and
vent pipes? Anything like that, that the different industries may need to be aware
of?
CHIEF TODD: I do not believe there's any change between the 2018 and the
2012 Code in terms of basically the pathways the Fire Department is requiring to
access the roof in the case of a fire. I'd have to double-check, but I think it
remains the same, which is basically that we're looking for a path to get up to the
ridge, and then the path at the top of the ridge to get across the building, if we
need a vent at the ridge.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. Currently, I believe
CHIEF TODD: And I'll go double-check on that, okay?
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I think before it was 10 inches clearance
from the ridge of the roofing to the panels, but I think it's been moved to 18
inches recently, in the past year or so. I'm just just from my experienceI
mean, some many people are moving to solar to help in sustainability measures,
and limiting electricity costs for households. The more space we can offer on
roof faces, specifically south faces, the better that we can provide opportunities
for our community to lessen their expenses and move towards being sustainable.
So anything we can do in this Code change to address the availability of solar on
roof space would be tremendous for both the installation experts and for the
community members to utilize roof space.
I think just aI don't think it will take you long, but a real quick review of what
is required, what our options are, and what the bare minimum of space needed for
Page 19
PWMTC-28 October 19,2022
firefighter personnel to address fire concerns in a building and let the industry do
what they need to do would be greatly appreciated.
CHIEF TODD: I will do some research, and I'll get back to you.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you very much. And to
Ms. Lee Loy's and Mr. Richards' point, for most of the district that I
represent, maybe this whole island, when there isn't County water or a
County fire hydrant available, any kind of facility requires firefighting fire
response equipment within the building.
I have heard from different folks say that a 10,000-gallon water tank is required to
help with any firefighting response on the premise. That is not a small tank. I
understand the reason for that, but I've seen this for buildings that have a 20x24
footprint, requiring a 10,000-gallon water tank even though County water is
available at the site. That is a major hurdle for any kind of business opportunities
that are trying to grow in our community when the limitation is a very expensive
fire suppression system, with the inclusion of a water tank, and company
equipment, or the ability to get a six-inch valve required for the connection to the
fire truck, so they can use it—basically putting the pressure on the homeowner to
provide a 10,000-gallon water tank so that the Fire Department can utilize it in the
event that there is a fire-based emergency at the property. That, to me, is very
prohibitive for the growth of a business. If we're pushing for more business
growth and more economy and sustainable economy, that is not a selling point.
So I have to concur very strongly with Mr. Richards and Ms. Lee Loy, for the
comments earlier that were made.
CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Mr. Kleinfelder. Before I go to Mr. Inaba, I see
Ms. Frenz. Her hand is up. No? We're good? Okay. Mr. Inaba.
MR. INABA: Perfect timing because my question is for Ms. Frenz.
(Note: At this time, Deputy Corporation Counsel Dakota(Cody) Frenz
came forward to address the members of the Committee.)
MR. INABA: With regards to the Hawaii State Fire Code,just so that we all
understand, is it basically like Hawaii Revised Statutes? We don't—we take
down what the Hawaii State Fire Code says, and we cannot do less than what the
Hawaii State Fire Code is?
MS. FRENZ: That's my understanding of the Hawaii State Fire Code. But I will
admit that I'm this is my first time working with it. So I will confirm, Council
Member Inaba, that this is in fact the case. I don't want to ever misspeak, but that
is my understanding. But I will confirm between now and the next hearing date
that that is in fact accurate.
Page 20
PWMTC-28 October 19,2022
MR. INABA: Fire Chief Todd?
CHIEF TODD: Okay, so I did want to follow up on Council Member
Kleinfelder's statement about water supply. So that was under our old
amendments, in the 2006 Code, under Section 42, for alternative water supply,
which is not being brought forward. Instead, we're just bringing everything back
into the Code. That was put there because of our rules with water supply issues
within areas like Paradise Park and whatnot, whether it's just one hydrant for the
entire subdivision, and basically, that was something previous administrations had
thought would be useful because we just don't have any water.
The section was added to the Code back in 2006, but the Mayor at the time
decided that was unfeasible. So it had to some extent, what they did was instead
of trying to be super strict on that, the goal was to actually give the Fire
Department some water tankers, and go forward in that way. I don't know that it
always has played out that way, but the goal going forward is not to create
additional alternative water supply concepts within our Code and just we're going
to stick to the Code. And then if there's a variance needed, you can basically
submit for it, and we'll look at that and consider the fact that, hey, this is a
building out in the middle of nowhere and nothing can burn; and we're not
concerned about life safety issues because, you know, all the walls are open, or
things like that. If anything, the goal going forward is to stick pretty much to the
Code, allow for variances where, you know, situation deems it and it's beneficial
to the public, and it doesn't affect life safety.
And then my understanding on the State Code thing, is that we adopt it—I'll
check with Cody too, but I thought we could be less stringent or more stringent.
But I'll double-check on that, too.
MR. INABA: Okay, thank you. Chair, I yield.
CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Mr. Inaba. Anyone else? Before I give it to
Mr. Richards, Ms. Frenz, if you don't mind during this postponement, when Fire,
DPW, Planning, everyone gets together, in this particular bill is the definition of
AHJ as it relates to Fire. I think my concern and something that Julann brought
up earlier, is that there are times where Fire and the shop drawings—DPW has a
different definition of AHJ, and I just want to make sure that as they crosswalk,
the definition of AHJ helps Fire for their needs and their execution of the Fire
Code, but where it overlaps with the department,we know who is the authority
having jurisdiction. It looks like Mr. Todd has
CHIEF TODD: Yeah, so actually under Section 17-1-4 under Definitions for this
document, it defines AHJ or "Authority having jurisdiction" as the Hawaii Fire
Department for this chapter, essentially. So I don't know if that needed to be
expanded on, but that was kind of the concept in there, is that the language being
brought forward on the State level just drops AHJ in a variety of responses. And
Page 21
PWMTC-28 October 19,2022
rather than changing every single one of those to say Hawaii Fire Department,
we just put a definition section under the first page to sort of adopt that.
CHR. LEE LOY: Yeah. And the research, Cody,would be AHJ as it applies to
Chapter 5, which is a different definition. And that's why I'm saying when your
plans move over to DPW, and they have to review, there's a conflict between the
definition of AHJ in the chapter; what will be now 17, and Chapter 5. So I just
want to make sure that the definitions are talking to each other. I see Cody
nodding.
MS. FRENZ: Will do. I understand. I'll double-check the discrepancy that you
indicated, and make sure that we can somehow conform both going forward, or so
that we don't need to also do what they—DPW Code amendment as well, for this
purpose. So I will address that next time, as well.
CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you. And if not, you know, all of our Codes have a
severability clause, and maybe that's something that we can refine so that in those
areas where there's a conflict between different chapters, we know which one will
supersede one another. All right. Seeing no more, Mr. Richards.
MR. RICHARDS: So I'd like to move that we postpone Bill 221 to, and I'm
going to look at Julann and Chief. We got November 1" or November 15''. You
guys want to arm wrestle or jan-ken-pon, and figure out which date?
CHIEF TODD: So what date were you moving for?
MR. RICHARDS: How time-sensitive is this? Do you want to have enough time
to get it worked out? Ms. Frenz, do you have a weigh-in?
CHIEF TODD: November I"I think we've already got some other things going
on.
MR. RICHARDS: So it would be the 15''. Hang on, Chief, before you go.
Judge Strance, you should have something on weigh-in.
CHIEF TODD: Yeah, the 15'h sounds good.
Motion to Postpone: Mr. Richards moved to postpone Bill 221,
as amended, to November 15, 2022. Seconded
by Mr. Inaba
CHR. LEE LOY: Any discussion on the postponement? I see Ms. Kimball's
light. Go ahead.
MS. KIMBALL: Yeah, I just want to be mindful of the upcoming transition of
terms. And so if we postpone it to the 15'', we have our last potential Committee
Page 22
PWMTC-28 October 19,2022
conversation, and then we wouldn't have a Council meeting until the new term is
in, in late December. Considering that this is fairly complex, and we're going to
be bringing in three new Council Members, I'd almost like to make the
recommendation that we push this as far out as the first Committee meeting in
January. I know that's a long time, but then you have the opportunity for the
three new Council Members to discuss this at the Committee level. Thank you.
CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Any more discussion? Mr. Inaba.
MR. INABA: Yeah, I understand where Council Member Kimball is coming
from. The current State Code that we're working with was adopted at the
beginning of 2021, right? So technically our two-year window would be
CHIEF TODD: So we don't have to do this because it will be automatic in
January, anyway. But it just comes without any amendments at that point.
MR. INABA: Which would put us in that—
CHIEF
hatCHIEF TODD: Yeah. It's up to the County Council on what you guys would
want to do. I would kind of prefer pushing for the 15th, but I'll leave it up to you
guys to make a decision.
MR. INABA: I personally would like to see it go. You know, even if we have to
take it up with new Council Members, to put us in a place of limbo that we
automatically accept the Hawaii State Fire Code as it is, and it might be like that
for two months before weI think we've got to do the November 15th.
CHIEF TODD: On the other side of it, 2021, is come in here, and we'll be back
sitting in front of you guys with the new County Council Members, within
probably a year, I'd estimate. We're not going to try to wait until the next two
years almost done to do it. So the next County Council may also get the
opportunity to weigh in very shortly thereafter.
MR. INABA: Perfect. Chief Kurashige is an expert now, I think. So thank you,
Chair. I yield.
CHR. LEE LOY: Ms. Kierkiewicz, I see your light.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. My preference is to postpone this to the 15th,
I mean, I really prefer the 1st so we can get it over the finish line. I'm very
mindful of transitions, but I recall—you know, my first meeting with Council
Member Villegas, Council Member Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, we were saddled with
some pretty heavy legislation that was in first and second reading already, and so
it just comes with the nature of the job.
Page 23
PWMTC-28 October 19,2022
I do anticipate our new colleagues being very eager to read this new section of
Code, and so just want to keep moving this forward. I don't want to sacrifice any
time by pushing this off to January. I think it's really important that we move this
Code in because it helps to keep our community safe and it allows our firefighters
to be doing their best at their job.
So I do support postponing this until the November 15'h meeting. I think it gives
our office enough time to engage with Public Works, maybe Planning, Fire, and
Corporation Counsel to ensure everybody is on the same page with how this Code
would be administered. Thank you, Chair.
CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Ms. Kierkiewicz. Mr. Richards, any more
comments?
MR. RICHARDS: No, I think I5h—again, mindful of Ms. Kimball's concern,
however, the 15'', that's plenty of time to get things worked out, so should be able
to flow reasonably quickly on the 15''. And if a postponement needs to occur, it
can happen when it gets to Council. This is only Committee right now. So, I
yield.
CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you. Anyone else? All those in favor to postpone
Bill 221 to November 15, please say "aye."
Vote on Motion The motion to postpone Bill 221, as amended, to
Postpone: November 15, 2022, was carried by the following
(Approved) voice vote:
Ayes: Committee Members David, Inaba,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz, Kimball,
Richards, Villegas, Chair Lee Loy –8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Committee Member Chung– 1.
Excused: None.
Page 24