HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN COUNCIL 2022-11-02 2020-2022 Hawaii County Council
52nd Session
Hawaii County Building
25 Aupuni Street
Hilo, Hawaii
November 2, 2022
INVOCATION: Pastor Ron Brav of Calvary Chapel Hilo gave the morning's invocation.
CALL TO The regular meeting of the Hawaii County Council was called to order at
ORDER: 9:01 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 (via videoconference from Kona)
Mr. Matt Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, 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
Ms. Rebecca Villegas, 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, Mr. Chung presented Certificates of Merit to a group of
EXPRESSIONS OF individuals led by Lei Robinson, who have been regularly cleaning up the
CONDOLENCE: downtown Hilo area for the past two years. He also presented Certificates of
Merit to Ed Olson and Troy Keolanui for building a soccer field along
Amau`ulu Road.)
Recess: At 9:18 a.m., the Chair called for a recess.
Reconvene: The meeting reconvened at 9:23 a.m.
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
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:
Dwight Vicente: Bill 156 (Comm. 739);
Bill 204 (Comm. 952);
Bill 222 (Comm. 1031);
Bill 223 (Comm. 1038); and
Bill 224 (Comm. 1039), comment.
Janice Palma-Glennie: Bill 220, Draft 2 (Comm. 1022.75), in support.
Todd Yukutake: Bill 220, Draft 2 (Comm. 1022.75), in opposition.
(representing Hawaii (See Comm. 1022.92)
Firearms Coalition)
Cory Harden: Bill 220, Draft 2 (Comm. 1022.75), comment.
Susie Osborne: Res. 592-22 (Comm. 1064); and
(representing Ho`oulu Res. 597-22 (Comm. 1076), comment.
Lahui and Kua O Ka La
Public Charter School)
Anja Marie Henriques: Res. 587-22 (Comm. 1056), in support.
(representing Makua Lani
Christian Academy)
Calvin Brown: Res. 587-22 (Comm. 1056), in support.
(representing Makua Lani
Christian Academy)
Lynelle Yadao-Ellazar: Res. 587-22 (Comm. 1056), in support.
(representing Makua Lani
Christian Academy)
APPROVAL The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business, Approval
OF MINUTES: of Minutes.
Page 2
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Vote on Approval Ms. Lee Loy moved to approve the Minutes of October 5,
of Minutes: 2022. Seconded by Mr. Richards and carried by the
(Approved) following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Chung, Inaba,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz,
Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair David—9.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
CHR. DAVID: Right now, I've been requested to take a couple items out of
order. We have people sitting here in chambers. The first one, we have our
nominee Natalie Reynolds in Kona. Could we please take "Reports,"
RAWEEMC-19, please?
Change Order As directed by the Chair and with no objection from the Council Members, the
of Business: following items were taken out of order:
RAWEEMC-19 NOMINATION OF NATALIE REYNOLDS TO THE GAME MANAGEMENT
(Comm. 1035): ADVISORY COMMISSION
Requires Council
Confirmation by: November 10, 2022 (Section 13-4(k),
Hawaii County Charter)
Motion to Approve: Ms. Lee Loy moved to adopt Regenerative Agriculture,
Water, Energy and Environmental Management Committee
Report No. 19. Seconded by Mr. Richards.
(Note: At this time, nominee Natalie Reynolds came forward to address
the members of the Council.)
Vote on The motion to adopt Regenerative Agriculture, Water,
RAWEEMC-19: Energy and Environmental Management Committee Report
(Adopted) No. 19 was carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Chung, Inaba,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz,
Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair David—9.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
Page 3
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
(Council Members spoke in favor of the appointment.)
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Reynolds, for being here.
MS. REYNOLDS: Thank you.
CHR. DAVID: Before we move on to some out-of-order resolutions, Mr. Clerk, I
just needed to make a short announcement in recognition of November being the
National Native American Heritage Month. So I just wanted to make that note.
Thank you. All right, we would like to take Resolution 587 out of order.
Res. 587-22: TRANSFERS/APPROPRIATES AN APPROPRIATION OUT AND FROM A
DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT AND CREDITS SAME TO A DESIGNATED
FUND ACCOUNT TO PROVIDE A GRANT TO MAKUA LANI CHRISTIAN
ACADEMY TO ASSIST WITH EXPENSES FOR ITS AEROSPACE MERIDIAN
SPACE CLUB IN KONA
Transfers $3,000 from the Clerk-Council Services —Contingency Relief account
(Council District 8); and credits to the Department of Liquor Control, Public
Programs account.
Reference: Comm. 1056
Intr. by: Mr. Inaba
Motion to Approve: Mr. Inaba moved to adopt Res. 587-22. Seconded by
Ms. Lee Loy.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Mr. Inaba.
MR. INABA: Thank you. I wasn't aware that our friends at Makua Lani were
going to be joining us just until yesterday. But I'm so happy that they were able
to come to share about the good work that they're doing. I think I've had the
privilege of going to visit them at the school two or three times now. At the latest
visit, they were sharing about the unmanned vehicles that would be helping us in
our searches potentially here at the County, both on land and at sea. But brilliant
work and, yeah, the future is bright. Hopefully, we can get some of these guys as
engineers for our County one day to help us out. I'm asking for your support for
this contingency relief request to help them with the projects that they're working
on this year. Mahalo.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Inaba. Anyone else? Ms. Lee Loy, go ahead.
MS. LEE LOY: Thank you for advancing this, Mr. Inaba. But to our youth, I just
had to pause for the brilliance in the room. I think one mentioned magnetic shoes.
For my colleagues here, I think they know how much shoes I have, and I don't
Page 4
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
have that. So I'm looking forward to that work from the youth and look forward
to supporting all the good work, as Mr. Inaba said,through this program. Thank
you, Chair, I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. Anyone else? Seeing none, all those in
favor of approving Resolution 587-22, please say "aye."
Vote on Res. 587-22: The motion to adopt Res. 587-22 was carried by the
(Adopted) following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Chung, Inaba,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz,
Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair David—9.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
CHR. DAVID: Going back, could we take out of order Resolution 577?
Res. 577-22: AUTHORIZES THE PAYMENT OF FUNDS OF A LATER FISCAL YEAR AND
OF MORE THAN ONE FISCAL YEAR FOR A MULTI-YEAR AGREEMENT
FOR SERVICES TO INSPECT AND IDENTIFY MAINTENANCE AND
REPAIR REQUIREMENTS OF LAND MOBILE RADIO SITE
INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THE CIVIL DEFENSE AGENCY
Authorizes the Mayor to enter into a three-year agreement with an approximate
annual cost of$50,000.
Reference: Comm. 1042
Intr. by: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder(B/R)
Approve: FC-216
Motion to Approve: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder moved to adopt Res. 577-22 and
Finance Committee Report No. 216. Seconded by
Ms. Lee Loy.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: We do have director Magno here today if
there are any questions. I have no further discussion on this, given our discussion
in Committees.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Anyone else? Seeing none, thank you,
Administrator, for being here this morning. Given that, all those in favor of
approving Resolution 577-22, please say "aye."
Page 5
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Vote on Res. 577-22: The motion to adopt Res. 577-22 and Finance Committee
(Adopted) Report No. 216 was carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Chung, Inaba,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz,
Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair David—9.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
CHR. DAVID: Our companion, out of order, is Bill 226 at first reading.
Bill 226: AMENDS ORDINANCE NO. 22-63, AS AMENDED, THE OPERATING
BUDGET FOR THE COUNTY OF HAWAII FOR THE FISCAL YEAR
ENDING JUNE 30, 2023
Appropriates revenues in the Federal Grants —State Homeland Security Program
Fiscal Year 2018 account($26,057.96); and appropriates the same to the State
Homeland Security Program Fiscal Year 2018 account. The funds would be used
by the Civil Defense Agency for its Hilo Emergency Operations Center
Enhancement Project.
Reference: Comm. 1041
Intr. by: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder(B/R)
Approve: FC-224
Vote on Bill 226: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder moved to pass Bill 226 on first
(Approved) reading and adopt Finance Committee Report No. 224.
Seconded by Ms. Villegas and carried by the following
voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Chung, Inaba,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz,
Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair David—9.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
CHR. DAVID: I do see some other people in here. Can we go to Bill 222,
please?
Page 6
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Bill 222: AMENDS SECTION 25-8-19 (NORTH HILO ZONE MAP), ARTICLE 8,
CHAPTER 25 (ZONING) OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE 1983
(2016 EDITION, AS AMENDED), BY CHANGING THE DISTRICT
CLASSIFICATION FROM AGRICULTURAL—20 ACRES (A-20a) TO
FAMILY AGRICULTURAL—ONE ACRE (FA-la) AT `O`OKALA,
NORTH HILO, HAWAII, COVERED BY TAX MAP KEYS: 3-9-001:023,
AND 031 (Applicant: Leonard Cardoza Trust) (Area: 15.404 Acres)
The Windward Planning Commission forwards its favorable recommendation for
this change of zone request, which would allow the applicant to apply to subdivide
the property into seven lots. The property is located to the north(makai) of
Mamalahoa Highway, approximately 270 feet east of its intersection with Milo
Street, Portion of Humu`ula and `O`6kala, in North Hilo.
Reference: Comm. 1031
Intr. by: Ms. Kierkiewicz (B/R)
Approve: PC-82
Motion to Approve: Ms. Kierkiewicz moved to pass Bill 222 on first reading
and adopt Planning Committee Report No. 82. Seconded
by Ms. Lee Loy.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Ms. Kierkiewicz.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Straightforward request, Chair. We had
comprehensive discussion in Committee, so looking for everyone's continued
support. Just want to note that the representative for the applicant, Mr. Daryn
Arai, is here if folks have questions, and then we also have Planning Department
available via Zoom. Thank you, Chair.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kierkiewicz. Anyone else? Ms. Kimball, go
ahead.
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you. I'll just reaffirm this is in my district. It is
appropriate and in alignment with the General Plan, CDP (Community
Development Plan), and it's appropriate use for the area. Thank you.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Anyone else? Seeing none, all those in favor of
approving Bill 222 at first reading, please say "aye."
Page 7
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Vote on Bill 222: The motion to pass Bill 222 on first reading and adopt
(Approved) Planning Committee Report No. 82 was carried by the
following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Chung, Inaba,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz,
Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair David—9.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
CHR. DAVID: I'm very sorry. Could we ask for Ms. Bartolome to come
forward on "Reports," GOREDC-28?
GOREDC-28 NOMINATION OF RABBI RACHEL SHORT TO THE BOARD OF ETHICS
(Comm. 1032):
Requires Council
Confirmation by: November 9, 2022 (Section 13-4(k),
Hawaii County Charter)
Motion to Approve: Ms. Lee Loy moved to adopt Governmental Operations,
Relations, and Economic Development Committee Report
No. 28. Seconded by Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder.
(Note: At this time, Executive Assistant to the Mayor Pomaika`i
Bartolome came forward to address the members of the Council.)
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Pomai Bartolome, for being here again, and in case
we have any other questions, I ask you to come up. Council Members, do we
need to ask any other questions of the applicant? And thank you, Rabbi, for being
here today and your patience. Okay, seeing no other discussion, all those in favor
of approving the nomination of Rabbi Rachel Short to the Board of Ethics, please
say "aye."
Vote on The motion to adopt Governmental Operations, Relations,
GOREDC-28: and Economic Development Committee Report No. 28 was
(Adopted) carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Chung, Inaba,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz,
Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair David—9.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
Page 8
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
CHR. DAVID: Thank you very much, Pomai.
MS. BARTOLOME: Thank you.
PRPSC-38 NOMINATION OF DYLAN ANDRION TO THE POLICE COMMISSION
(Comm. 1033):
Requires Council
Confirmation by: November 10, 2022 (Section 13-4(k),
Hawaii County Charter)
Vote on Ms. Lee Loy moved to adopt Parks and Recreation and
PRPSC-38: Public Safety Committee Report No. 38. Seconded by
(Adopted) Ms. Villegas and carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Chung, Inaba,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kimball, Lee Loy,
Richards, Villegas, and Chair David—8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Kierkiewicz— 1.
Excused: None.
RAWEEMC-18 NOMINATION OF DELL OTSUKA TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL
(Comm. 1034): MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
Requires Council
Confirmation by: November 10, 2022 (Section 13-4(k),
Hawaii County Charter)
Vote on Ms. Lee Loy moved to adopt Regenerative Agriculture,
RAWEEMC-18: Water, Energy and Environmental Management Committee
(Adopted) Report No. 18. Seconded by Mr. Richards and carried by
the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Chung, Inaba,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz,
Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair David—9.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
CHR. DAVID: Can we go to Bill 204, please?
Page 9
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Bill 204: AMENDS SECTION 25-8-3 (NORTH KONA ZONE MAP), ARTICLE 8,
CHAPTER 25 (ZONING) OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE 1983
(2016 EDITION, AS AMENDED), BY CHANGING THE DISTRICT
CLASSIFICATION FROM AGRICULTURAL—FIVE ACRES (A-5a) TO
FAMILY AGRICULTURAL—ONE ACRE (FA-la) AT KAILUA-KONA,
NORTH KONA, HAWAII, COVERED BY TAX MAP KEY: 7-5-017:043
(Applicant: Siting Chen) (Area: 14.968 Acres)
The Leeward Planning Commission forwards its favorable recommendation for
this change of zone request, which would allow the applicant to apply for a
subdivision of the parcel into 11 lots of at least one acre. The property is located
on the south side of Hualalai Road, approximately 0.6 miles east of its intersection
with Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway, Wai`aha 1st, Puapua`anui 1st in North Kona.
Reference: Comm. 952
Intr. by: Ms. Kierkiewicz (B/R)
Approve: PC-81
(Note: The following from Council Member Heather L. Kimball, transmitting
proposed amendments to Bill 204, were circulated: Comm. 952.7 (dated
November 1, 2022) and Comms. 952.8 and 952.9 (dated November 2, 2022).)
Motion to Approve: Ms. Kierkiewicz moved to pass Bill 204 on first reading
and adopt Planning Committee Report No. 81. Seconded
by Ms. Lee Loy.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Ms. Kierkiewicz.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chair. We had a very long discussion in
Committee, and I don't think we've really settled on how we want to move
forward. I know that one of my colleagues has worked with the applicant and
their representative on some amendments that will look to strengthen the bill
that's before us. So, look forward to that discussion. I yield for now. Thank you.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kierkiewicz. Anyone else? Ms. Kimball, go
ahead.
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Chair. On behalf of the applicant, it was requested
of my office to submit some additional amendments in light of the fact that the
amendments proposed last time were not satisfactory.
Motion to Amend: Ms. Kimball moved to amend Bill 204 with the contents of
Comm. 952.7. Seconded by Ms. Kierkiewicz.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Ms. Kimball.
Page 10
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Chair. I guess, at this time, I would ask the
applicant and their representative to come up and explain the amendment. Jon,
I'm not actually sure if you were provided with a copy of these, but this is the
amendment with respect to the Hualalai Road bill.
(Note: At this time, Planning Consultant John Pipan, applicant's
representative, and Siting Chen, applicant, came forward to address the
members of the Council.)
MR. PIPAN: Aloha, Council Members. John Pipan, Land Planning Hawaii. To
my left, Steve Chen, medical doctor; the applicant in this case. Thank you all for
bearing with us through the last Planning Committee meeting. We've looked at
the concerns that were brought up from the first Planning Committee meeting
again. Did some further digging no pun intended—on the actual cost to put in
the sewer system.
So we've got a couple of proposed amendments that would hope to clarify that we
don't intend to put a second access on Hualalai Road. So that secondary clause or
this Condition H would really be moot and unnecessary. The project wouldn't be
feasible with a secondary access, requiring improvement of the entire length of
Hualalai Road along the subject property. If that's all we're addressing in this
amendment, then, yes, I think that covers we don't intend to put a secondary
access; only one access to Hualalai Road. And I think it's important, really, to
just reiterate the purpose of this bill, the purpose of the project, to create 11 small
family agricultural lots, giving the opportunity for families to have a small farm,
have a home; really seek to address that housing crisis that we all know is
ongoing.
CHR. DAVID: Ms. Kimball.
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you. I think, after we've gone through these three
amendments, we can have a larger, deeper discussion about the bill itself. But at
this point, we had the conversation about the cost of improving this road. So this
was the applicant's proposal. They're not going to put a secondary access on
Hualalai. I'll just leave it at that.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Anyone else, discussion on the
amendment? Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, go ahead.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Chair. Yeah, this was a point of
confusion for me. I'm glad this has been clarified because it was kind of an
"if-then," and I don't like that because it was very vague. So I think this is a good
amendment. There will be no yeah? Okay, thank you.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. Anyone else? Mr. Inaba,
if you need to say anything,just holler,please.
Page 11
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
MR. INABA: Will do.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Seeing no other discussion on the amendment, all
those in favor of approving the motion to amend Bill 204 with the contents of
Communication 952.7,please say "aye."
Vote on Motion to The motion to amend Bill 204 with the contents of
Amend: Comm. 952.7 was carried by the following voice vote:
(Approved)
Ayes: Council Members Chung, Inaba,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz,
Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair David–9.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
CHR. DAVID: Back to the main motion, as amended. Ms. Kimball, go ahead.
Motion to Amend: Ms. Kimball moved to amend Bill 204 with the contents of
Comm. 952.8. Seconded by Ms. Kierkiewicz.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Ms. Kimball.
MS. KIMBALL: Again, I'll have the applicant and their representative explain
the purpose and intent of this amendment, but I think it goes back to a similar
discussion we had about"if-then"—the conditions—as this just kind of clears up
about what scenario would—clarity about what scenario would require sewer
hookup. If you wouldn't mind.
MR. PIPAN: Thank you very much, Council Member Kimball. Again, we're
looking to clarify any vagueness or any confusion in this bill. The language, we
think, has been added to really clarify the trigger and bring it into alignment with
County Code Chapter 21, relating to sewers, and(Chapter) 23, relating to
subdivisions. The condition is consistent with the intent of those Codes and just
really makes it clear that the sewer line that we're looking at that we would
connect to is the one in this specific street that's a stub-out that could be extended,
and not the sewer line that's in a cul-de-sac we cannot connect to.
So we would be able to use Department of Health and approved individual
wastewater systems, as is consistent with Subdivision Code and Sewer Code,
should we get the final subdivision approval before that sewer line is extended to
within 300 feet. That's what this is trying to say. We fully anticipate that we'll
be able to get final subdivision approval before that happens. But this is should
Page 12
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
there be delays, should development of Lot 42 happen more quickly, then we
would know where that sewer is going to be and we would be able to connect to
it.
This harkens back, I think, to Council Member Villegas' criticism that the pipes
don't line up. So I think this is meant to address that, because once they begin
work on it, we'll know where the sewer line would be, and we would be able to
connect up to it in an efficient fashion. However, it would save a lot of money. It
would make these lots more affordable if we were able to offer them quickly with
the ability to do septic systems. We're trying to make this project more
affordable, feasible; offer the lots quickly. That's the intent here.
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you. I'll yield to discussion.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Anyone else, Council Members, on the
amendment?
MR. INABA: Chair?
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Mr. Inaba.
MR. INABA: Sorry, yeah. Question: What is the actual distance right now from
the end of the sewer line to the subject property?
MR. PIPAN: I'll tell you that momentarily, Council Member Inaba. I've got the
map up. It's approximately 600 feet in a straight line-550, 600 feet.
MR. INABA: Five hundred fifty or six hundred?
MR. PIPAN: Looks like at its nearest would be 550.
MR. INABA: Okay, thank you. Thank you, Chair, I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Inaba. Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, go ahead.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Just to the maker of the amendment: The
purpose of this amendment is to?
MS. KIMBALL: If you'll recall in the first conversation about this bill, there was
wording about the County sewer system shall be considered that they were
required to connect to the County sewer system should it become accessible. The
question that I actually raised at that time was what does it mean to be accessible,
because I think that is something that could be open to interpretation. As an
example, they mentioned that there's sewer at this cul-de-sac, but you can't
actually connect to it because you'd have to go through somebody else's home to
Page 13
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
get to it. So it's technicallyI mean, it's there but it's physically not accessible.
So this was their response to my request, specifically, to define what accessible
means in terms of the condition. Am I reflecting that accurately?
MR. PIPAN: Yes. Thank you, Council Member Kimball.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: No discussion, Chair.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Anyone else on the motion to amend with
Communication 752.8? Ms. Villegas, go ahead.
MS. VILLEGAS: I thank Council Member Kimball and Mr. Pipan and his client
for clarifying with this language for this amendment.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Villegas. Anyone else? Seeing none, I do have
one question. I think we talked about this. Should your subdivision be approved
prior to the completion of the sewer line, yeah, the owners will be required by law
to put in septic systems anyway, right?
MR. PIPAN: Correct.
CHR. DAVID: And that is because we are mandated by 20-53 to convert all our
cesspools to septic systems. So, if they do a septic system, would they have to
pay the cost to connect to the sewer system once it's completed? I mean, they're
actually in compliance on what kind of sewer system they have, given what we're
looking at in this here and now. But I'm just wondering what would be the
because I think it affects the proposed purchases, yeah.
MR. PIPAN: Yes.
CHR. DAVID: Especially when septic systems cost a pretty penny.
MR. PIPAN: Thank you, Chair David. I do understand your question. The
previous amendment that we had proposed at the last Planning Committee would
have required dry sewers. And then if the sewer line wasn't connected, it would
also have required septic systems. So this is the alternative where if they put in
septic systems, they're fine with septic systems. That's all that's needed.
Department of Health says that's perfectly adequate here.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you for clarifying that. That was my only concern and
question because it does. It's a double cost on proposed purchasers. Okay.
That's all the questions Ioh, Mr. Chung, go ahead.
Page 14
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
MR. CHUNG: I just want to make sure I know what I'm voting on. So, if the
sewer system is extended to within 300 feet of the subject property, then you're
going to connect—
MR.
onnectMR. PIPAN: Yes.
MR. CHUNG: Prior to it hitting the property?
MR. PIPAN: Yes. Exactly. Thank you for your question. We would be required
to sewer the subdivision. We wouldn't have final subdivision approval at that
point. So that's the trigger: final subdivision approval. If work has been done to
begin that sewer line extension, then we have to provide sewer. And then we
wouldn't, unless someone was very we're not going to be doing septic systems
and the sewer at that point. So it's one or the other with this proposed
amendment.
MR. CHUNG: What do you mean one or the other? That's what I don't
understand.
MR. PIPAN: If,prior to final subdivision approval, the sewer line is being
extended, then we're going to have to connect to it, right. We're going to have to
make our plans fit those plans.
MR. CHUNG: Wow. Yeah, yeah. That's good.
MR. PIPAN: It's going to be a huge cost. Perhaps cost-prohibitive but—
MR.
utMR. CHUNG: Yeah, thank you. Thanks for that clarification, sir.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Chung. Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, go ahead.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Is anyone from DEM (Department of
Environmental Management) available for a comment on this? I understand the
intent. My issue is I think we have a current County Code—and I saw you,
Director, online; thank you. Director, as far as I understand, our current County
Code requires that if a property parcel is within 300 feet of an existing sewer line,
they must connect.
(Note: At this time, Environmental Management Director Ramzi Mansour
came forward to address the members of the Council.)
MR. MANSOUR: That is correct.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. And that's (County Code Section)
23-56, right?
Page 15
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
MR. MANSOUR: Right. Aloha, Council Members. In this situation, he is
within the vicinity of the County sewer system. It depends on the circulation of
the roadways and, as I was listening, that roadway,potentially that's going to be
extended. So the developers usually end up putting the sewer line—in his
situation, if he's going to wait until the sewer line's extended in there, the
requirement would be dry sewer and septic tank. He cannot just put septic tank
without dry sewers because it's only within 500 feet. So the Code is very clear.
If you're going to have extension municipality sewer in the near future, then you
put a dry sewer and septic tank. Otherwise, when you put a septic tank, it'll be
hard to force the homeowners to connect to the sewer; and that's going to be a
challenge to our department as well, and the County.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Director. Have you seen this
communication? It's 952.8. It's an amendment to Condition P of the ordinance
that we're talking about.
MR. MANSOUR: I have not seen that communication.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: This Condition P, the amendment states,
"The County sewer system shall be considered accessible if it is extended from its
current terminus at the northern end of Paulehia Street to within 300 feet of the
subject property." My trouble with this is we're redefining, in my eyes, County
Code (Section) 23-56 and providing a way for the project to proceed even though
the parcel is already within 300 feet of a sewer line, and providing a different
definition that our Code currently provides.
MR. MANSOUR: That is true. I mean, the sewer is really within his reach. It
would be a shame to just do septic and not consider any connection. Because
once the developer sells out these properties, it becomes burdensome on the
homeowner to do a connection, and the likelihood with trying to enforce that.
And that's about the situation we have now. It's very difficult.
Five hundred feet from that road. I don't have access to the road circulation map.
Probably, I don't know, Public Works Department; if John, the planner, has
worked with Public Works to figure out where's the future County road so at least
these become dedicated roads and he could start laying out the sewer within that
future easements within these County roads in the future. But even if the property
adjacent to his property ends up developing, it's a win-win to everybody.
The cost to put in septic and dry sewer outweighs the cost of extending the sewer
now. Septic tanks and dry sewers are going to be way more expensive than just
putting in the sewer and tying to the current sewer. Even if it's 500 feet away, it's
still economically cheaper than putting in dry sewer and septic. So, I recommend
that you guys go back and do the economic to your sewer connection. You could
find out it's actually more beneficial environmentally and cost-wise to you and to
your developer.
Page 16
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Director.
Point of Information: MR. CHUNG: Madam Chairman,just as a point of information, if Mr. Kaneali`i-
Kleinfelder could repeat that County Code section so I can digest this discussion.
CHR. DAVID: Okay.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I'm going by memory, but I think it's
Chapter 23 and then 23-56 is the Code section.
MR. PIPAN: If I may, it may be helpful; I have it up now: (County Code
Section) 23-85, sewage disposal systems.
MR. CHUNG: Oh, 85. Okay, all right. Go ahead.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Thank you, gentlemen.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Sorry. Going by memory.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Director, 23-85 is the right section.
Correct?
MR. MANSOUR: I don't have it in front of me, but I think that's the correct
Code, if I recall.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Mr. Pipan offered up, I think, the correct
one. That was my mistake on the number, but 23-85.
MR. PIPAN: If I may, Chair, respond with respect to 23-85.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you.
MR. PIPAN: It's a two-part section: A and B. So, "(a) In a subdivision to be
laid out after December 21, 1966, sewer lines shall be installed where the
subdivision is within three hundred lineal feet of the existing sewer system.
These lines shall conform to the minimum requirements of the department of
public works." B of that same section is: "In subdivisions where sewer
connections cannot be made to an existing sewer system under the requirements
of this chapter, the subdivider shall meet the minimum requirements of the State
health department relating to sewage disposal."
So we're not able to connect to the sewer system now without easements, without
everything connecting with the neighboring parcel. So they point to the
Page 17
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Department of Health, which is what the latest comment letter from Department
of Environmental Management agreed can satisfy Department of Health, who
says septic systems are fine here.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I yield, Chair.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. Mr. Chung, go ahead.
MR. CHUNG: This is getting really complicated, yeah. I'm glad Mr. Kaneali`i-
Kleinfelder brought this up because I didn't even know that this law existed. And
you're right; there's two components to this thing. But what I'm reading here is
that—you said that if the County sewer system comes within 300 feet of your
subject property, that's like 300 feet away, you will connect to that sewer system?
MR. PIPAN: Yes. That's the intent.
MR. CHUNG: So you're not going to be using septic. You are going to
MR. PIPAN: Connect to the sewer system. Yes.
MR. CHUNG: That's expensive.
MR. PIPAN: It is. And it may turn out to be
MR. CHUNG: How are you going to get all the easements and stuff through?
MR. PIPAN: We're anticipating subdivision will be accomplished before the
sewer line is extended; and therefore, septic systems will be available,
appropriate, usable for all of those lots.
MR. CHUNG: Wait, I thought you said you're not going to
MR. PIPAN: It's an "if-then." "If'the sewer line is extended from its current
terminus in Paulehia Street to within 300 feet, "then"we're required to connect to
it. "If' it isn't at final subdivision approval, "then"we can use septic systems
approved by Department of Health. That's how this condition is written. It's
basically to clarify how this Section 23-85 applies to this specific parcel. That's
all we're trying to do in this amendment.
MS. KIMBALL: Chair, if I may,just for my colleagues, the Planning
Department is also available if there are questions specific to this chapter and this
(inaudible).
CHR. DAVID: Thank you.
Page 18
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
MR. CHUNG: See, I have to think, in my mind, whether this is a way of
allowing just a roundabout way of allowing for septic tanks. Ramzi, what's the
probability of that sewer system, our County sewer system, extending to within
300 feet of that subject property any time soon?
MR. MANSOUR: This is 500 feet. The developer, within that road to be
extended, probably would be required to extend that sewer under our current
Code, and he'd be reimbursed for it. Once the development—if these people are
willing to develop now, I would imagine that that's going to be within the near
future, definitely. Five hundred feet, it's a walking distance. You're talking
about$400,000 just to extend that sewer line. So,the cost to extend that sewer
line of$400,000, it could be done anytime.
The challenge is John is right. You need to go back to the Department of Health,
but the Department of Health is going to require you to do a dry sewer as well, not
only septic. I just want to make it clear this should not be approved with septic
only. It should be approved with septic and dry sewer because DOH (Department
of Health) code is very clear about you've got municipality sewer within the near
future, and this is we're talking about 500 feet. We're not talking about miles. So
he'll be required to do dry sewer. Once the dry sewer's in place, then it's easier
for the County to be able to connect. The challenge here is how are you going to
enforce the owner to do the connection? I think that's going to be the challenge.
MR. CHUNG: Yeah and that's why I say, at first I was wondering why Ramzi
was talking about the septic systems when we're dealing with what I viewed as
being a clear case of connections. But I think I understand the problem here now.
I mean, one possibility is to have each of the deeds provide some kind of
statement of this situation, and that each property or the entire property or each
component thereof is aware, by signing that deed, they understand the obligations
that in the event that the County sewer line comes within 300 feet of that property,
then they will be required to hook up. I mean, that's the only way that would
make it palatable for me because I understand now what the concern is. Okay,
thank you.
MR. PIPAN: Chair, if I may clarify.
CHR. DAVID: Yes, go ahead, Mr. Pipan.
MR. PIPAN: I disagree with Director Mansour, respectfully, that Department of
Health will require dry sewers. They made no statement to that regard in
response to our request for clarification. They say, and I'm quoting their email of
Tuesday, March 8h, of this year, "The use of individual wastewater systems for
the proposed 11-lot subdivision is allowed." I had spoken to DOH Wastewater
Branch Chief Sina Pruder on this matter and a DOH comment: "requiring
wastewater treatment plant may have been an error." So there was some
confusion in previous conversations between DEM and DOH, but I believe this
Page 19
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
should have settled it, that septic systems are okay, according to Department of
Health. Please, Mr. Kay, Planning Department, if you could back me up so it's
not just my word against Director Mansour's.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Mr. Chung, do you want to follow up?
MR. CHUNG: Maybe if I could ask this last question. What is the usefulness of
this clause, this new underscored section? How does it help the project or benefit
the community? Because as it stands right now, your project is obligated to
connect to the County sewer system should it become accessible prior to final
subdivision approval. So, at first blush, it seems to be something that's more
onerous on the developer, but what's the usefulness of this?
MR. PIPAN: Again, thank you for your question. This harkens back to Council
Member Kimball's initial request for clarification of what accessible actually
means in this instance. So we know where the sewer line would be coming from;
that's Paulehia Street. We know where it would be going. So, if it gets close
enough, and that's consistent with Chapter 23 in its definition of 300 feet being
close enough, then it would just—
MR.
ustMR. CHUNG: So that's what triggers the accessible
MR. PIPAN: Yeah, we would just do sewer. We wouldn't do individual
wastewater septic systems at that point.
MR. CHUNG: But wouldn't it have been more easy for you guys if accessibility
meant right there next to the property?
MR. PIPAN: Yes. For sure.
MR. CHUNG: So why would you guys agree to something like this, 300 feet
away? That's why I'm complexed. What's going on here?
MR. PIPAN: This, I think,just more closely reflects what's in Chapter 23-85
already with the 300 feet buffer and what is
MR. CHUNG: So it's a restatement of what's already in the law.
MR. PIPAN: Basically how it applies to this specific parcel.
MR. CHUNG: So that's the intent?
MR. PIPAN: That's the intent.
MR. CHUNG: All right, thank you.
Page 20
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Chung. Mr. Richards, go ahead.
MR. RICHARDS: In my mind, clarify since it's gotten pretty muddy waters here.
When the approval for the subdivision comes through, if the sewer line is not
within 300 feet, the whole subdivision is septic system. If it is, the whole
subdivision is sewer.
MR. PIPAN: Correct.
MR. RICHARDS: That's the long and the short of it. So it's a little bit of a race
to get it approved but there's no imminent plan to extend that sewer system, and
it's not incumbent upon you to extend the County sewer system.
MR. PIPAN: Exactly.
MR. RICHARDS: See, I think it's pretty straightforward. Actually, I think, in
my mind, what this does is it clarifies the steps we are taking as a County to get
sewer. But it's setting up saying we recognize we have to allow this to happen, as
we don't have our system fully implemented as of yet. But it also puts that notice
if we get it there, then it's going to be sewer. So, to me, it's pretty
straightforward. Thanks, Chair, I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Richards. Anyone else before—Ms. Villegas, go
ahead, and then I'll go to Ms. Kimball.
MS. VILLEGAS: I suppose, for me, something that's also a part of the
conversation is Lot 42, which is directly makai of this, which the applicant and
Mr. Pipan have spoken about earlier, about this property currently being in
escrow. And it's currently zoned for Residential 10, RS-10. However, all of its
I'm forgetting the term basically, the time extensions have all run out.
So, for me, one of these challenges in the authenticity of the intention is you've
got two potential developments that are relying on"if-when." So, when you're
talking about the subdivision approval, in my mind I keep going to whether or not
this subdivision is approved. Because if this subdivision is approved to be built,
then of course sewer would be added and it would solve a lot of your problems.
Correct? But we don't know if that's going to happen. That's in limbo in escrow.
Nor do we know if the timelines will be extended on this development.
Hualalai Road, which these both attach to, is in horrible state of disrepair and
continues to decline.
I'm going to stop there because we're talking about sewer, and I'll save my other
comments for when we return to the ordinance. But until then, I just want to put
that out there because I think it's relevant to take into consideration what's
Page 21
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
happening on the properties surrounding this potential subdivision. And I also
just want to yeah, infrastructure. We are at capacity without expanded
infrastructure.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Villegas. Ms. Kimball and then Mr. Chung.
MS. KIMBALL: I just wanted to share my understanding of this and then
actually ask Mr. Kay if he can chime in about what would happen if subdivision
were to proceed right now. But my understanding—if you look at the map that's
Exhibit A of the bill, there's two other streets here that are cul-de-sacs that are
closer to the subject property that do have sewer going to them, but it wouldn't be
possible to connect. So my understanding from the applicants of the intent of this
amendment is that Chapter 23 is unclear, I would say, or mute about whether the
sewer line that is within 300 feet is actually possible to connect to.
From the applicant's perspective, the one coming off this particular street that's
named in the amendment, that's where they would be able to connect. But the
sewer lines that are available on the other two cul-de-sacs there, it's not possible
for them to connect. That's the purpose of the clarification. Am I stating that
correctly? Thank you.
MR. PIPAN: Exactly.
MS. KIMBALL: Mr. Kay, could you just chime in about—and I'm asking this
because I truly don't know because we've had some conflicting statements here
what would the Planning Department recommend if this were to be subdivided
today, given that the adjacent property that Council Member Villegas mentioned
is kind of in a state of limbo.
(Note: At this time, Planner Christian Kay, Department of Planning, came
forward to address the members of the Council.)
MR. KAY: I think, at this point—sorry, good morning, Council
Member Kimball. Good morning, members of the County Council. Christian
Kay, a planner with the Planning Department, pinch-hitting for Jeff Darrow today.
To answer your question, as the condition is written and as was recommended by
the Planning Commission, should the applicant secure final subdivision approval
prior to the extension or accessibility of the sewer line, they would currently be
able to utilize individual wastewater systems as required by the Department of
Health.
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Mr. Kay. I hope that clarifies what's going on here
for folks. I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Mr. Chung, go ahead.
Page 22
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
MR. CHUNG: Yeah, thank you. I really do apologize because I just have a
natural suspicion towards developers. We've got to, right? Unless they're like
the one we had yesterday that was really good. I think this is where we're getting
lost, in my opinion. And it's only my opinion. Section 23-85 doesn't speak about
a connection to our County sewer system. It only says that you have to have
sewer lines installed within the subdivision. That's why we're getting kind of
confused here when it says the County sewer system should become. I think
when they talk about accessibility—and they don't use the word"accessibility" in
Section 23-85. So I think, within the context of this bill, accessibility means right
there next to the property.
This section only says that when there's a County sewer line within 300 feet of
the subdivision, the subdivider or developer has to install sewer lines within the
subdivision. But there's no talk of connections. So I would say—well, first of
all, I think you guys taking a calculated risk that the County's not going to have
their sewer line extended 300 feet from the property by the time final subdivision
approval is had. But I would just say take this thing out. We don't need this. It
doesn't even—it's not just a restatement of what's codified. I don't know. I
don't want to that's my thoughts, anyway.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Chung. Anyone else? Go ahead, Mr. Pipan.
Yes, go ahead.
MR. PIPAN: Going back to the Code, 23-85 is a two-part: A is if there's a sewer
line within 300 feet, you put in sewers. B, that's like an alternative reading or an
alternative provision. It's subdivisions where sewer connections cannot be made.
So that's where it talks about connections, and that's where we're trying to
clarify. We can't currently connect. If it were at our doorstep at the property line,
then we, for sure, we cannot argue the point that we shouldn't connect. And I
think we have to have some condition in this ordinance that says what we're
doing with respect to wastewater. Department of Health is saying one thing:
Individual wastewater systems are okay. DEM is kind of saying another thing.
So we need to clarify.
MR. CHUNG: Well, it's true they mention the word "connections,"but it just
says where sewer connections cannot be made.
MR. PIPAN: Which we cannot.
MR. CHUNG: You cannot, right?
MR. PIPAN: Correct.
MR. CHUNG: So why is it necessary to put this language in there? I would say
just leave it in. And we've got to suck eggs already because the law is the law,
right, already. So it's there and we have to follow it. You guys have to follow it.
Page 23
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
We would like sewer lines to be installed within the subdivision, but I don't think
that we're going to have the necessary trigger. So, if it's within your rights to
install septic systems, it's in the law, what can we do already?
MR. PIPAN: We would be perfectly happy with doing septic systems.
MR. CHUNG: I mean, it's in the law. Right? That's your reading of the law,
right?
MR. PIPAN: That's the preference.
MR. CHUNG: That's my reading of the law.
MR. PIPAN: Agreed.
MR. CHUNG: So, I mean, what can we do, right? I mean, this doesn't do
anything for us, really. Anyway, thanks.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Chung.
MR. INABA: Chair?
CHR. DAVID: Who was that? Judge Strance, thank you; we see your hand up.
Go ahead.
(Note: At this time, Corporation Counsel Elizabeth Strance came forward
to address the members of the Council.)
MS. STRANCE: Thank you. Aloha and good morning. Elizabeth Strance,
Corporation Counsel. Since you folks are having discussion regarding legal
interpretations of at least one Code provision, and my quick review is there may
be others, I'd like to suggest that you get a legal opinion. I'm not able to provide
it. I may be able to reach a deputy who can provide it during this discussion. But
if not, then I would recommend that you go forward once you know what the law
requires.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Judge Strance.
MR. KAY: I'm sorry, Madam Chair. Christian from the Planning Department.
CHR. DAVID: Yes.
MR. KAY: Whereas our Subdivision Code, Chapter 23, speaks to connection
requirements, there is also Chapter 21, which is our Sewer Code, that also may
provide you some information on subdivision requirements and what it means to
be accessible.
Page 24
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Kay. What-2 I?
MR. KAY: (Hawai`i County Code Section) 21-6. And then in the definitions,
there is a definition for "accessible to a sewer."
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Kay. Director Ramzi, you wanted to say
something?
MR. MANSOUR: I'm sorry. I was not prepared for this because I was here for
Bill 223. But as far as this one, definitely there's our Code the Planning,
Subdivision—and the Department of Health, 11-62. In earlier conversations with
Department of Health, anything within the near future to sewer connection, I just
feel like you should have a dry sewer to allow the residents to connect.
Otherwise, the residents are not going to be able to fund tearing up the roads and
putting the infrastructure in. So that would be totally a missed opportunity
because even if we extend the sewer line down that road and it's within
connection distance, the lack of the infrastructure within the subdivision is going
to be cost-burdensome on the residents themselves to be able to connect. And,
thus, they're going to have septic for life because the County's not going to end
up funding private individuals with the sewer infrastructure.
So I just want to make sure that it's very clear you have multiple subdivisions
within that area. Usually, the standard of that sewer coming through the cul-de-
sac, if there is a master planning into the sewer or the subdivisions, usually the
standard practices, they allow for easements because they'll have an idea of where
the sewer collection is going to be extended. Here, we know that it's going to be
extended within that road because that becomes County roads. And usually,
infrastructure is built within County roads based on the traffic circulation map.
So you find out where the future roadway is going to be, and that's when we
request from the developers to extend the sewer to within that easement.
So the idea is we understand the 300 feet, but the Department of Health, also in
communication with our department, made it clear if you are within accessible or
near-future connection, you're required to put in dry sewer. Because, otherwise,
if you don't have the dry sewer, you're never going to be able to make that
connection. That's the scenario we have all over the County. It's unfortunate.
The County cannot bear the costs to come back later and start building these
infrastructures. It becomes cost-burdensome on the taxpayers, on the County
itself. And that's the challenges we're having currently as we're evaluating the
possible conversion, how we're going to connect the dots; and it's going to be
impossible in the future. Thank you.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Director. Mr. Chung.
Page 25
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
MR. CHUNG: I think we all understand where Ramzi is coming from, but I think
he's kind of misdirected as well when he talks about the overall sewering or
sewerage plan. This is a little bit different now.
The other speakers spoke of the Sewer Code, Section 21-6, and it does speak of
accessibility. But accessibility is defined as the line that comes next to the
properties which have laterals to those properties. So the accessibility provision
in the Sewer Code and the other one in 23-85 are two completely different
concepts. That 23-85 is to trigger dry sewer lines within a subdivision. That's all.
So these are two separate concepts just by definition already.
I agree with Ramzi 100 percent. It would be great if we could require different
things, you know, sewer lines in anticipation of connections. But at the same
time, short of us changing our own laws, we have to follow our laws. Right? So
that's where I'm stuck. I mean, I'd like to find a way out. But I guess the bottom
line is this amendment doesn't do anything for us. It doesn't achieve Ramzi's
vision. It doesn't further refine what we're looking for. It just kind of confuses
things, in my opinion. But, I mean, thank you for proposing it.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Chung. Mr. Richards, go ahead.
MR. RICHARDS: I think it actually does take us a step forward because what it's
doing is it's highlighting that eventually we do want a sewer, but the County's not
quite ready. So it's highlighting if we get ready, then we will; if we can't get
ready, we won't. But going forward, we're setting the stage and they're going to
be working very diligently to get this done in this subdivision. And we get that
because we need the housing. And I'm always mindful about what Ms. Lee Loy
says: If we get more structures built, that's more of a revenue base for us as a
County. But in the transition time, we can't hold this back. We've got to keep
going forward. But we're setting the stage so we get the big infrastructure there;
so, as more come online, then we can have them sewered. So I think it's actually
setting us in the right direction.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Richards. Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, and I think
we can consider Judge Strance's request.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Ms. Strance,thank you for your input today.
Mr. Mansour and Mr. Kay, thank you as well. I'm thinking down the line. I'm
thinking 20, 30, 40, 50 years, 100 years down the line, and I'm thinking about
Mr. Mansour's request and the need for dry sewer. Something that caught my
attention was the property owner is looking to rezone to FA-1, but the nearby
properties are zoned RS-10. Is that correct, Mr. Kay?
MR. KAY: Yes. Thank you for the question. The property directly makai of the
subject property is currently zoned RS-10.
Page 26
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: RS-10. So what I see down the line is a
possibility of all these properties being rezoned, one by one or as a whole, to a
much more dense zoning. In that case, then you are looking at a huge increase in
the amount of parcels and even more individual wastewater systems. And as we
look down the line, the point is to get these septic systemssorry, not push
towards more septic systems, but push towards more sewer connections. And so,
even more so, I think this bill should be an impetus for us to start to look at what
we require as a sewer connection and when we require, especially in an area that
is being built out and has the potential to be much more dense zoning in the
future. That's my thoughts. I yield, Chair.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. Before we take the vote
on the amendment, Mr. Chung.
MR. CHUNG: I've got to disagree with Mr. Richards, and I don't know if I'm
disagreeing with Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, because I agree that we need to plan.
Right? And I think you said it. Who said it? Tim? Yeah, we need to have that
capacity to pay for our sewer systems. But this doesn't achieve it because the
trigger is if something becomes accessible prior to final subdivision approval.
Don't lose sight of that. That's the trigger.
And there's nothing in here—well, I guess it does that because if it does become
accessible prior to subdivision approval, which we don't know what the
likelihood of that happening is, then they have to connect, which is a different
term of art they're using. But I guess you have to assume if they have to connect,
then it also includes putting in sewer lines throughout the subdivision too,
although it's not specifically stated in this. It's very confusing.
If we're going to do contract zoning,just do it specifically. Just sayI mean, I
don't want to jam you guys up or anything just require it already. But that's
going to fly in the face of our own law. So that's whyI mean, I just wanted to
clarify that. I cannot support this. I know what Ramzi is saying and I agree with
it in concept, but under the law, I don't think we can do it.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Chung. All right—
MR. INABA:
ightMR. INABA: Chair?
CHR. DAVID: Mr. Inaba, go ahead.
MR. INABA: Looking at this amendment, it's more related to not the
amendment but before we get away from this specific condition. To the
applicant, is there an intention to have more than one residential dwelling or one
dwelling on each of the lots?
MR. PIPAN: No, sir. One dwelling maximum.
Page 27
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
MR. INABA: Okay. And then I don't know if this is for Planning: If later on,
because they're technically entitled to an additional dwelling. Is that right?
MR. KAY: They could apply for an additional farm dwelling should they meet
the requirements for an additional farm dwelling.
MR. INABA: Okay. Now, if they were to take that option, according to
Condition P, as it stands, they would then be required to connect with the County
sewer. Is that correct?
MR. KAY: That's correct.
MR. INABA: Okay. What we have here, then, is we're going to have dry sewers
installed for these main units. Is that correct?
MR. KAY: I don't think that's clear at this point if that question is for me. The
way the condition is written, as I understand it, without the clarification or even
with the clarification for this amendment is that, should the sewer line be
extended prior to receipt of final subdivision approval, then the project would be
required to connect. Should the applicant be able to secure final subdivision
approval prior to the sewer line being extended, then they could get individual
wastewater systems, which comply with the requirements of the State Department
of Health.
In terms of the additional conversation between Health and DEM, I'm not aware
of that. I'm just hearing that today. So that's kind of where we're at right now if
that answers your question.
MR. INABA: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Kay. I don't have any further questions. I
have to agree with Mr. Chung in that the amendment right now, it just seems to
I'm not sure where it stands in reading those two different sections of the Code.
So I think it's better to just leave the Code language in the Code and we make
sure that we're following that, rather than putting in some specific language as to
streets into the rezoning ordinance. Thank you, Chair, I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Inaba. Okay, Mr. Chung, we're going to take a
vote on the amendment. All right, Mr. Clerk, roll call please on the amendment.
Page 28
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Vote on Motion to The motion to amend Bill 204 with the contents of
Amend: Comm. 952.8 failed by the following roll call vote:
Failed
Ayes: Council Member Richards — 1.
Noes: Council Members Chung, Inaba,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz, Kimball,
Lee Loy, Villegas, and Chair David—8.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
CHR. DAVID: Back to the main motion, as amended with
Communication 952.7. Ms. Kimball.
Motion to Amend: Ms. Kimball moved to amend Bill 204 with the contents of
Comm. 952.9. Seconded by Ms. Kierkiewicz.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Ms. Kimball.
MS. KIMBALL: I will put it to the applicant and their representative to explain
the intent and purpose of this.
MR. PIPAN: Thank you, Council Member Kimball. This one should be fairly
straightforward. We're going to comply with Chapter 11 regardless of anything
else for this project that would require two affordable housing credits be earned
by the project. This just clearly states that we're going to satisfy those affordable
housing requirements by doing onsite affordable. Lots is the most likely outcome.
For this project, current affordability levels would be either two lots at 80 percent
AMI (Area Median Income), and that'll be 244,000-and-change apiece, or four
lots at 100 percent AMI, 355,000 apiece. So, this is just stating we're not going to
make use of any excess credits from other developers' projects. We're going to
do the affordable onsite.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Pipan. Ms. Kimball?
MS. KIMBALL: I yield to discussion.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Council Members, discussion on the proposed
amendment? Mr. Inaba, go ahead.
MR. INABA: Just a punctuation. Hawai`i's apostrophe can be changed to an
`okina. Thank you.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you very much. Anything else? Seeing none, Mr. Clerk,
can you do a roll call on that proposed amendment 952.9?
Page 29
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Vote on Motion to The motion to amend Bill 204 with the contents of
Amend: Comm. 952.9 was carried by the following roll call vote:
(Approved)
Ayes: Council Members Chung, Inaba,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz,
Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair David—9.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you very much. We are now back to the main motion.
Ms. Kimball, go ahead.
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you. That completes my list of tasks with regard to
presenting the amendments. I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you. We're on the main motion, as amended by
Communications 952.7 and 952.9. Any other discussion? Ms. Villegas, go
ahead.
MS. VILLEGAS: Thank you for the lengthy discussion by the colleagues and for
really digging into the issues at hand as they relate to sewer. Thank you,
Mr. Mansour, for being here and articulating the necessary vision for our
wastewater management protocols and sewer systems, of which we are decades
behind in bringing up to date.
In yesterday's conversation about a number of different points, we had a lengthy
conversation about our housing crisis, about our infrastructure crisis, as it comes
to roads, wastewater, schools,parks, sewer systems. We are decades behind in
providing the necessary infrastructure for our already-existing communities.
I've heard it said here today: taking into consideration tax revenue and the
support of projects like this because of what they bring forward in potential
increased tax revenue for the County of Hawaii. At what expense? To the
expense of the quality of life for those that live in District 7 who already spend a
half hour to travel two miles on roads that were not made to withstand the amount
of traffic that are on them today.
I bring this back to value systems. Historically, we look in retrospect at
gentlemen farms and some of the changes that have been made with tax codes
based on one-acre lots, and the recognition that predominantly gentlemen farms
are not, number one, affordable nor are they authentically utilized for agriculture,
nor are they historically affordable for kama`aina. They tend to be the lots
purchased by malihini who move here with a desire for a lifestyle in the tropics
where there's a year-round growth cycle.
Page 30
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
I thought long and hard about this particular zoning change application and Kona
in general, District 7, as we continue to be approached with zoning change
requests. For me to authentically sit here and with good conscience say that I am
in full support of providing affordable housing, workforce housing, I cannot
support a perpetuated decision-making cycle that allows for zoning changes
without infrastructure being aligned in process and projects underway at the same
time, if not before so. In Kona, we're at capacity. Unless developments are
authentically proposing solutions to our existing workforce-kama`aina housing,
I'm not comfortable entertaining zoning changes for ag lots.
I really feel that the era of land divisions being utilized as a means for malihini or
anyone to prospect and finance the building of their dream homes in Hawaii must
end. The lots in this project will already be unaffordable. I don't know very
many working families that could afford $244,000 just for the lot. Almost none.
Unless for some reason they already have a home or some form of real estate or
some form of generational wealth.
By the applicant's own admission, his wife, who's in real estate in Seattle, may
decide to sell the lots off one by one over time. That's prospecting. There are too
many "if-thens" for me to be able, in good conscience, to approve of this zoning
change. And in light of everything else that's happening on our island—and my
colleagues here, we sit for hours talking about the authentic value systems that we
hold dear, and the future of our island and those we want to be able to stay here
this project does not provide for that vision; nor, in my mind, does it authentically
align with that value system. And for that, I can't be supporting your request for a
zoning change. I yield.
MR. CHEN: May I, please?
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Villegas. Go ahead, Mr. Chen.
MR. CHEN: Aloha, Chair and Council Members. I really appreciate comments
from Council Member Villegas. Those are very important comments. I want to
say something particularly because you mentioned about my wife being a realtor.
The reason I mentioned to you about my wife being a realtor is that I was trying
to say something but I didn't get to finish it, right. I was trying to tell you that my
wife is a very active community member, being a realtor caring about a
community.
She is actually a member in the community in Seattle to a point that she is only
one of five people that's selected from the community to advise our school
district. She's also a board member of a local Chinese community association.
So those are among other things that she does. In short, she's actively engaged in
the community, and she wants to carry that legacy when she comes here in a
Page 31
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
couple of months. So that's what I was trying to say. Then when she mentioned
about trying to sell, one by one is by default. I wish you can come in and buy the
whole thing. That would be fine. Otherwise, how would we do it? Right?
So, this project, I hear your concerns. There are infrastructure issues. And to that
end, we voluntarily donated a portion of the land for the frontage improvement, in
addition to close to $200,000 for fair share contributions. I looked at this project
very thoroughly, thorough considerations. I went through the entire file that you
brought in last time. I read every comment from the community. I talked to
community leaders about what's the best use of the land, okay. So there were
comments about either high-density bringing traffic and the previously proposed
by a previous owner of 40-some units, that it was not feasible to go through. I
went through all those considerations.
I've been talking to a number of people who decided this is the best middle-of-
the-road consideration to use the land. We're making low-density, low-impact to
the community, yet we'll provide I I lots for the community. I know we even
offered onsite affordable housing. So all that is with a good intention to
contribute to the community.
You talked about dry sewer. Now the reason we talked about—dry sewers is a
miscommunication about this requirement and everything. But, argumentatively,
we follow the law that's recommended by DOH that because, you know,
relatively, for your units, only I I units on a I5-acre land is basically impossible to
do a sewer. That's why DOH recommended that you can do individual treatment
systems. But, alternatively, if it becomes available you can do it. But even that
can be very cost-prohibitive. Per-lot estimate is about$400 or $500 per linear
feet. The calculation for ours is at least 700 plus another 300 to the other side,
and plus there are other lots. We may need 600 each to access the lot. So, for
them, over 2,000 feet of linear. And the cost—
MS.
ostMS. VILLEGAS: Mr. Chen, I'm just going to go ahead and stop you here. I
appreciate your comments and the things that you're bringing forward, but I stand
where I stand. So I believe Mr. Pipan hereI'm not sure what the protocol here
is, but in the interest of time, I just would ask that you go ahead and refrain at this
point.
MR. CHEN: I appreciate that. That's fine. Thank you.
MS. VILLEGAS: Thank you.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Villegas. Anyone else? All right.
MR. PIPAN: Chair, if I may,just very briefly point to
CHR. DAVID: Okay.
Page 32
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
MR. PIPAN: A grassroots institute study called "The `Outsider' Theory of
Hawai`i's Housing Crisis." This came out pretty recently, and it looks at the
actual statistics of where buyers in Hawaii are coming from and what that means
in terms of affordability. They basically debunk the outsider influence.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you.
Point of Order: MR. INABA: Chair,point of order.
MS. VILLEGAS: I'm going to debunk the grassroots institute and a lot of their
writings as well.
CHR. DAVID: Okay, Ms. Villegas. Mr. Inaba, we heard you. Thank you for
your efforts in bringing forth that kind of information, but right now, we are on
the application before us to decide. Mr. Clerk, can we please take a roll call on
Bill 204, as amended.
Vote on Bill 204: The motion to pass Bill 204, as amended to Draft 2, on first
Draft 2 reading and adopt Planning Committee Report No. 81
Failed failed by the following roll call vote:
Ayes: Council Members Kierkiewicz, Lee Loy,
and Richards —3.
Noes: Council Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kimball, Villegas, and Chair David—5.
Absent: Council Member Chung— 1.
Excused: None.
MR. HENRICKS: The motion fails.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Henricks. All right, thank you, gentlemen. Can
we move to Bill 207,please?
STATEMENTS The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business,
FROM THE Statements from the Public.
PUBLIC ON
BILL 207 The following individual registered to speak and came forward when called by
(COMM. 973): the Chair:
Richard Bidleman: Comment.
Page 33
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Bill 207: AMENDS SECTION 25-8-15 (HAMAKUA DISTRICT ZONE MAP),
ARTICLE 8, CHAPTER 25 (ZONING) 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 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL—
15,000 SQUARE FEET (RS-15) AT HONOKA`A, HAMAKUA, HAWAII,
COVERED BY TAX MAP KEYS: 4-5-010:136 and 4-5-024:010
(Applicant: Lehua Village Partners, LLC) (Area: Approx. 14.322 acres)
The Windward Planning Commission forwards its favorable recommendation for
this change of zone request, which would allow the applicant to downzone the
property to develop a Planned Unit Development by reducing the number of lots in
the Lehua Villages from 60 to 40 lots. Lehua Village 1 would consist of 20 lots to
be sold at rates pursuant to affordable housing guidelines, and Lehua Village 2
would consist of 20 lots to be sold at market rates. The properties straddle the east
and west sides of Lehua Street, north(makai) of the Hawaii Belt Road and south
(mauka) of the Honoka`a Park complex, portion of Papa`anui and Haina in
Hamakua.
Reference: Comm. 973
Intr. by: Ms. Kierkiewicz (B/R)
First Reading: October 19, 2022
Motion to Approve: Ms. Kierkiewicz moved to pass Bill 207 on second and
final reading. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Ms. Kierkiewicz.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chair. I just wanted to take the opportunity to
once again mahalo nui the applicant and their representatives for bringing this
project forward. I'm going to be continuing to support this. I really appreciate
how much of the project is actually going to be affordable and available to
working and local families. I know how much that means to you, Mr. Meeker,
and your wife. So thank you. I appreciate how this aligns with our General Plan
and CDP and all the work that's being done to continuously engage community in
this development. So thank you for being here. I'm going to yield to my
colleagues for additional questions and comments. Thank you, Chair.
CHR. DAVID: Ms. Kimball, go ahead.
MS. KIMBALL: I'll just reiterate my comments in the previous hearings on this.
It is appropriate in-fill. It's area that's designated for this type of property. It is a
downzone, which means it's fewer lots than initially proposed. That is, in part,
just to relieve the applicant of some of the conditions that came from the 1978
rezoning of this that are no longer applicable. Like I said and Mr. Bidleman said,
the community generally supports this too. It's close to the park. It's close to the
Page 34
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
school. It's close to medical facilities. When we talk about making
neighborhoods walkable and accessible, putting housing where there are things is
kind of a key part of that.
Mr. Bidleman does have a point about the infrastructure and the need for a
walking path in the area. I was hoping to have a cost estimate from
Director Pause. I don't think I have that. There's a way to access the park
potentially through County property, and then there's a County right-of-way
where we could develop an additional walking path. I think it would be
appropriate, so I will probably be coming back to this body when I have a better
sense of what that cost would be. But generally just supporting this project going
forward. Thank you.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Anyone else? Go ahead,
Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Chair. Ms. Kimball, I
appreciate that last comment. At the most, you have a nice community being
built, or looking to be built, but adjacent to a County park within proximity of
schools. Now is the time to put the request in to make sure that we're tying in to
those County facilities so we truly are creating a very nice future-oriented project
for these families that are moving to this community. Please take those comments
to heart, Mr. and Mrs. Meeker and your two representatives. There's nothing
more important, I think, than making sure that, as we're planning these future
communities, we're doing it with some real grace. I appreciate your time and
energy to that. Please take those comments to heart. I look forward to anything
you bring forward that will tie it all together. Thank you. Thank you, Chair.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. Anyone else? Seeing
none, all those in favor of approving Bill 207 at second and final reading,please
say "aye."
Vote on Bill 207: The motion to pass Bill 207 on second and final reading
(Adopted) was carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Chung, Inaba,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz,
Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair David—9.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
CHR. DAVID: Can we go to Resolution 579, please?
Page 35
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Res. 579-22: CREATES ONE NEW HUMAN RESOURCES PROGRAM SPECIALIST
POSITION FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
Establishes a Program Specialist SR-24 position for the Recruitment and
Examinations Division.
Reference: Comm. 1044
Intr. by: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder(B/R)
Approve: FC-217
Motion to Approve: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder moved to adopt Res. 579-22 and
Finance Committee Report No. 217. Seconded by
Ms. Villegas.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: We've had the Director here for the last two
or three hours. Thank you for your patience, sir. Did you want to add anything or
provide a summary to the Council? Thank you, Director Leopoldino.
(Note: At this time, Human Resources Director Waylen Leopoldino came
forward to address the members of the Council.)
MR. LEOPOLDINO: Good morning, Chair David and members of Council.
Thank you. I do want to just summarize the need for the additional position. In
general, the County has been growing by positions significantly over the last
several years, whereas the Department of Human Resources, as you can see,
remains tight-knit and does not make any sense because we have to have
personnel in place to support all these additional positions. This is the start of that
process, whereas you all know that we are in a recruitment crisis.
Through the monies we were given recently, we were working out different
strategies on trying to fill the many vacancies we have here in the County. And
we've determined that our division head for recruitment needs to do more
outreach in the community, be out in the community, focus on social media and
different types of strategies that we've never had to consider in the past, which
takes away from the day-to-day operations. So this position will serve that
function, being there to perform the day-to-day operations with screening
applications, posting job announcements, and coordinating the existing HR
(Human Resources) staff, recruitment staff, that are in place. So that's the reason
for the request here. I'm happy to answer any questions.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Director. I'll be supporting this
today. What is our vacancy right now? If you have a good solid number, go
ahead, but just a guesstimate.
Page 36
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
MR. LEOPOLDINO: I can tell you that our continuous recruitments are currently
at 65, which is crazy. It's a huge number. I don't think we've ever been at that
number, but that's just 65 classes. For example, if we have a Clerk III class, we
could have ten vacancies within that class. I don't have an exact number for you
at this time, but we are looking at close to a 30 percent vacancy rate, which is
really outstanding. So we need to get some control over that.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: That's a huge number. This position would
help us kind of reach out into the community and make sure we're doing
everything we can to get more applicants, and to make sure people know what
positions are available and utilize different platforms, yeah.
MR. LEOPOLDINO: Correct. This position will assist with all of those things
and more.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. That's outstanding. I've been
thinking about this for a while, as an employer, but also watching this go on
within our County, within our Police departments, different departments across
the board. It's hard to find employees right now; but we're coming off of a
national crisis, a global crisis, and yet there's no one to work. It's just a really
interesting parallel that I'm having a hard time grasping what is really going on
right now.
MR. LEOPOLDINO: Right. We keep asking ourselves, "Where is everybody?"
Everywhere you go, there's a lot of"Help Wanted" signs, and businesses are
reducing their hours just because of staffing. So we're feeling it tremendously
here.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you very much. Chair, thank you.
MR. LEOPOLDINO: Thank you.
CHR. DAVID: Anyone else? Ms. Kierkiewicz first and then Ms. Villegas.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Director, for being here.
We are a service kind of organization, and we need people to deliver these critical
government services. So I'll be supporting this position. I was going through the
B-52 and I really appreciate just knowing all the different recruitment strategies
you guys are employing.
One of the things I wanted to ask you about, because you mentioned it in there,
was engaging our community colleges, universities. Would this particular person
be involved with perhaps designing different internship opportunities for
college/university students, because that was one of the first ways that I was
Page 37
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
exposed to County government. I did a couple of years at environmental
management. Really valuable experience that I think if we expose more of our
local kids to, they may see themselves wanting to work in County government.
MR. LEOPOLDINO: Just to clarify, this position we're requesting is actually
going to support the division so that the HR manager that we have in place will do
all of those things that you've listed.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Got it. Okay.
MR. LEOPOLDINO: That's going to be the new function of this HR manager
position for recruitment.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Okay. Perfect.
MR. LEOPOLDINO: But all of those things, yes.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Awesome. Just wanted to make sure somebody was
getting that job done. Thank you. I appreciate that.
MR. LEOPOLDINO: Yes, absolutely. Thank you.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Chair, I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kierkiewicz. Ms. Villegas. Okay, thank you.
Anyone else? Ms. Lee Loy, go ahead.
MS. LEE LOY: Good morning, Mr. Leopoldino.
MR. LEOPOLDINO: Good morning.
MS. LEE LOY: Thanks for being here. Completely understand the need and will
support this. I'm trying to wrap my head around the recruitment part, and I've
just had a number of individuals I know who applied. But there has been quite a
stall as far as them even knowing if they're kind of"in process." How does this
position help shorten that timeline? Not to pick on you guys, but I jokingly told
them, "You were applying for a building permit, or for a job at the County?"
Because, they were just really like, "Aunty Sue, it's kind of taking a long time."
Can you share with us how this position will help shorten that timeline?
MR. LEOPOLDINO: Absolutely. So, kind of parallel to requesting this position,
we've been looking at ways to shorten the recruitment timeline. One of the huge
strides we've actually taken, effective September, is we've temporarily suspended
written exams for entry-level positions because, with the limited amount of staff
Page 38
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
we have, it takes them away from screening applications. So, now that we've
temporarily suspended the written exams, they have more time in the office to
screen.
We're also looking at other ways of trying to streamline that recruitment process.
Our system, the NEOGOV system, offers some other opportunities for us to
screen in a more efficient manner that we're looking into. There's some other
efforts that we're looking into to definitely reduce that amount of time for
response on our end.
MS. LEE LOY: On average, what's kind of the wait time right now on the
screening process? And then how many weeks are we looking at with you guys
being full force so that as we begin to get real aggressive? And I completely
understand on recruiting, social media, but I almost feel like we're going to pack
the pipe with a whole bunch of applicants, but we're still kind of at a choke or
pinch point with this screening process.
MR. LEOPOLDINO: A lot of the bottleneck is coming in—at the beginning of
the new fiscal year when departments come in for requests for new positions,
what that does is it also stacks up in the recruitment end. Because, in addition to
the existing vacancies that we have, now we're getting 80-some-odd new
positions that we've got to in and recruit for, but we don't have the staff to do it.
Once our recruitment closes, we try our best to screen within two weeks,
depending on the size of the recruitment, obviously. But that's not realistic these
days because of all the new positions and all the continuous recruitments that
we're running. And it's constantly screening because every single application
that comes in, the priority is to screen it, qualify the applicant, and push them
through to the department. So the timelines are all over the place at this point.
So, hopefully, we'll get a better handle on it soon.
MS. LEE LOY: Is it reasonable or sensible to manage that expectation if they
don't hear anything for three or four months, to check back in or ?
MR. LEOPOLDINO: Yes, absolutely.
MS. LEE LOY: Okay.
MR. LEOPOLDINO: We do encourage applicants to call us back. When they do
call us, if we don't have an answer, we give them kind of a timeline when to call
back just so that we can keep them in the loop and they're not just sitting out there
waiting.
MS. LEE LOY: Yeah. I mean, other job opportunities come along, too, for them.
MR. LEOPOLDINO: Sure.
Page 39
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
MS. LEE LOY: And I think they're trying to balance those choices.
MR. LEOPOLDINO: Sure. And we are encouraging departments not to sit on
any referred lists. We don't have that luxury anymore. I mean, it's a matter of
days before people get job offers, and we don't have that luxury to sit and wait
anymore.
MS. LEE LOY: Great. Good to see you, Mr. Leopoldino.
MR. LEOPOLDINO: Thank you.
MS. LEE LOY: Chair, I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. Thank you, Director, for being here.
Anyone else have questions? No? Seeing none, all those in favor of approving
Resolution 579, please say "aye."
Vote on Res. 579-22: The motion to adopt Res. 579-22 and Finance Committee
(Adopted) Report No. 217 was carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Chung, Inaba,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz,
Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair David—9.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you very much, Director, for being here. Mr. Clerk, can
we go to Bill 220,please?
STATEMENTS The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business,
FROM THE Statements from the Public.
PUBLIC ON
BILL 220, Draft 2 The following individuals registered to speak and came forward when called by
(COMM. 1022.75): the Chair:
Brian Ley: In opposition.
Recess: At 11:34 a.m., the Chair called for a recess.
Reconvene: The meeting reconvened at 11:46 a.m.
Jason Blair: In opposition.
Bunnie Harrington: In opposition.
Page 40
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Bill 220: AMENDS CHAPTER 14 OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE 1983
(Draft 2) (2016 EDITION, AS AMENDED), BY ADDING A NEW ARTICLE RELATING
TO LICENSES TO CARRY CONCEALED AND UNCONCEALED FIREARMS
WITHIN THE COUNTY
Establishes a new article that includes Sensitive Places where the licensed carrying
of a firearm would not be allowed, that the licensed carry of a firearm while
intoxicated is prohibited, that upon contact with law enforcement the licensee must
notify the enforcement officer of the possession of a licensed firearm and present
the license for inspection, and that a license may be revoked by the Chief of Police
for one year for any violation of the terms of this new article.
Reference: Comm. 1022.75
Intr. by: Mr. Chung
Approve: PRPSC-39
(Note: Communications 1022.93 through 1022.102, transmitting proposed
amendments to Bill 220, Draft 2, were circulated.)
Motion to Approve: Mr. Chung moved to pass Bill 220, Draft 2, on first reading
and adopt Parks and Recreation and Public Safety
Committee Report No. 39. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Mr. Chung.
MR. CHUNG: First of all, for our last speaker, I think most of her concerns were
incorporated actually into our Draft 2. So she might be looking at something else.
I don't know. But I have some amendments. I know Ms. Kimball came up with a
bunch of them but,just out of courtesy, if you guys would allow me to take mine
up first. We can work off of that if it's approved or disapproved. Would that be
okay?
MR. HENRICKS: Madam Chair, before Mr. Chung makes a motion, there are
quite a few amendments. I just want to make sure we take time. There's some in
here that are clearly "either-or" and they won't play well together. So I just want
to make sure that the Council is aware of that when it's making its motions and
whatnot. So if you could just take some time, before we start deliberations, if
you'll make motions.
MR. CHUNG: That's why I suggested or asked,just as a matter of common
courtesy since I'm the introducer of the bill, if we could take up mines first. If
you guys want to work off of that other one, then that's fine.
MR. HENRICKS: I wasn't suggesting that at all. I was just—even, I think, your
two amendments are "either-or" as well, yeah. Correct?
MR. CHUNG: Yup.
Page 41
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
MR. HENRICKS: Gotcha. Thank you so much.
MR. CHUNG: Thank you.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Clerk Henricks. Go ahead, Mr. Chung.
Motion to Amend: Mr. Chung moved to amend Bill 220, Draft 2, with the
contents of Comm. 1022.93. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Mr. Chung.
MR. CHUNG: Thank you. There was actually another competing or alternative
communication, but I'm going to work off of this. There's three changes that I
made, and I really was trying to incorporate things that I heard from my
colleagues. The first one has to do with hospitals. This didn't come from my
colleagues, though. It's putting that same proviso or exception that's contained in
almost every other "sensitive place" item. So, whereas the item, as drafted
currently, would prohibit firearms or licensed firearms in hospitals, medical
facilities, medical offices, and/or medical clinics, I put the following clause:
"except where permission is granted by the administrator of the facility."
The second change is in Item 3. There was some concern about it being too
general, and it still might be somewhat general, but I really feel the strong need to
protect children. "Daycare centers,playgrounds,parks, and/or other places
where"what we took out were "where children gather." Children are all over
the place, right. Took that out and inserted "that are designed for children's care
or enjoyment." It still is somewhat vague, but it really is designed to protect
children.
The last one had to do with government buildings. On the last go-around, we
took out parking lots because just in case somebody went to a government
building and forgot they had their gun; now what? They're kind of stuck. But I
put back in—and this is after talking with Major Mahuna and working with our
Legislative Auditor's department, legislative drafting teamso, government
buildings. Then this included the new language: "and the accompanying parking
lots attached to such buildings, except when the licensed firearm is kept in the
vehicle unloaded with an affixed trigger lock or in a locked case."
So those are the three changes. And, of course, we don't have bars or restaurants
or anything like that because that was taken out. It might come back in later, but
it isn't in there right now. The reason why I put back the exception for hospitals,
medical facilities, which is included everywhere else, is, and I think we don't
want to do this, but we put the onus on the facility. We heard from a church
already, a church pastor who said they're inclusive. They want everybody,
whether they have guns or don't have guns. Okay. Well, he can make his own
decision.
Page 42
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Basically, this is restrictive but it will allow for guns to be—well, people with
licensed guns to enter various facilities. Why I wanted it in for hospitals and
schools and daycare centers is very simple. Since we're taking this measure up,
the last thing I want to do is put my name on something that is just going to,
across the board, say no licensed guns in hospitals, no licensed guns in schools. If
we do that, and we all hope that nothing will happen in these facilities, but I bet
every community who's been adversely affected thought the same way.
I don't want to announce to the world that there's no chance of a licensed gun
being in a school or in a hospital. That, in and of itself, hopefully will provide
some deterrence to any of the so-called bad people that we seem to be talking
about. And that's why I think it's important to have these exceptions in there.
There's nothing in here that says it has to be announced who has the guns. As
long as we can keep people guessing, I think that already helps the situation.
That's only in my opinion, though.
I don't know how you guys are going to look at that small clause relating to those
places designed for children's care or enjoyment, because I also have another
communication which excludes that but includes the other two. But that's what
I'm proposing. I hope we can get support, and we can go on from there. Thank
you.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Chung. Discussion, Council Members?
Ms. Kimball, go ahead.
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Chair. If I may just make a brief comment beyond
the scope of this amendment. I do have another slate of amendments. The
purpose for introducing them individually is the last time we amended with a
communication that had all of these individual amendments, we didn't have an
opportunity to deliberate them individually, which I think is important in this case
particularly because even though this bill is intended to establish a law that
applies to our County at this time until the State does implement some sort of
legislation, it is also fundamentally going to be a signal to the Legislature about
what our County is willing to accept.
I am anxious to get something put in place, but I am also very cognizant that I
think we want to spend as much time as possible deliberating. I have more to say
on the subject matter itself, but to the particular amendment that's on the floor, the
second and third changes I can agree to: the designation for children's care and
enjoyment and then the last one about the parking lots. I think that those both
make sense. But again, I have an amendment in front of me that has three
different things, and I can't agree to the first one. And the reason for that is—and
it all has to do with a level of choice. The Second Amendment doesn't supersede
all of the rest of the constitution and all of the other amendments. We are
balancing personal freedoms, property rights on the Second Amendment.
Page 43
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
When you are required to go to the hospital, or the State says you have to go to
school or you are having to go to the DMV(Department of Motor Vehicles) to do
your registration for your car, there's not as much a choice about whether or not
you go to these places. That's why I haven't produced an amendment about the
churches. Churches, you do have much more freedom about whether or not you'd
go to that place. So what I'm trying to balance is the freedom of those people to
go to those places to make—when it's less of a choice versus some other
perceptions. I will expand upon that when we get to the bill.
One of the additional purposes of introducing all of these other amendments
addressing single items in the bill was to give Corporation Counsel Deputy Wan
the opportunity to explain the historical references that pertain to these various
proposals. Because, the Supreme Court's decision and the concurring decisions
by the other justices, or concurring statements, did clearly state that if there were
historical prohibitions, that those could be adopted as far as sensitive places. It
clearly spelled out government buildings, clearly spelled out schools, and then
also provided the opportunity for each individual jurisdiction to identify sensitive
places based on historical precedence. So, if you don't mind, Corp. (Corporation)
Counsel Wan, to come up. And if you can refer to particularly the hospital case
and the reference there, I think it would be an appropriate time to do that. Thank
you.
(Note: At this time, Deputy Corporation Counsel Sylvia Wan came
forward to address the members of the Council.)
MS. WAN: Deputy Corporation Counsel Sylvia Wan. Thank you, Council, for
the opportunity to address this body. As far as hospitals go, I will note that the
statute itself or the bill itself has an amalgamation of historical references as well
as some modern allegories, which is allowed under Bruen. Hospitals are one of
the ones that is a modern allegory. Hospitals have been deemed as sensitive
places in 12 different states. In addition to hospitals, a lot more of the states,
14 additional states, also include mental healthcare facilities. So, when it comes
to hospitals, they have already been determined to be sensitive places in a large
number of states.
Now, I understand that in this particular perspective, when you look at the
historical statutes, they don't say anything about hospitals specifically because we
didn't have hospitals at that time. But the idea of hospitals being a sensitive place
goes to the very nature of what people go to a hospital for. They're already in an
extremely vulnerable position because they're going there for healthcare, and
some of them are on death's door. So you don't want to have another implement
that is considered to be a dangerous weapon to be within the same facility that
could cause potentially more damage, even if on accident. So that is the rationale
behind the hospitals and medical provisions. But I will note that our bill does not
currently include mental health facilities. That was an oversight.
Page 44
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you very much, Deputy. Just reiterating and I'll go more
into this as we talk about the full content of the bill. The Bruen decision was
really around the fact that our concealed carry applications were nonobjective.
There was a requirement when you applied for a concealed carry permit, but you
had to give a reason why you needed that permit. That was what was considered
to be unconstitutional. But it is very clear to see that in the decisions and the
concurrent statements that sensitive places could be identified by the
municipalities based on historic or concurrent examples.
To your statement, Mr. Chung, and with all due respect, not wanting to have your
name on something that could lead to whatever, if you listen to the statistics
provided by Cory Harden and others that I provided at the last hearing, the
probability that because there is a gun in a place—and accidents happen—is
higher than actually the good guy getting the bad guy. I mean, it's less than half a
percent. It's likely not even a quarter percent where that actually occurs. That's
what I don't want on my head.
We see increased rates of successful suicides when guns are present. We see an
increased rate of domestic violence turning lethal when guns are present. There's
very little evidence that a good guy with a gun takes care of a bad guy with a gun.
We saw that here. I have more to expound on this when we get to the full
measure.
I can't support this amendment because it includes hospitals. Like I said, I
support the other two components of it, but the hospital amendment, I cannot
support. Thank you, Chair, I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Mr. Richards, go ahead.
MR. RICHARDS: I'm not exactly sure how we're going to be working through
these amendments, but I did want to commend Mr. Chung for listening to the
public and trying to sort through this because I think it is reflective of a lot of the
concerns that were raised. And Ms. Harrington, to her point, I definitely hear
what she was saying, but I think Mr. Chung has addressed those concerns in
version Draft 2. I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Richards. Anyone else? Mr. Chung, go ahead.
MR. CHUNG: I certainly respect Ms. Kimball's viewpoint, but first of all, the
Bruen decision didn't mention municipalities, I don't believe. It was a state law.
It did speak of sensitive places, but as I've stated before, the two places that they
mention specifically were government buildings and schools. Of course I'm glad
that Deputy Corporation Counsel Wan has been here and is prepared to explain
the historical underpinnings of each and every item that was maybe on the
original one, but I think, as she stated the last time too, most of those were derived
from state laws.
Page 45
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
We're kind of in unchartered territory here, moving as a municipality. That's
why I really credit the Police Department and Deputy Corporation Counsel Wan
for at least advancing something like this and bringing it to the fore. Because, we
could have just as well taken a laissez-faire kind of approach to this and say, "You
know what? The Legislature's going to take it up anyway, so let's just leave it
alone. Why should we go through the process? We're heading for the holidays.
Why don't we just smooth sail it all the way through,"right? But I think it's
important that we take it up.
We may disagree on various items. You have your viewpoint. I have my
viewpoint. But hospitals were never specifically mentioned in the Bruen case,
not at all. We're adding that. There may be historical underpinnings, but you
already stated there weren't even such things as hospitals before. We don't know
how far back the Supreme Court is going to look in terms of history. As I've
already said with regard to that Bruen case, they took a convoluted route all the
way back to coming to their decision, but that's the law. I kind of disagree with
the way they did it, but it's the law. We've got to deal with that.
There is one doctor who has stated that he would like to have a gun there for his
own protection. I'm hoping that if something like this is passed, which requires
permission to be had by those facilities, then it will be administered responsibly.
That's my take on it. I hope they're not going to act irresponsibly. And I don't
know, really, why I kept it out for hospitals to begin with. I just thought maybe
they're going to have their own security force there, but I don't think that's the
case. And hospitals, more than any place else, I think, you're talking about the
intrusion by, I hate to use it, but the bad guys. They might be there to get
medications. You don't have that at schools or anything like that. So there is a
real threat that people might try to go into the hospitals if they know it's fair
game.
I'm not saying that we have to have guns or we have to allow it. We're starting
actually, we're saying that you're not allowed to have it at these facilities. But if
the facility sees fit to allow it, then it's their call, really. But that's my take on it.
I just wanted to make sure that everybody knows there's only two things that were
mentioned in Bruen, which was a state law that they were looking at; schools and
government buildings. And they opened the door for other places, of course, but
it kind of leaves us to our own devices as to how far we want to go. So I think
this strikes a good balance, in my opinion.
And with regard to putting my name on it, yeah, I'm not going to support any
amendment that's going to take this out. But, ultimately, I'll vote in favor of
anything that's going to protect our community the main bill. But, anyway,
that's all I have to say. Thank you.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Chung. Ms. Villegas, go ahead.
Page 46
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
MS. VILLEGAS: I want to first thank Council Members Kimball and Chung for
the deep dive in these things and providing a broader understanding and education
on the parameters. I suppose, to me, to bring it back down to layman's terms, we
have one hospital in Kona. I don't have a choice to go to a facility that an
administrator says you can't bring guns. I don't want to go to a hospital where
people can bring guns, nor do I think a doctor should have to carry a gun. It's
tragic that we're in that place in society that people feel that that's what makes
them feel secure. I remember an era where we took personal self-defense, and we
could defend ourselves without killing another person.
For me, I can't be supporting this amendment because I really do agreeI can't
agree with the "except where permission is granted by the administrator of the
facility." I think that adding that into an already incredibly complex medical field
and the decisions that have to be made by our already overly stretched medical
providers and administrators is not fair to them, and neither is it fair as someone
who has somebody currently in Kona hospital, a close family member. Yeah.
And then my one question to you, and I'm sorry, I'm going to butcher your last
name.
MS. WAN: Ms. Wan.
MS. VILLEGAS: Ms. Wan. You said it does not include mental health
facilities?
MS. WAN: Currently, our ordinance does not spell out mental health facilities. I
think it could be argued that they are also another medical facility. So I think
that's going to be within the interpretation. I'm just saying that there are specific
states that do specifically state and expand on mental health institutions and
places where people will go for mental health care. I just wanted to highlight for
the Council that, as the ordinance stands right now, it doesn't specifically spell
that, but I think it could be left open to interpretation as to whether those are
actually health facilities.
MS. VILLEGAS: I concur that there is wisdom in including it specifically so that
we don't end up in a legal argument splitting hairs. If we look at our country and,
historically, the state of tragedies gun-related and the connection with mental
health issues and our mental health crisis, and as we look at our houseless
population and the percentage of that population with mental health, it's all
intertwined. So thank you for bringing forth this better understanding of why it's
there.
I do support and appreciate Mr. Chung's articulation and transitioning of
terminology from "where children gather"to "that are designed for children's
care or enjoyment." It's ludicrous that we are at a time in society when this has to
Page 47
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
be written in law because of the tragedies that have happened. So, yeah, I won't
be supporting this amendment in its entirety because of what's listed in
Section 14(a)(1). Thank you.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Villegas. Anyone else before I go back to
Ms. Kimball? Ms. Kimball.
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Chair. Let's start from where we all agree, which is
we want to protect the health and safety of our community. I think that is certain.
Again, to reiterate, the Bruen decision applies to concealed carry of handguns. It
was because the Hawaii process for applying for a concealed carry permit had
the requirement that a reason be given, and that was determined to be
unconstitutional. It intended to protect the right to self-defense, not the right, per
se, to protection of personal property.
I think where there's disagreement here is to the level at which the Supreme Court
allowed in its decision for other sites beyond government buildings and schools.
So I've had lengthy discussions with Judge Strance, and I'd like to ask her to
come forward, at this point, to talk about her interpretation of this decision.
Because, I think that we don't want to get off arguing the wrong point here, which
is do we or do we not have the authority to do this. I think we do. I'd like to just
ask you, Judge Strance, to share some of our discussion and some of your
thoughts on the ruling by the Supreme Court.
MR. CHUNG: Madam Chairman, is this related to the amendment? Because, the
overall bill isI mean, whether we can or cannot enact something like this relates
to the overall bill. I don't know about this specific amendment.
MS. KIMBALL: I asked Judge Strance because you actually brought that point
up in your argument in support of the amendment just moments ago. And so it
seemed an appropriate time to have the discussion about whether or not we can
include this in our bill. If it's important to defer this to the discussion of the
legislation as a whole, I'm willing to do that.
MR. CHUNG: Yeah, I did bring it up because there was reference to having
more—we were talking about historical underpinnings and other things like that.
And I just wanted to bring the discussion back to make sure that everybody
understood what was in the Bruen decision. Only two things specifically stated,
not saying that you couldn't go further, but only two things for sure that we know
the Supreme Court will uphold.
CHR. DAVID: Ms. Kimball, do you ?
MS. KIMBALL: I think it is relevant to the discussion of the amendment to
pursue that interpretation and expand upon it from the perspective of our Corp.
Page 48
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Counsel on what can be included,just because it was previously brought up under
the context of this discussion. But I'm willing to defer to yourself as Chair or the
Clerk, based on their recommendation.
CHR. DAVID: Okay, if it's specifically to address that one issue that you said
Mr. Chung raised and not go further into any other discussion, then I will allow
Corp. Counsel Judge Strance to proceed.
(Note: At this time, Corporation Counsel Elizabeth Strance came forward
to address the members of the Council.)
MS. STRANCE: Thank you. Elizabeth Strance, Corporation Counsel. I think I
can focus my remarks. Is everybody able to hear me okay?
CHR. DAVID: Yes.
MS. STRANCE: Okay. So,just in terms of context, the Bruen case was about a
law that refused to issue gun licenses to people unless they showed that they had a
need to have them. So the focus of the opinion was on that issue and under what
circumstances can licenses be issued. The discussion about sensitive places really
had to do with the argument that was being made in New York, that basically the
entire island of Manhattan was a sensitive place.
So there's two aspects to the case. One is, and the primary reason that you folks
are considering legislation, is that the court found that New York and six other
jurisdictions, which included Hawaii so those jurisdictions that had laws that
gave the police the discretion to issue a license, those laws were unconstitutional
because the Second Amendment right to carry arms is a constitutional right.
The court did not say that it was going to attempt to limit what sensitive places
were. They were going to provide a framework for when those could be
considered. So there are places both in the majority opinion and in the concurring
opinions that are specifically leaving untouched the 43 other jurisdictions that
have the "shall carry" laws. So the court distinguished between two types of
jurisdictions: "may carry,"which Hawaii was—and those laws are
unconstitutional because of the manner that we issued registrations. And the
"shall carry" laws, which are the rest of the jurisdictions, did start with the
presumption that people have the right to carry.
The court specifically stated that the jurisdictions have the right to limit where
firearms can be carried, so long as there is a historical context for them. In one
concurring opinion, Bartlett concurring opinion, where she found the court wasn't
clear on which model of historical context they're going to use. But within the
majority opinion and the concurring opinions, they identified, as Council
Member Chung mentioned, schools and government buildings. But there were
also references to legislative assemblies, polling places, appearances before
Page 49
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
government officials and justices of the peace; places that carrying of deadly
weapons in a manner that is likely to terrorize others and that there are appropriate
limitations on carrying dangerous and unusual weapons, which is why there was
the focus of the discussion on handguns.
I'm not sure that it is a helpful exercise to try to guess what the United States
Supreme Court is going to do in light of the deference to the 43 "shall carry"
jurisdictions, and that there were concurring opinions. So, for a Supreme Court to
have a majority opinion, there has to be five justices that agree. In this case, there
were six justices that agreed on the main opinion. The three additional justices
were justices that participated in concurring opinions. So, Justice Alito had some
discussion about primarily attacking the dissenting opinion. Justices Cavanaugh
and Roberts were fairly clear about what the limits of the opinion was in their
views. Justice Bartlett found that the court left open the methodology of how to
view historical context.
The dissenting opinion was based upon they felt that the majority didn't wait for
an evidentiary hearing and that there were other societal considerations to balance
the right to bear arms, in the same manner that other constitutional rights are
considered. So, basically where that opinion left you folks, and I agree that it's a
difficult position because of the way that the Supreme Court's opinion is written,
but without any legislation, then people who are issued licenses to carry can carry
them any place. So what you're starting with is whether—you're starting with
every place and going backwards from there. And so, if you're going to impose a
limitation, it needs to be paired with a historical context, and that was the reason
for the work that Sylvia did. She went back and she looked at those historical
contexts. That doesn't mean that the Council has to adopt those historical
contexts. This jurisdiction is free to place different—is free to say that we don't
want that. We want a broader right to carry than we would otherwise have if we
wanted to rely on all the historical contexts.
So I thought it was important to have that context and worry less about what you
think the Supreme Court might do down the line because that's a long way off,
but to consider more about what is it that this body wants to see happen in this
jurisdiction. And when there are limitations that this body has consensus on, you
have to ask whether or not there is a historical context for it. So I just thought it
might be helpful to provide that context to help you in your discussions.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Judge Strance, for that. Anyone else before I go back
to—on the amendment? Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I just want to mahalo Mr. Chung for
listening to what was being said by the Council. Ms. Strance, thank you for that
overview and providing some background on why and what's in front of us. I'll
be supporting the amendments that Mr. Chung has brought forward. Thank you.
Page 50
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. Anyone else?
Ms. Kierkiewicz, go ahead.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Just quick thoughts. Thank you, Chair. Because of the
slender guidance that was provided by the Supreme Court, we're now really being
forced to be the gun zoning authority in our County. Just a tough position to be in
as policymakers. Council Member Chung, I will be supporting these
amendments. They do resolve the issues that I had raised in previous hearings as
well as the concerns that were brought up by the members of the community.
And I appreciate this being a stopgap measure until our State Legislature can take
it up next session. And I think it just strikes the right balance between wanting to
protect our community, hence identifying these sensitive sights, but then also
ensuring that folks have the right to carry and defend themselves. So I'll be
supporting the amendment. Thank you.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kierkiewicz. Ms. Lee Loy, go ahead.
MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Mr. Chung, for advancing this. I think what I'm
very appreciative of—and, Deputy Wan, thank you so much because I've been
able to have these definitions in historical context for a while now and why I will
be supporting this amendment. But, also, now that we've had the opportunity to
kind of set Bill 220, Draft 2, and evaluate it and now synergize the historic
definitions and put it all in context, it's really beginning to set nicely, I think.
And one of the main reasons I will continue to support this from a County
perspective is the supremacy clause that we have in our ordinance, because it
forces the State to take this up during this next legislative session. Thank you,
Mr. Chung, for advancing this. I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. Anyone else? Mr. Inaba.
MR. INABA: Quick question.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Go ahead.
MR. INABA: Mr. Chung, when you put in the words "that are designed for
children's care or enjoyment,"I think that's the only place I'm a little bit
confused here in this amendment. Because, for example, when we do, let's say,
playgrounds within this same number for Old Airport, would that not be allowed
on the soccer field per se?
MR. CHUNG: May I?
CHR. DAVID: Yes, go ahead, Mr. Chung.
MR. CHUNG: Holeka, as I stated earlier, this really is somewhat open-ended.
But it was my hope that we could just refine a little better from what we had
Page 51
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
before. I've got to be honest; it does leave a lot for discretion. But I just think we
should do whatever we can to protect children. That's my thoughts. Hopefully, it
never becomes an issue.
MR. INABA: Thank you, Mr. Chung. Thank you, Chair. I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Inaba. Anyone else? Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Sorry, I'm looking over the two
amendments. I won't be supporting 1022.93 but I would support 1022.94. Thank
you.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. Anyone else? Okay,
seeing none, thank you, Judge Strance, for your input on this. Mr. Clerk, roll call
please?
MR. CHUNG: Wait. Hold on.
CHR. DAVID: Oh, wait. Hang on.
MR. CHUNG: I mean, it's kind of interesting because I really want to get most of
the members voting in favor of this. I don't know if taking out that clause "that
are designed for children's care or enjoyment" is going to be a dealbreaker. I
mean, I really would like to hear from everyone. But if it is going to be a
dealbreaker or if people, at least more than a bare majority, are in support of it, I'd
certainly take up 1022.94 on this. But I want to hear more from everybody. If
that's a sticking point for Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, maybe if everybody else can
weigh in. I'm all ears.
CHR. DAVID: Before we move on, okay. Thank you, Mr. Chung.
Mr. Richards, go ahead.
Point of MR. RICHARDS: This is a little bit of a point of clarification, and I appreciate
Clarification: the latitude that you've granted Mr. Chung on this as far as talking story. We
actually don't have an official amendment before us to vote on as of yet, as I
understand. Correct? Because, none of these have been read in.
CHR. DAVID: Only this one.
MR. CHUNG: 1022.93.
MR. RICHARDS: Okay, 1022.93. Okay. This was part of the concern, and I
have to agree with what Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder just said. I get the concern but
that is very open-ended. And I am mindful of the daycare unless it's specifically
Page 52
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
allowed. I get it and I do support that. But it's kind of like any place that kids
gather. Well, where is that? And that's what you're trying to get away from
here, and I fully appreciate you trying to establish that.
And then I come back to listen to Ms. Harrington's conversation and what she's
articulating. So I can definitely support 1022.94. I have reservations about
1022.93. I'd like to hear more. I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Richards. Anyone else? Ms. Kimball.
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Chair. I think it's probably reasonable at this time
to ask Deputy Corp. Counsel Wan if she'd like to expand on some of the other
language. It was included in that memo that was sent out to us around areas
where children gather and that particular language. Can you expound on that a
little bit?
MS. WAN: Deputy Corporation Counsel Sylvia Wan. I will just note, as far as
daycare centers go and places where children reside, there's a total of 14 different
states that outright prohibit firearms within those areas. There is one state that
does a prohibition but will allow a firearm with permission of the authority of the
daycare center.
As far as parks considered a sensitive place and places where children gather,
there was a Federal case where it says—one second. Here it is; I was looking at
the wrong page. It states that"No court has held that the Second Amendment
encompasses the right to bear arms within State parks." There was a case in
Washington that was specifically upheld, a municipality designating city parks
where children and youth are likely to be present, as sensitive places and
upholding the firearms prohibitions in those locations because it was tied to the
fact that children were going to be present in those areas.
So there is a direct link that has been recognized historically as well as in modern
statutes that places where children are are specifically sensitive, especially in
regards to firearms.
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Deputy. I understand the concern of my colleagues
about the vagueness of the initial language, but I think the precedence, if you will,
is there in terms of using that particular terminology.
I don't think I need to repeat myself about my concern about the earlier statement
with this. But this particular amendment is not the part that's the part around
the places where children gather, that particular wording is not the thing that gives
me pause with this. It's actually number(a)(1). So I'll leave that at that. Thank
you.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder.
Page 53
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Not to belabor the point, but I
like the clarity involved in 1022.94. In 1022.93, we're still in a little bit of a gray
area. That's my only reason.
CHR. DAVID: All right. Thank you very much. Mr. Chung.
MR. CHUNG: First of all, I really want to make it clear that I respect
Ms. Kimball and where she's coming from. Because, from the very beginning of
this exercise, she made it clear that she would have voted in favor of that, which
was first advance, right. And then, so, she's not—don't get me wrong on that. I
absolutely respect your opinion. But what I'm going to do right now isI'm just
kind of hearing from people I'm going to withdraw this motion relating to
Communication 1022.93, and I'm going to make another motion to amend
Bill 220, Draft 2, with the contents of Communication 1022.94. It's a little bit
more clearer, I think.
Withdraw Motion Mr. Chung withdrew his motion to amend Bill 220, Draft 2,
to Amend: with the contents of Comm. 1022.93.
Motion to Amend: Mr. Chung moved to amend Bill 220, Draft 2, with the
contents of Comm. 1022.94. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Mr. Chung.
MR. CHUNG: Very briefly because we had extended discussion on this anyway.
But this is the item that caused both me and the Legislative Research Branch,
LRB, the most consternation. And when we thought out loudreally, when you
think about it, we're not like Oahu or other metropolitan areas where you have
those exploratoriums or anything like that. So what do we have, really, yeah, that
would fit that? There might be some: Mokupapapa or something. But I can live
with this, what we have in this 1022.94. That's all I've got to say. Thanks.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Chung. Anyone else? Ms. Lee Loy, go ahead.
MS. LEE LOY: Like I mentioned earlier, in support of, I think this tailors it real
nicely. I do want to alert my colleagues that I do have an appointment at 12:45
and will be asking for a break or a recess soon. If not, you guys can carry on
without me. I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. I think we will after this—I'll ask our
members if we should take a break. I think we should. Anyone else?
Ms. Kimball, go ahead.
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Chair. I'm not trying to belabor a point here, but
again, I can't support this amendment because of(a)(1). Additionally, I do think
(a)(3)now; there's a lot of areas that are going to have lots of kids that are now
Page 54
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
excluded from the list of sensitive places. So my preference would be, if there is
still more clarity around(a)(3)that is necessary to pursue other wording besides
"other places where children gather"because I think, while we don't have an
exploratorium, there are GameStop, or not GameStop, but the place over there by
the mall where all the kids go to play. What was the new place you told me about
in town yesterday?
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Slow Your Roll.
MS. KIMBALL: Slow Your Roll is another place where these are private
places where kids are gathering. Again, the hospitals, medical facilities; folks
don't always have a choice whether or not they're going to be there. So we are
balancing personal liberties, and I continue to be opposed to that amendment.
Thank you, Chair, I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Anyone else? All right, seeing none,
Mr. Clerk, can you take the vote on the proposed amendment?
Vote on Motion The motion to amend Bill 220, Draft 2, with the contents of
to Amend: Comm. 1022.94 was carried by the following roll call vote:
(Approved)
Ayes: Council Members Chung, Inaba,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz,
Lee Loy, Richards, and Chair David—7.
Noes: Council Members Kimball and Villegas —2.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
(Note: Mr. Inaba voted "kanalua"then "aye.")
MR. HENRICKS: The motion carries.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Okay, on that note, Council Members, I
think we need to take a short break for lunch. Half hour or an hour? Half hour.
Okay, we'll be back at 11:15. We're in recess.
MR. HENRICKS: That will be 1:15.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you. 1:15.
MR. HENRICKS: That's okay. Even with that junk clock, I can tell you that.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you. We're in recess.
Recess: At 12:44 p.m., the Chair called for a recess.
Page 55
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Reconvene: The meeting reconvened at 1:18 p.m.
CHR. DAVID: I guess we can continue where we left off on Bill 220, Draft 2.
We are now on Ms. Kimball. You're done, Mr. Chung, right? Okay, for now.
Alrighty. Ms. Kimball, go ahead.
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Chair. I'm going to introduce a series of
amendments here. And as I stated earlier, the intention behind doing this is that
the initial amendments that we've looked at for this amended many clauses at the
same time, and did not provide the opportunity to deliberate individually around
each rewording of individual clauses. While appreciate the intent, the intent must
probably be more efficient. As I mentioned before, the gravity of this bill and
what it could mean just in terms of the law here, as well as the signal we're
sending to the State, I think it's important to have that same level of evaluation of
each clause. So I hope that the rest of you are willing to go through this exercise
because of the import of this particular legislation.
Just referring previously, I'm glad we had the opportunity to hear from
Judge Strance as well as Deputy Wan about their interpretations of the Supreme
Court ruling. Again, this really had to do with the fact that our process for issuing
permits was not objective. I would like to spend a little more time before I get
into the amendments,just talking about some of the narrative that we've heard.
There's this perception that permitting concealed carry in more places means
greater protection, and there's really just no evidence to that.
There was a study done by the British Medical Journal of laws in the
United States, which found that there was a statistically significant increase in the
number of gun-related violence events directly correlated to the laxness of the
laws in a given state. So that's pretty well established. Some of the other
comments that were made about evildoers and being able to stand up against I
mean, we're not in a movie, folks. This is not a Wild West film. This is not a
sci-fi film where you get them with one shot.
I mean, what is happening here is that very few examples of where there was
somebody with a concealed carry weapon being able to disarm or prevent
somebody else from committing crimes. It's not a true narrative. It's not
something that actually exists in real life. Similarly, we have some of the strictest
gun laws in the country, and as a result, we have some of the fewest gun-related
incidents.
Deputy Wan was actually previously working in the Prosecutor's office. We have
Major Mahuna. Just one of the things that I want to talk about before we get to
the amendments is just their experience with gun-related crime in our County, and
the likelihood that the stranger-on-stranger violence, based on past history, is even
Page 56
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
going to happen because it's very rare. And so these pictures that were being
painted that we need this concealed carry for everyone everywhere to protect
safety is not representative of the reality in our County.
So, Major Mahuna, can I ask you maybe to introduce or to just discuss kind of the
rarity of stranger gun-related violence in our County?
(Note: At this time, Major Reed Mahuna, Police Department, came
forward to address the members of the Council.)
MR. MAHUNA: I don't have statistics in front of me; I'm not prepared to answer
that question. But I would say that one thing that I was made aware of is recently
we had a stranger-on-stranger abduction in South Kohala. I was informed that
that is an extremely rare occurrence; less than ten in the nation occur in a year's
time.
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you. Deputy, would you like to add anything to the
conversation about this particular aspect, about the rarity of these events that were
being presented as a justification for needing to have broadly accessible concealed
carry?
MS. WAN: Deputy Corporation Counsel Sylvia Wan. It appears, Council
Member Kimball, that you're speaking about my past history as a Deputy
Prosecuting Attorney; and so the information that I can only provide to this
Council would be anecdotal at best. Anecdotally, in the ten years that I had been
a Deputy Prosecuting Attorney, the vast majority of violent gun crimes were
between individuals that knew each other, and there was usually some standing
motivation between those crimes happening.
So, again, I don't have statistics. That's just based off of my personal handling of
cases. So I agree with Major Mahuna, the idea that a gun-related violence would
be against somebody that was not known, in, like, the mass shooter incidents that
have been brought up repeatedly, would be extremely rare. My only knowledge
of a mass shooting event in the State of Hawaii was the 1999 Xerox shooting.
That is the only one that I'm aware of, and that's somethingobviously, I can't
speak to the rest of the State but only to my personal experience.
MS. KIMBALL: Could you maybe describe what happened in that particular
case?
MS. WAN: Well, I mean, anybody can look up that particular case. But my
understanding from the Xerox mass shooting, which happened in 1999 in
Honolulu, it was from a disgruntled employee who ended up shooting at eight,
and seven died, with a nine millimeter(9mm) gun that was rightfully registered to
him. So, at that time, he did not have a concealed carry license; but if we were to
Page 57
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
look at where our laws are going to today, he would have otherwise had a
concealed carry license, or, rather, he could have qualified if he had applied. But
that being that, that is the only incident I'm aware of.
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you. One of the conversations we had was about gun
violence in public places. You mentioned at the time, and I won't make you
repeat this, that your recollection was the public places where this occurred was
either on the side of the road or in parking lots. And there were only two
examples. Or did you want to expand on that? I don't want to misquote you.
MS. WAN: Well, again, that was anecdotal in nature. That was just off of my
own personal recollection, and those incidents were also quoted in the news. It is
a very rare occurrence. In those particular cases that I had been referring to, they
actually involved individuals that were being lawfully arrested by police officers
and a shootout basically incurred, which was in a public parking lot and was one
case. Another case was on the side of the road.
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you again. And the reason I wanted to spend a little time
on this, folks, is that we are being presented with a narrative not from other
Council Members, but from certain interested parties that we are in this violent
place where we need to protect ourselves by having concealed carry. That just
isn't brought out by the evidence.
So again, I want to be very careful with this piece of legislation, making sure that
we're as thorough as possible. I'd like to go ahead, and if I mayChair, I see
Council Member Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder has his light on. So, maybe before I
introduce the amendment, I will yield and let him respond or discuss.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Go ahead, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Just a very brief statement. I was talking to
Dwight Vicente, and there was actually a shooting; it's called the Hilo Massacre.
It happened on August 1st, 1938. There were 200 unarmed protestors partaking in
a strike and they were fired upon. That was actually one of the few large-scale
shootings that we had in this State. Pre-statehood, but nonetheless, it's still a
mass shooting. It just came up in our conversation. So I wanted to just put that
on the record, that we have had shootings and this is one of them. Thank you.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. Go ahead with your
amendments, Ms. Kimball.
Motion to Amend: Ms. Kimball moved to amend Bill 220, Draft 2, with the
contents of Comm. 1022.95. Seconded by Ms. Villegas.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Ms. Kimball.
Page 58
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
MS. KIMBALL: So, simple amendment here: taking out the clause that allows
for institution to grant permission to firearms on schools, colleges, universities,
places where people are assembled for educational purposes. Again, schools was
actually one of the ones that was clearly identified in the case as a sensitive place.
I will again mention that Deputy Wan does have information regarding the
historical foundation and contemporary foundation for this. So, if there are
questions about that, she's available.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Anyone else? Mr. Richards, go ahead.
MR. RICHARDS: Probably this is a little bit of direction from you, Chair. How
are we going to be entertaining all these amendments? Is it going to be one by
one, or we're going to take—or we're going to go, like Mr. Chung said,
conceptionally and then go through one by one? How are we doing this?
CHR. DAVID: No, I believe the intention is, and correct me if I'm wrong,
Ms. Kimball, that she wanted to take her amendments one by one so that we, as a
body, can vote each one on its own—how we feel about each one of them. We've
already voted on Mr. Chung's proposed amendment. Some of these will be the
same thing that we voted on already. So I think it's up to us. If we've already
voted on something that's being covered again in another amendment, we can just
do what we want to do as far as either vote for it or not. But we have to take this
separately, and I'm hoping that we can go through these as quickly as possible.
So, right now, the only one we're talking about is 1022.95, which is taking out
what Mr. Chung put back in on 1022.94.
MR. RICHARDS: Okay. So I guess this is speaking to the amendment and the
intent of the amendment. I'm listening very closely, Ms. Kimball, and
justification or non justification for the reason to carry is actually not what we're
discussing here, because that's already been approved. What we're going to do is
put some, I'll use the term "guardrails," around it.
I also am very mindful of being sensitive to what the public has stated concerning
people should have the ability to make that determination. And so, though I am in
agreement with some structure around this "sensitive areas," if a private
institution wants to allow, I think that is their personal business.
And I hear what you're saying about schools. I stated this before, when I was in
Minneapolis, that must be allowed to carry because there were establishments that
prohibited the carrying of firearms, and they posted that. And I thought that was a
reasonable way to approach that. So I hear what you're trying to say here, but my
concern is we start using nibbles at the cookie to justify the next one, the next one,
the next one. And that is a very common legislative technique that I don't
particularly care for. So, though I'm in agreement with you with sensitive areas,
Page 59
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
if an institution wants to allow it, I think they are entitled to allow it. And so, for
that reason, I support the sensitive areas, but not with that thing. So I'm not going
to support this amendment. Thank you, Chair, I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Richards. Anyone else? Seeing none, Mr. Clerk,
on the proposed amendment—
Vote
mendmentVote on Motion The motion to amend Bill 220, Draft 2, with the contents of
to Amend: Comm. 1022.95 failed by the following roll call vote:
Failed
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kimball,
and Villegas –3.
Noes: Council Members Chung, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Richards, and Chair David–5.
Absent: Council Member Lee Loy – 1.
Excused: None.
MR. HENRICKS: The motion fails.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Ms. Kimball, next amendment, please.
Motion to Amend: Ms. Kimball moved to amend Bill 220, Draft 2, with the
contents of Comm. 1022.96. Seconded by Ms. Villegas.
MR. HENRICKS: Madam Chair, procedurally, this is ground that was covered
by the approved 1022.94. I don't think it will work if we look at it. I think it's
become decided upon, at least at this session.
CHR. DAVID: I see. I think that's what you were trying to explain before we
started; that if we took action on something that comes up later, I don't think we
should be revisiting that particular amendment if it's identical.
MR. HENRICKS: Well, there's procedural issues as far as kind of going back
and doing something that you've already approved if it contrasts completely
with but there's also just the aspect that we have to know what Draft 2 is going
to look like. And if it's not clear what words—so there's things that overlap here
that I think that we can all agree,just because, like, if these are all independent,
then it doesn't affect things that it wasn't intended to. But when you look at
1022.94, it makes changes to Item 1, Item 3, and Item 6. And then 1022.96
makes changes to Item 3 that don't work with what's already been approved in
1022.94.
MS. KIMBALL: Chair, if I may?
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kimball, go ahead. Thank you, Clerk.
Page 60
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
MS. KIMBALL: While I agree, actually some of these do contradict and I will
not be introducing those amendments, I would suggest that this one actually does
not because it's not amending the same clause within stated Item 3. So the
previous amendment really amended the portion prior to the comma in Clause 3
but left the remainder of Clause 3 intact. Well, this actually speaks to the second
half of the clause.
MR. HENRICKS: (Communication) 1022.96 actually would reinsert"and/or
other places where children gather," even though it's not underscored. And the
purpose of 1022.94 was to remove that and include "and parks"to make parks the
final place.
MS. KIMBALL: I would disagree, Mr. Clerk, in all due respect because the
communication indicates that the amendment is proposed in ramseyered format
with respect tothe contents of Draft 2. It does not speak to the contents of
Draft 2, as amended. So it is not incorrect to have the unamended language in the
communication.
MR. HENRICKS: I remain concerned that everybody will understand exactly
what is being proposed in this format.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Clerk, and thank you, Ms. Kimball. We can
proceed with the vote if no one else has any discussion on this proposed
amendment. Go ahead, Mr. Clerk.
MR. RICHARDS: Chair?
CHR. DAVID: Oh, I'm sorry. Mr. Richards.
MR. RICHARDS: So I understand the Clerk's concern because we have an
amended deal. And so this would be reinserting that information back. I hear
what Ms. Kimball is saying. So we don't—we could strike that in your
amendment 1022.96? We can strike that; is that correct?
MS. KIMBALL: Chair, may I have some latitude to respond?
CHR. DAVID: Okay, go ahead.
MS. KIMBALL: Yes. Because the communication clearly states that the
amendment is presented as a ramseyered version of Draft 2, unamended, we have
already amended Draft 2 in a different part of it. So this is not reinstating. If that
were the case, if I were reinstating a component to it, it would be underlined and it
would state "Draft 2, as amended."
MR. RICHARDS: Okay. So what you're saying is that's already been stricken.
So that's not part of the consideration.
Page 61
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
MS. KIMBALL: It's not part of the consideration because what was presented to
you as a communication is the ramseyered version Draft 2 prior to its amendment
earlier today.
MR. RICHARDS: Okay. I get it but I understand what the Clerk is saying,
because I don't think the public is going to understand that. So thank you, Chair.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Richards. Mr. Clerk
MR. HENRICKS: That's fine. Okay.
CHR. DAVID: Roll call,please.
MR. INABA: Chair,just real quick.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Mr. Inaba.
MR. INABA: Ms. Kimball, I just want to say I'm not opposed to the idea, but I
have to agree with the Clerk, that it is a littleI hear what you're saying, that
we're doing it based on Draft 2, but there's some confusion, even though I can
work through it. So I don't think I can support this right now,just to keep things
clean. Thank you.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Inaba. Ms. Kimball.
MS. KIMBALL: Chair, if I may? In the interest of providing clarity, I will
withdraw this motion at this time.
Withdraw Motion Ms. Kimball withdrew her motion to amend Bill 220,
to Amend: Draft 2, with the contents of Comm. 1022.96.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kimball.
MR. HENRICKS: Before we move further, I agree with Ms. Kimball's point
about it clearly stating that it applies to Draft 2. So I don't think, from a technical
standpoint, we would have any issues. It's just kind of filtering through it, but her
point is taken well.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Thank you, Clerk Henricks. Okay,
Ms. Kimball.
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you. I will skip Communication 1022.97, as I think that
is genuinely an issue because we have amended that portion. I'd like to go
forward and propose amendment to Bill 220 with the contents of 1022.98.
Page 62
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Motion to Amend: Ms. Kimball moved to amend Bill 220, Draft 2, with the
contents of Comm. 1022.98. Seconded by Ms. Villegas.
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Chair. So the original version of this bill was
actually more similar to this where it was required to be conspicuously posted
when firearms were permitted; not the opposite, which is you have to
conspicuously post that it is not permitted.
I did actually want to ask Deputy Corp. Counsel to explain the basis of a more
affirmative that we are permitting guns on this premisesnotification, as
opposed to "guns are not permitted." Are you prepared to respond to that one?
MS. WAN: Deputy Corporation Counsel Sylvia Wan. Yes. So this particular
measure is going to be a choice by this body. I will note that all of the states,
absent, of course, the fact that we do not have legislation in Hawaii, but the
remaining of the states do recognize the rights of private property in that it is a
fundamental right. That fundamental right, it has also been noted in a previous
Federal case out of the I Ph Circuit, which discusses how this fundamental right
abuts the Second Amendment right to bear arms, which means that it does not
supersede, how do I say this, the buck would stop there.
The Second Amendment does not expand or extend or enlarge the individual right
to bear arms at the expense of other rights. That is a direct quote from
GeorgiaCarry.org, Inc. v. Georgia. In that particular case, it speaks about an
individual's right to bear arms as enshrined in the Second Amendment where it's
full-scoped, and entirety is limited by equally fundamental right of private
property owner to exercise exclusive dominion and control over its land.
Basically, a property owner has the right and authority to decide whether or not
they want to have firearms on their property.
Originally, in the bill, it was proposed that there be a positive influence in that
private property to the public, unless it is conspicuously posted where the firearms
are allowed. Because up until this point, the vast majority of our private property
enjoyed not having firearms within their establishments.
And so to keep with what people in our community have felt as the norm, that's
why it was written in that fashion. There are other states that have written it in
reverse. There is a total of—it looks like seven other states, if you include the
District of Columbia, that provide the inverse, which is private property. It is
allowed on private property unless there is a sign saying it is prohibited.
There are other instances where private property owners can provide written
notice saying that it is allowed. But, in every single state, they do honor the
private property owner's right to decide whether or not there's going to be
firearms.
Page 63
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
So it is going to be a decision for this body to determine in which fashion they
want it to be exhibited within this bill. I will note that New York specifically is a
"sign to permit" state.
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Deputy. And so, of all of the amendments, I think
this one I feel strongly about from the perspective of just what has been the social
norm in Hawaii, which is that concealed carries have not been permitted and that
the likelihood that by having this in the Draft 2 format means that, by and large,
more folks are going to have to put signage up saying it's not approved, although
there has been, in the past, this expectation that it's not approved. So, at least as
we roll this out, maybe the initial stance just because of the historical position
should be an affirmative that it is permitted, as opposed to not permitted. Thank
you, Chair, I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Mr. Chung.
MR. CHUNG: If you recall the discussion we had, actually this is what was
proposed originally by the Police Department in consultation with Deputy
Corporation Counsel, then we kind of flipped it on its head. But the more I think
about it, I don't have strong feelings one way or the other. I'm actually amenable
to voting in favor of this. I don't know how other guys feel, but I'm okay with it.
I just don't know how we're going to do it within the context of the other thing
that we passed. Mr. Clerk, I mean, do we have awe can go ahead with this?
MR. HENRICKS: Yeah, this one fits nicely. And going backwards, 1022.96 did
too, actually, for the most part; 1022.97, not so much.
MR. CHUNG: But I certainly want to hear what everybody else has to say, but
I'm okay with it, though.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Chung. Mr. Richards.
MR. RICHARDS: Yeah, absolutely not. This flies in the face of agriculture and
that's a problem. We went through this whole conversation about under the
findings—and again, I'm no legal expert—but with the ruling, it's the expectation
that someone can carry. With all due respect, Ms. Kimball, I hear what you're
saying. However, this is very vague because where it talks about private property
open to the public; so, basically everywhere, unless you post it.
Then we get to agriculture and that means you have to post signs on agriculture.
How many? How often? Where? And then a cowboy who's a law-abiding
citizen suddenly becomes a lawbreaker because they are carrying a firearm to take
care of an animal problem that they have to deal with. And that's not what this is
supposed to be about.
Page 64
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
It is reasonable to expect people in agriculture to have the use of their firearms to
do their job, to get things done. And the way this is written now, suddenly they
have to post signs to say that they can carry a firearm on their own property.
That's not right.
And you say, "Well, it's not open to the public." We discussed this before: If
they are allowing hunting, it is open to the public. If they are transiting the
property to get to hunting grounds, it is open to the public. If you ever invite and
have a parry on your land or farm or ranch, whatever, you have been open to the
public. So this is so vague; what it's going to do is it's going to take a whole
segment, a whole demographic, and make them nonlaw-abiding when they were
law-abiding. So I cannot support this at all.
I liked what we had crafted through with the conversations to get it where we
were expected to carry unless prohibited. This is a 180-degreeI understand
what you're trying to accomplish here, but the problem is this takes us back to
weeks ago and many hours ago, and that's not a reasonable expectation. Because,
what am I supposed to do with someone who's supposed to use a firearm? But
again, how many signs? How often? Where? How many per acre? You can see
where the problem just explodes. So I cannot support this at all because it's not
I know what you're trying to accomplish, and I don't conceptionally disagree with
it, but this is one of those massive unintended consequences. It's not fair. And so
I cannot support it at all. Thank you, Chair, I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Richards. All right, I'm going to go to Council
Member Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder first and then Mr. Chung. Go ahead.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Chair. Sylvia, can you give me
an example of a private property open to the public?
MS. WAN: A grocery store. That's a private property that's open to the public.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, what else?
MS. WAN: The mall is a private property that's open to the public. Any retail
establishment that invites the public in for transactional purposes is open to the
public.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. Ms. Villegas and then
Mr. Chung.
MS. VILLEGAS: Unfortunately, I think Mr. Richards is completely off base on
what this amendment actually states. It is not requiring that signs be posted if a
place is okay to carry firearms. It says, "Sensitive places prohibition; exceptions.
Page 65
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Any person granted a license to carry a concealed or unconcealed firearm shall
not carry such licensed firearm in the following sensitive places: private property
open to the public unless it is conspicuously posted that public carry of firearms is
allowed."
It doesn't require that every farm or ranch has to have a sign where agricultural
people do carry firearms. So I think this is very specific about that, and it does
not incumber those who would need to; having a mom who's in farming and
cowboys that come on their property. So I would ask for clarity from
Ms. Kimball to confirm that such is the case, but I'm afraid that my colleagues
here on the Council would accidentally be led astray into that understanding and
that complication, which is not relevant to this piece of legislation. I yield.
MR. RICHARDS: Chair, a response?
CHR. DAVID: Are you yielding? Thank you, Ms. Villegas.
MS. VILLEGAS: I'm actually asking. If I can ask for a response, I would prefer
to have one from the bringer of the amendment for clarification.
CHR. DAVID: I'm going to go for clarification first, Mr. Richards.
MR. RICHARDS: That's fine.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Ms. Kimball.
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you. The intention of this was certainly to identify
places that are open generally to all of the public anytime, as businesses that were
mentioned: grocery stores, hair salons, and all of those places that have
unrestricted access to the public. It certainly wasn't—and I appreciate your
concern that it's not intended to cover private property that is only open to the
public on invitation, or because somebody has been asked to come over and cull
some sheep or something like that. That's not the intent.
When I was initially looking at revising this—when we created the EV(Electric
Vehicle) bill, we identified places of public accommodation. And I actually
considered changing "private property open to the public"to "places of public
accommodation"because we have those defined as stores, grocery stores, hotels,
things like that. If that would provide greater clarity, I'm not sure I can do that on
the floor right now because it might be a significant enough amendment that it
needs to be in writing, but I'm willing to do that if that swages your concerns.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Mr. Richards first and then Mr. Chung.
MR. RICHARDS: So Ms. Villegas is dead wrong. She doesn't get it. We're
talking about agriculture. And under the description here where they talk "open
Page 66
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
to the public," sometimes some of these ranch lands are mandated by the State to
be open to the public to allow hunting access. And this is a problem because,
having dealt with the trespassing laws where you have toinitially, you had to
put up a no trespassing sign, I think it was every 50 feet. Imagine that on some of
these ranches. It's ridiculous. That's not reasonable. And I can see the same
problem with this going on that interpretation, because once again, firearms are
almost ubiquitous in agriculture. A cowboy sees a firearm just like they see a
hammer; it's just a tool. And the fact that we're going to have to take extra steps
to allow them to do their job is not appropriate. It's not right.
So I get what you're trying to do, Ms. Kimball, but the problem is, once again,
this is where we pretend like we're ignoring agriculture when in fact we areI
get what you're saying about the businesses. I don't support it. I think it needs to
be the way it is now. But my big concern is for agricultural people and putting in
overreaching, burdensome regulation on the motion to have to do that. And so
I'm adamant about that. Thank you, Chair, I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Richards.
MR. INABA: Chair, here in Kona if can.
CHR. DAVID: Mr. Inaba, I'm going tooh, he didn't talk yet. Mr. Inaba, you
can go.
MR. INABA: Thank you. I know we had conversation on this already. Hearing
Mr. Richards talk about the signs and where they would need to be posted, I think
the point of what we're trying to do with this bill is to not be overreaching, but to
be cautious and to protect our community. So with that intention, I'm kind of in
line with how we do things now. I do think that this amendment is helpful, so I'll
be supporting this. Thank you, Ms. Kimball.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Inaba. Mr. Chung, go ahead.
MR. CHUNG: Thanks. Again, walking it back to how it got flipped on its head,
Mr. Richards' concern was one of them, because I'm not familiar with hunting
and stuff like that. So if he says it might have an impact, I'm going to take his
word for it. But, also, it was with the thought that the Supreme Court, in a
roundabout way, has validated this whole idea of licensed carries. So I thought it
might be better to operate under that assumption.
But, at the same time, you have private property rights. The kicker on this one is
that it's open to the public. And the first thing that came to my mind was what
you said: supermarkets, malls, right; until he threw a crimp in the whole thing,
right? But I'm just thinking, though, I think reasonable minds can kind of come
to some kind of agreement on this. Maybe we can carve out something for
agricultural lands or something.
Page 67
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
I mean, I know you still might be stuck on where the burden lies, right. Either
way, it's going to be bad for a business to say it's allowed or not allowed. I don't
know what's worse, right. They're going to be caught in a tough situation, really.
But I did say I'd support it, and I still feel like it's okay. But maybe until
something is worked out with the agricultural lands, I'll just stick this to how it is.
But I'm very much open to some kind of discussion on this matter as long as you
guys can come up with some kind of agreement.
CHR. DAVID: Okay, thank you, Mr. Chung. Ms. Kierkiewicz, you haven't
spoken yet.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chair. Thank you for the amendment. I'm not
going to be supporting it. I'm more comfortable with the current language that's
in Draft 2. I think we're going to be putting businesses in a really tough situation
to determine if they want to visualize signage that explicitly says they want to
welcome concealed carry. So I'm of the mindset if this is something that they
don't want, similar to how businesses have signs posted that say, "No Shirt, No
Shoes, No Service,"posting a sign that says, "No Concealed Carry." So I will not
be supporting this amendment. Thank you.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kierkiewicz. Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, and I'll
go back to you.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Chair. One year ago, on my
birthday, I decided I was going to go jump in the ocean. I went to
Richardson Beach Park, walked down to the shore. I jumped in the water, and
there was nobody else in the water. And I thought, "Wow, what a great day." It
was a little bit overcast and nobody else in the water. I'm in the water and I'm
looking at the shore, and there's a lifeguard on the beach explaining to somebody
something. I can't hear him. I'm watching him and I see his hand go like this.
I realized that I walked by two signs that said, "Shark sighting. Do not get in the
water." And I walked right by them; took off my shirt, threw my stuff on the
ground and jumped in the water and went swimming anyway. I just thought I'd
mention that because it was kind of funny that I missed all those signs and jumped
in the water.
I'm of the mindset, though, as Ms. Kierkiewicz on this. I'm a business owner. If
I don't want this on my property, I'd rather put a sign that says, "I don't want it,"
than force everybody else to post a sign that says, "We allow this." I just feel that
it's more in line with the ruling that's been passed by the Supreme Court. And it
still creates this requirement for signage if you want this, if you allow this in your
business, your property that's private that's open to the public.
Page 68
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
So I'll be supporting the original Bill 220, as amended, but not this amendment.
But I do appreciate the conversation. I thought I'd offer that as a funny story
because I laughed about it. I thought it was funny. And I'm still here.
CHR. DAVID: Yes, you're still here. Thank you. Ms. Villegas, go ahead.
MS. VILLEGAS: Yeah, I suppose, in my mind, it's the opposite when it comes
to guns. I would like to assume in any business that I go to, that unless the
business owner puts a sign up that says, "Concealed carry is okay,"that I'm not
going to be exposed to other people with concealed carry in the grocery store, in
Walmart. It doesn't say that you have to put up signs. Nothing in here has a legal
requirement that says you have to put up signs either way, but it does include
some responsibility for those that decide that firearms are allowed.
Ironically, I'm thinking of the smoking legislation, right, and the bars that had
smoking. By all means, there are some dive bars that could just have a sign that
says, "Hey, in our bar, we allow smoking," and that's the choice of our private
property business. But, otherwise, it's assumed by everyone else that if I go into a
restaurant, I'm not going to have to endure somebody smoking at a table next to
me or on the airplane.
So it's an empowered statement, in this switching of the terminology, by telling
our community that you will not have to be exposed to the potential of somebody
carrying a firearm, and you don't even have to consider it. And you can make a
choice if going to a bar, a restaurant, a shop, if there is a sign that says,
"Concealed carry is allowed here,"I can know when going into that place that
that's what's allowed. And unless it's posted, it wouldn't be.
And I would beg to differ that the majority of our places don't want concealed
carry, wouldn't be putting up signs or required to put up signs that said,
"Concealed carry is allowed." So, for me, there's a responsibility and a kuleana
for the statement and holding accountable those that want concealed carry, and
those that do choose to have guns as a part of their daily life when participating in
public spaces versus putting it on other people, who then small businesses put
"No guns."
There's also repercussions about that for other small businesses. To me, it's
common sense: Don't bring one unless they tell you that this is allowed here.
And if they don't put it, then you can assume it's not. So I will be supporting this
amendment, and I think it's a wise transition in our terminology and in our laws to
opt on the side of the protection of the health and safety of people that shouldn't
have to even consider this when grocery shopping. So I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Villegas. Ms. Kimball, go ahead.
Page 69
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Chair. I see Judge Strance has her hand up, so I'll
give her an opportunity to weigh in. But I actually just want to say that Council
Member Kaneali`i-KI einfelder's example is actually exactly kind of why I wanted
to shift this back to the other way, is that the likelihood that business owners,
private property owners will not be aware that this switch has happened. And,
therefore, not necessarily get the signage out that they don't want concealed carry
on their property is more probable than the reverse, at least because it's just been
such the norm in Hawaii, that we haven't had concealed carry as a common
thing.
So, again, I mentioned at the very beginning this is all about balancing individual
rights, property rights, and the Second Amendment. There is a property right and
a personal right of private property owners to determine what they want to have
on their property. So I think your example is actually relevant to the reason why I
introduced it.
I'll go to Judge Strance just to give her the opportunity to weigh in. But, after
that, I'd just like to say my hope would be that those that are willing to support
this language, support it today. And I will commit to Council Member Richards
to work on some language that either more clearly defines public space or carves
out an exemption for public agricultural access. Judge Strance, please go ahead.
MS. STRANCE: Thank you. Elizabeth Strance, Corporation Counsel. I just
wanted to refer people to the language of the bill because it applies to both
concealed or unconcealed firearms, and the discussion has been using the word
"concealed" quite a bit. But the law, as written, refers to both.
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Judge Strance. I'll yield at this point. Thank you.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Anyone else?
Point of MS. WAN: I'm sorry, can I have a point of clarification?
Clarification:
CHR. DAVID: Sure, go ahead.
MS. WAN: Deputy Corporation Counsel Sylvia Wan. I just want to clarify that
concealed and unconcealed firearm licenses are only provided for pistols or
revolvers. So, even though the statute says concealed or unconcealed firearm, the
only firearms that are allowed for licensure is a pistol or revolver, and it's
commonly known as a handgun. So I just wanted to make sure that the Council is
well aware that when we're talking about this particular legislation, we're talking
about carrying concealed or unconcealed handguns. That's all.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Wan. Anyone else? Go ahead, Ms. Villegas.
Page 70
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
MS. VILLEGAS: I'm not sure how many of you saw today's newspaper with the
article that was written about the deep concern within our Police Department by a
number of officers who—we don't have adequate training. Adequate training has
not been implemented and needs to be further explored. I don't personally feel it
is—it's not fair to our first responders that they are going to be exposed to
navigating and dealing with concealed and unconcealed carriers in our public
places without protocols or parameters or professional training in what that's
going to mean.
So any and all guardrails and guidelines and erring on the side of extreme caution.
For me, in taking into consideration the health and safety and well-being of our
first responders and their current lack of having adequate training, I think is
another reason for these amendments that have been brought forth, and that there
is wisdom in passing them. So I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Villegas. If everyone else is done, I want us
Ms. Kimball, please take us home.
MS. KIMBALL: I just want to thank Corp. Counsel for reminding us that this is
exclusively about handguns. I think that's really an important point. And then it
also just occurred to me that if it is a State-mandated access for hunting, then
that's going to supersede our law anyway. That's all, Chair, I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Ms. Wan, thank you for being here and
answering all of our questions. For me, I think either way would be, in my mind,
okay, except I have reservations about this proposed amendment. Ms. Wan, is
there, in the statute that you cited, as far as private property open to the public, do
you see any possibility of, as Ms. Kimball said, bringing forth some sort of an
exception? I mean, I'm from a ranching family myself, and hunters; and I
appreciate the fact that a lot of families, mine included, do have firearms.
And I think Mr. Richards brings up a good point, because right now, it's not only
agriculture. We have private property that host huge parties in ag-zoned lands,
like vacation rentals, and then they have some really big concerts way out in the
boonies. Those are private properties also. I mean, I think we need to be specific
because I took "private property"to mean every private property, whether it's a
store, a retail establishment. There's no definitive explanation or clarification.
So if there's some way that we could address the private property ranching and
other kinds of commercial private property ownership, which we have a lot of
here. For today, I will be supporting this amendment on the condition that we do
address this when it comes up to second reading because I think it's important.
Okay, Mr. Clerk.
MS. WAN: I'm sorry, did you want me to respond? Oh, no? Later? Okay.
Page 71
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
CHR. DAVID: No, I was just thanking you. Because, I know Ms. Kimball is
going to be talking to you about addressing the concerns about private property as
it relates to Ag and ranching and that sort of thing.
MS. WAN: Deputy Corporation Counsel Sylvia Wan. I'm more than happy to
work with any Council Member offline regarding that issue.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you. All right, Clerk Henricks, can we take a roll call
please?
Vote on Motion The motion to amend Bill 220, Draft 2, with the contents of
to Amend: Comm. 1022.98 failed by the following roll call vote:
Failed
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kimball,
Villegas, and Chair David—4.
Noes: Council Members Chung, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Lee Loy, and Richards —5.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
MR. HENRICKS: The motion fails.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Ms. Kimball.
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Chair. I just want to, before I go on,just
acknowledge that this is a cumbersome process. I know it's time consuming, and
I just hope everyone shares the sense of gravity about this bill and making sure
that we get it all right. So I appreciate your patience with this. I have three more.
Each of these is intended to bring back a clause that was in the initial bill that was
removed as part of the whole set of amendments. I'm going to start with
Comm. 1022.99.
Motion to Amend: Ms. Kimball moved to amend Bill 220, Draft 2, with the
contents of Comm. 1022.99. Seconded by Ms. Villegas.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Ms. Kimball.
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Chair. So this one actually brings back the clause
about places of assembly, social gatherings, rallies, demonstrations, public
expeditions. Again, wanted to bring it back so that Deputy Corp. Counsel Wan
could explain the reasoning and rationale behind adding this sort of clause.
Just to tell a personal story one of my staff mentioned: We run the Pride Event.
There's always some folks that come out and oppose that event. What are we
supposed to do? Throw glitter on them? I think that there are reasons to believe
that some of these gatherings are indeed sensitive places.
Page 72
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
I'm not sure that this language is perfect, and I think there can still be some
fine-tuning. But political rallies, we've seen an increase in politically-related
violence in this country; other large social gatherings that could be over a subject
or an event. We've had a couple drag-related events where there've been violent
threats made. So I just want us, again, to consider potentially including this in our
list of sensitive places. Deputy, can you speak to the rationale behind this clause,
please?
MS. WAN: Yes. Deputy Corporation Counsel Sylvia Wan. As far as this
particular clause: "places where people are assembled for an event, social
gathering, rally, demonstration, or public exhibition that requires the issuance of a
permit,"this particular clause was to be an allegory or analogous to what has been
historically present within prior State statutes. Historically, it was Arizona,
Missouri, Montana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Texas; all had the
exact same phrase where guns were prohibited into any circus, show, or public
exhibition of any kind, into a ballroom, social party, or social gathering, which is
actually rather broad and would include places even more minuscule than would
be required by a permit.
In modern statutes, 12 different states already preclude public places for social
gatherings; most commonly cited are strikes and rallies. But, in addition, there
are other states that have included stadiums and arenas. There's 13 states that talk
specifically about stadiums and arenas, which is a large gathering of people.
There are areas where amusement parks there's four different states that
specifically say that an assemblage of people at amusement parks are prohibited,
firearms are prohibited, and the like. So this was to try to kind of go back to the
historical, which was talking about these large assemblies of people.
There's also historically, like, for instance, in Missouri. Their historic statute
from 1879 stated that concealed weapons were not allowed into any other public
assemblage of persons met for lawful purpose, which is for any lawful purpose,
which is a rather broad definition. So this particular provision was to try to limit
that to a set number of people which would be required for the issuance of a
permit so it didn't encompass all public assembly, but at least there was that kind
of defining line.
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you very much. And then, Major, would you care to
comment at all on the Police Department's or your perception on including these
types of gatherings as sensitive places?
MR. MAHUNA: Well, the Police Department's position is we support the
original bill, which was submitted that would include this particular amendment.
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Major. And, again,part of the reasoning and
rationale from the Supreme Court decision was this necessity, with respect to the
Page 73
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Second Amendment, to provide for self-defense money of these large gathering
events. They do have security; they have off-duty police officers present, other
things like that. It makes the argument for self-defense less robust.
So, putting this forward right now, I would ask my colleagues if they're not happy
with the full content of this language, tell me what you are happy with. I am
willing to revise this one if there's any way that we can include these larger
events that have not been covered by the previous clauses. Thank you, Chair, I
yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Anyone else? Seeing none, Mr. Clerk,
please, roll call.
Vote on Motion The motion to amend Bill 220, Draft 2, with the contents of
to Amend: Comm. 1022.99 failed by the following roll call vote:
Failed
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kimball,
Villegas, and Chair David—4.
Noes: Council Members Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Lee Loy, and Richards —4.
Absent: Council Member Chung— 1.
Excused: None.
(Note: Mr. Inaba voted "kanalua"then "aye.")
MR. HENRICKS: The motion fails.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Ms. Kimball, go ahead.
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you. The next one is an addition of the public transit
facilities and any modes of transportation utilized by the public. The initial clause
in Draft 1 included airport facilities, but those are likely regulated by the Federal
Government or the State, so those have been excluded in this amendment. I'm
sorry; I should have made the motion first.
Motion to Amend: Ms. Kimball moved to amend Bill 220, Draft 2, with the
contents of Comm. 1022.100. Seconded by Ms. Villegas.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Ms. Kimball.
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you. I think this is probably the most straightforward of
all the re-editions. We're talking about our bus facilities, our buses, and whether
or not those are appropriate places.
Even if you're transporting a firearm or if you're transporting a handgun,per the
HRS (Hawai`i Revised Statutes), you are transporting it in a locked container,
Page 74
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
unloaded. So transporting it on public transit, I think, is appropriate as a place
that just a typical concealed carry wouldn't allow in terms of being in alignment
with HRS, but I'd like to again ask Deputy Corp. Counsel to explain the basis and
history of this particular portion of this clause.
MS. WAN: Deputy Corporation Counsel Sylvia Wan. As to public transit
facilities and any mode of transportation utilizing public transit, this particular
clause was to go hand in hand with the Federal statute, which also incorporated
airports, because there is a Federal prohibition for firearms to be concealed or
unconcealed carry within the secured areas, I should say, of the airport.
There are an additional six other states that recognize public transport facilities
and modes of transportation as sensitive places. Along the lines of the
justifications is the close packed proximity of individuals, the fact that they are
otherwise generally supposed to be seated or in a stationary position. And they
don't want anybody necessarily to even move around and physically fight, let
alone fire a firearm. So those were along the justifications for including public
transit facilities and modes of transportation by public transit as a sensitive place.
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Deputy. With that, Chair, I'll yield to discussion.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Anyone else on this? Mr. Richards, go
ahead.
Point of MR. RICHARDS: Just a point of clarification. If I understand correctly, on a
Clarification: bus, if you are taking a long gun or a handgun in a locked container, you're okay.
MS. WAN: That is currently my understanding of the state of law.
MR. RICHARDS: Okay, all right. Thank you, I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Richards. Anyone else? Seeing none, Mr. Clerk.
Vote on Motion The motion to amend Bill 220, Draft 2, with the contents of
to Amend: Comm. 1022.100 was carried by the following roll call vote:
(Approved)
Ayes: Council Members Chung, Inaba, Kimball,
Villegas, and Chair David—5.
Noes: Council Members Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Lee Loy, and Richards —4.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
(Note: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder voted "kanalua"then "no.")
MR. HENRICKS: The motion carries.
Page 75
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Ms. Kimball, go ahead.
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Chair. This is the last one, folks. Again, appreciate
everybody's willingness to really analyze this bill.
Motion to Amend: Ms. Kimball moved to amend Bill 220, Draft 2, with the
contents of Comm. 1022.101. Seconded by Ms. Villegas.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Ms. Kimball.
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Chair. Again, not entirely convinced that the
language of this is ideal. And so I encourage my colleagues, if they are willing, to
consider reintroducing this back in with alternatives; might be used to describe
these places where there's a high probability,potential for people to put
themselves into a state where they're maybe not making the best decisions.
We know that alcohol and cars don't mix. I'm sure alcohol and guns mix even
less. I'd like to again invite Deputy Corp. Counsel Wan to explain the basis and
history of this particular clause.
MS. WAN: Deputy Corporation Counsel Sylvia Wan. As far as the historical
reference for this, there is a historical perspective on this. Previous Oklahoma
State specifically wrote in their particular statute that they prohibited guns to any
place where intoxicating liquors were sold. Period. It was very open-ended.
Since the historic statute, which was in 1893, 17 other states have recognized bars
and places where liquor has been sold to be consumed onsite to be a sensitive
place.
Some of the statutes have had limiting factors, since you're talking about limiting
factors. They've limited it. One example was 51 percent of their revenue is from
alcohol. Another was 60 percent of their revenue was from alcohol. Other
statutes were just for bars. But many of the states recognize the fact that where
there is a high consumption of alcohol, that is considered a sensitive place.
Because, irrespective of whether the individual who is licensed to carry is
carrying a firearm, that firearm is then otherwise available to other individuals in
the bar to do bad things, basically. So that is the historical as well as modern
reasonings behind why you would want to have a bar be considered a sensitive
place.
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Deputy. And again, one of the additions or
amendments, I shouldn't say amendments, but the revisions that are included in
this amendment is that it specifically states, "for consumption on its premises,"
which was not in the initial draft. Presumably, Major, the Police Department
supports the original version. Your thoughts on this clause.
MR. MAHUNA: We would support this amendment.
Page 76
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Major. With that, I'll yield to discussion, Chair.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder then
Ms. Villegas.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I have spent probably ten years in
bars/restaurants as a server, as a manager, and as a bartender. I am concerned not
about the people carrying the weapons, but I'm concerned about the employees. I
think about the staff members who have to walk out together in case anyone's
hanging out at the back end of a bar at two o'clock in the morning. I am
concerned about the ability, then, to protect themselves; more the staff of these
places.
And given this amendment, I have my concerns about this portion, although I
understand the pairing of alcohol and impaired judgement. I really do wonder if
we're protecting the folks who work at the establishments.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. Ms. Villegas, go ahead.
MS. VILLEGAS: While I understand that concern, having been somebody in the
service industry for many years and worked at bars and restaurants that closed
very late, I want to bring back the fact that there are other means for us to defend
ourselves other than guns. There are tasers. There's pepper spray. There are
knives. I have a large knife in my car at all times underneath my seat, because I
used to camp alone at Kohanaiki and have had interactions with men in the
middle of the night. And I don't think a gun would have kept me safer per se. It
may have, in fact, escalated the situation.
I have also worked large events in areas withI worked for a beer company for
years, and I have seen people get the tar kicked out of them. Thank God nobody
had a gun. It was still hand-to-hand combat. I have a propensity my husband
does not appreciate; that I tend to get in the middle of those kinds of fights. As a
woman my size, I do have some capacity to diffuse a situation. But wielding a
gun will not diffuse the situation.
More guns do not make things safer. There are instances for security in "walking
a buddy" system to cars afterwards, with all respect to Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder.
Alcohol and guns, they don't mix. Having been raised in a house that had semi-
automatic machine guns because of conspiracy theories with history of mental
health issues, I think that we—and alcoholism. I see there's wisdom, once again,
in including this. There should be no reason for a gun to be necessary in a bar or
restaurant or establishment that serves alcohol on its premises.
I hope my colleagues will take into consideration the support being offered for
this amendment by our Police Department, whose primary role is to protect and
Page 77
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
serve. And if they agree with the wisdom of this amendment, I think there is
wisdom in including this language. So I would ask for everyone's support. I
yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Villegas. Mr. Chung, go ahead.
MR. CHUNG: I mean, I agree. I don't own a gun, but I'm just guessing guns and
alcohol are not a good mix. But the reason why we took this out is because—and
it's not as strong as it would be if it were in; I've got to admit that. But it'll
probably be covered under the private business-, private property-owned open to
the public. That's one of the reasons why I decided to take it out.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Chung. Anyone else? Mr. Richards, go ahead.
MR. RICHARDS: I completely agree guns and alcohol, not a good mix. But in
part of what Mr. Chung just said and also in part that just because someone is
carrying a firearm, if they're not drinking, they're not drinking. I don't seeI
have trouble with, say,just because we serve alcohol means that we can't trust
you to follow the law. I mean, I think you're already assuming they're going to
be breaking the law.
I have a problem with this because we're assuming they're going to be breaking
the law; so thereby, we have to do a bit of an overreach in some descriptions as
far as that goes. I completely agree with it. And if someone decided to go out
and have dinner and cocktails, all that, yeah, no firearms. Completely support
that. The problem is if we are assuming that just because you walk into a
restaurant, that you're immediately going to start drinking; I don't think that that's
a fair statement. So I have trouble with this. I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Richards. Ms. Kimball, go ahead.
MS. KIMBALL: Yeah, I just wanted to offer a response to that last statement by
Council Member Richards, and just reiterate a point that the Deputy made, which
is part of the concern here is, not actually only the person that is carrying, but
other people in the facility that may have access because there's a gun physically
present in the facility.
So I get what you're saying about how it may appear that we're saying, "Okay,
we're anticipating that you could commit a crime." No, it's broader. It's just the
probability of either an individual or other individual in the same facility might
engage in something dangerous. It's higher in a situation where there is alcohol.
It's more broad than just the one individual that's bringing the weapon in.
MR. RICHARDS: Chair, a response?
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Go ahead, Mr. Richards.
Page 78
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
MR. RICHARDS: Yeah, Heather, I agree. I hear what you're saying. And to
Corporation Counsel's response: You were talking about 1879 Oklahoma, no
consumption of alcohol. Basically, that's the old"Check your guns at the door,
but we'll give them back to you on the way out." I don't think that that's the
direction where we want to go with that.
So, like I said, we're assuming someone is going to be breaking the law in this
situation, and I don't like that. I like to assume that we're going to be law-
abiding. So that's my angst with this one. I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Richards. Anyone else? Seeing none, I have one
question. Ms. Wan,private property open to the public: I know you had a list.
Does that include bars, restaurants and establishments, stores?
MS. WAN: It could. The reason why bars are unique is because of the primary
item for consumption is an intoxicating beverage. And it is the intoxicating
nature of the business that makes them special outside of regular
CHR. DAVID: Public Places.
MS. WAN: Public places that are otherwise open to the public. So that is why,
historically, as well as in other states, they have been treated differently.
CHR. DAVID: Understood. Thank you. Major Mahuna, what is your position
on this amendment on the bars addition? Do you support that?
MR. MAHUNA: Yes, the Police Department supports this.
CHR. DAVID: Okay, all right. Thank you. Mr. Clerk, please, a roll call vote.
Vote on Motion to The motion to amend Bill 220, Draft 2, with the contents of
Amend: Comm. 1022.101 was carried by the following roll call
(Approved) vote:
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kimball, Lee Loy,
Villegas, and Chair David—5.
Noes: Council Members Chung, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, and Richards —4.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
MR. HENRICKS: The motion carries.
Page 79
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Now, we are back to the main motion,
Bill 220, Draft 2, as amended with the contents of Communications 1022.94,
1022.100, and 1022.101. Discussion, Council Members? Mr. Chung, go ahead.
MR. CHUNG: Madam Chair, there's one last issue that has come up. It has to do
with Section (b)(3). Now, I've prepared a communication which takes out—and
this is just for the sake of speeding things up because I'm going to be voting
against this communication, but anybody can introduce it. I don't feel real
strongly one way or the other. But that item says that anyone who has a license
under LEOSA, Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act—basically, a retired officer
would be exempt from the preceding places. So they could carry a gun there.
There is a difference of opinion between these two bodies; see, that's the problem
here. So Corp. Counsel, I don't want to misstate you guys, but Corp. Counsel is
saying this LEOSA thing is derived from United States statute, and there are
certain prohibitions and restrictions. She can describe it a little bit more.
The Police Department wants this included because they're saying that retired
officers are sometimes targets. So they should be able to pack at all times. I'm
going to be supporting the Police Department, but really, this is something that
could go either way. So I have this communication because I didn't want to have
to wait another half-an-hour for it to be printed. So it's here. Anybody wants to
introduce it can do so.
CHR. DAVID: Not today, right?
MR. CHUNG: No, can today. I mean, it's going to be a real fast discussion. So
either yes or no.
CHR. DAVID: It's in writing. Anyone?
MR. CHUNG: But I think you should let maybe Ms. Wan
CHR. DAVID: Okay, yes. Ms. Wan, can you weigh in on this one?
MS. WAN: Yes. Deputy Corporation Counsel Sylvia Wan. So I saw the
amendment adding (b)(3) at the last hearing and, unfortunately, was added
without me being consulted. So I did not have the opportunity to inform the
department of the legal contradictions that this would create.
First and foremost, it is my legal,professional opinion that this particular
amendment conflicts directly with the LEOSA Act because, within the LEOSA
Act, which is 18 U.S.C. (United States Code) 926, it says that this section shall
not be construed to supersede or limit the laws of any state that permit private
Page 80
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
persons or entities to prohibit or restrict the possession of concealed firearms on
their property or prohibit or restrict the possession of firearms on any state or
local government property, installation, base, or park.
Our State of Hawaii Department of Attorney General has provided guidelines for
LEOSA licensees. And just for a little bit of background for the Council, LEOSA
allows retired law enforcement officers to apply for a concealed firearms license.
And they have already been able to do this within our State because of the statute,
irrespective of 134-9, which is our concealed license- and unconcealed license-to-
carry statute.
So these officers have already been allowed to conceal carry within our State
because of this statute. Within the State of Hawaii Department of Attorney
General's guidelines, they said specifically to LEOSA licensees: "You do not
possess a concealed firearm in any area,public or private, in the State of Hawaii
where carrying of firearms is prohibited." So, from the State's perspective, if
there is a State statute or other prohibition within the State, they have to abide by
that, according to the Federal law. So what this does is basically directly
contradicts the Federal statute by making them exempt from our sensitive places
prohibitions.
I did do some other research to see if there were any other states that provided
such an exemption. Out of the 50 states, there is only one. So this particular ask
is a tall one, especially because, from my reading of the Federal statute, it
basically tells LEOSA licensees that they have to follow the same rules as
civilians. And the State of Hawaii Department of Attorney General's guidelines
also states that they are not considered law enforcement officers even though they
have this license, that they are to be considered the same as civilians. So that is
my input for this.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Okay. Mr. Chung, continue.
MR. CHUNG: Oh, no, I'm
CHR. DAVID: Oh, you're done. Anyone else? Ms. Kimball, go ahead.
Motion to Amend: Ms. Kimball moved to amend Bill 220, Draft 2, with the
contents of Comm. 1022.102. Seconded by Ms. Villegas.
CHR. DAVID: Ms. Kimball.
MS. KIMBALL: I just want to be expressly clear: You're saying by having
No. 3 in as an exemption, we are contradicting the HRS.
MS. WAN: We are contradicting Federal law as well as our State's Deputy
Attorney General's interpretation of that Federal law.
Page 81
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
MS. KIMBALL: Given that, Chair, I'll be supporting this amendment. Thank
you.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Anyone else? Mr. Richards.
MR. RICHARDS: We're legislating on the fly here, so I have to catch up
reading. I think I understand. So the amendment is essentially dropping the
LEOSA accommodation and, thereby, being consistent with Federal law. Is that
what I heard you say?
MS. WAN: Yes. So, right now, as it stands, within the bill that's been adopted so
far, it would provide an exemption from the sensitive places that would otherwise
contradict what the Federal statute states, which the Federal statute says that they
have to follow the regulations of the state in which they're in.
MR. RICHARDS: Of the local jurisdiction.
MS. WAN: Of the local jurisdiction, yes.
Point of MR. RICHARDS: Okay. All right. And then,just as a point of clarification,
Clarification: Major, if a police officer is off duty, are they carrying their firearm?
MR. MAHUNA: Yes. I mean, they're not required to, but they certainly have
that—
MR.
hatMR. RICHARDS: But they may. If they go into a restaurant and they're off
duty, they shouldn't be carrying a firearm?
MR. MAHUNA: They can still carry a firearm, but we have rules and regulations
that require that they not consume alcohol. So a police officer who's off duty can
carry a firearm in a restaurant or bar, yes; but they cannot consume alcohol.
MR. RICHARDS: Okay, which makes sense. All right, thank you, I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Richards. Ms. Lee Loy, go ahead.
MS. LEE LOY: Thank you. Major Mahuna, I heard Deputy Wan. I just wanted
to hear—and sorry if I stepped out of the room the Police Department's position
on this particular amendment.
MR. MAHUNA: Well, this is a difficult position for the Police Department to be
in. Certainly we're not attorneys. Okay. But what we can say is we can say that
the purpose of the Law Enforcement Officers Safety Act of 2004, one of its
purposes is to protect law enforcement officers who have threats that come to
them through the course of their employment. So these are specific threats that
they may have.
Page 82
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Once they're retired, if people know that they don't have any firearm or any
ability to protect themself in that manner, it can open them up to being hurt or
targeted specifically. We can say that in 2004, when this act was passed, until
today, we have no incidence in Hawaii County of somebody who has been
authorized under LEOSA to carry, this time, that there has been any incident with
them. There has been no incident with an officer that's carrying under LEOSA.
Again, we're not attorneys. We cannot speakI certainly don't have the
expertise that Ms. Wan has. But what I can say is that it's our position that we
don't want to force people carrying under LEOSA to be in violation of this
section, which is what we're going to do if we don't give them that exemption.
I can't comment to legal opinions. There's plenty of them out there, certainly.
Sometimes it's just—that's our position. Our position is the part of this act was to
protect police officers. It's not simply that they're carrying these guns around
looking to enforce something or whatnot. It's to protect themselves against
specific threats that arrive at them from their career as law enforcement officers.
So that's our position. Thank you.
MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Major, for your candor. Just having been on the
receiving end of some of that as a family member of law enforcement. Thank
you, Chair, I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. Mr. Chung.
MR. CHUNG: Yeah, real quickly, Madam Chair. I do agree with Ms. Wan. Her
reading of the Federal statute is correct, and we probably would be running afoul
of it. But there is the supremacy clause built into this bill just in case there's a
fallback I do want to give deference to the retired police officers, so I'm going to
be voting "no" against the stuff that I prepared. But let the chips fall.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Chung. Anyone else?
MR. INABA: Chair?
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Mr. Inaba.
MR. INABA: Thank you. Ms. Wan, I'm trying to make sure I understand this
correctly. So the LEOSA reading is saying that nothing there should supersede or
limit State law, right?
MS. WAN: I'm sorry. Deputy Corporation Counsel Sylvia Wan. Council
Member Inaba, can you please restate the question? I don't think I quite
understood the question.
Page 83
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
MR. INABA: Reading through the LEOSA Act here, it's saying that nothing
there shall be construed to supersede or limit the laws of any state. So, sorry.
You were saying that our HRS is not in line with No. 3 in the bill in the
subsection?
MS. WAN: No, that is not correct. What I am saying is that, if you pass Bill 220
as it currently reads, it will contradict what is currently within the LEOSA Act,
which the LEOSA Act says that this sectionI'm reading directly from the
statute, which is 18 U.S.C. 926C, and it is entitled, "Carrying of a concealed
firearm by qualified retired law enforcement officers." That is specifically the
name of the statute. In Subsection (b), it states, "This section shall not be
construed to supersede or limit the laws of any state that permit private persons or
entities to prohibit or restrict the possession of concealed firearms on their
property, or prohibit or restrict the possession of firearms on any state or local
government property, installation, base, building, or park."
So, in this section, it is allowing the states and the local government to provide
prohibitions as to where an individual can have a concealed firearm; and
therefore, the LEOSA-licensed firearm carrier would have to follow the same
laws within what the state and the local government had put in place. So what
you would be saying is that this particular LEOSA officer would not have to
follow the prohibitions that are put on in the state because you would be carving
out a special exemption for them that is otherwise reserved just for law
enforcement and what you have put into the statute as private security officers.
MR. INABA: Thank you. Chair, I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Inaba. I saw someone else's light.
Ms. Kierkiewicz, go ahead.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chair. I was just curious. I don't know if you
mentioned this earlier, Deputy or Major: How many LEOSA permittees do we
currently have in the County or State? Do you have that information?
MS. WAN: I do not know because my understanding is that they may be able to
apply these not just from the counties, but also from the State.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Okay. Major?
MR. MAHUNA: So, if somebody is carrying under LEOSA, they can carry and
they can be from another jurisdiction.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: I see.
MR. MAHUNA: So we don't know. It's not necessarily with the jurisdiction,
but you have to have identification that says that you're retired. You have to have
Page 84
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
proof that you qualified with the weapon; you have to be retired, in good standing,
and so on and so forth. So, I mean, that's really the purpose of LEOSA, is that
retired officers could carry their firearms in other jurisdictions that would
otherwise prohibit it.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Got it. So the designation that you apply for that you can
carry with you beyond state boundaries.
MR. MAHUNA: That's correct.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Okay, thank you. Chair, I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kierkiewicz. Mr. Richards, go ahead.
MR. RICHARDS: Is that a Federal issuance? Like if someone here applied for
LEOSA, who's issuing the document?
MR. MAHUNA: There is no document that's issued by the Federal Government.
The Federal Government in LEOSA has guidelines of what you need to carry
with you. So, like I said, you need to have your retired ID (identification). You
need to have proof that you were qualified with the firearm. And there's other
qualifications so that you can carry under LEOSA. But the Federal Government
themselves do not issue out a permit. It's a set of guidelines that that law puts
forward.
MR. RICHARDS: Okay. So that makes sense. Our County can issue that, but
we have no idea how many retired officers may be in this County under that
program, correct?
MR. MAHUNA: We don't know.
MR. RICHARDS: Okay, thanks.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Richards. Anyone else? Seeing none,
Mr. Clerk,please, roll call.
Page 85
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Vote on Motion The motion to amend Bill 220, Draft 2, with the contents of
to Amend: Comm. 1022.102 failed by the following roll call vote:
Failed
Ayes: Council Member Villegas — 1.
Noes: Council Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards,
and Chair David—7.
Absent: Council Member Chung— 1.
Excused: None.
MR. HENRICKS: The motion fails.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you. That brings us back to Bill 220, Draft 2, as amended
with 1022.94, 1022.100, and 1022.101. Any discussion, Council Members? Seeing
none, Mr. Clerk.
Vote on Bill 220, The motion to pass Bill 220, Draft 2, as amended to
Draft 3: Draft 3, on first reading and adopt Parks and Recreation
(Approved) and Public Safety Committee Report No. 39 was carried by
the following roll call vote:
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kierkiewicz,
Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair David—7.
Noes: Council Member Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder— 1.
Absent: Council Member Chung— 1.
Excused: None.
(Note: Ms. Lee Loy and Mr. Richards voted "kanalua"
then "aye.")
MR. HENRICKS: The motion carries.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you very much. Okay, guys, can we just get to the top of
our agenda? Okay, let's take a five-minute break. We'll be in recess till 3:00 or
3:01. Thank you. We're in recess.
Recess: At 2:56 p.m., the Chair called for a recess.
Reconvene: The meeting reconvened at 3:04 p.m.
CHR. DAVID: Mr. Clerk, can we go to bills for second and final reading, please?
Page 86
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Bill 212: AMENDS THE PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITY SCHEDULE,
CHAPTER 15, ARTICLE 8, SECTION 15-68.1 OF THE HAWAII COUNTY
CODE 1983 (2016 EDITION, AS AMENDED), BY RENAMING THE PAHOA
DISTRICT PARK IN THE PUNA REGION, THE"WILLIAM `BILLY' KENOI
PARK," IN HONOR OF WILLIAM "BILLY"PUNAPAIA`ALAIKAHALA
KENOI
Reference: Comm. 1003
Intr. by: Ms. Kierkiewicz
First Reading: October 19, 2022
and
Comm. 1003.3: From Council Member Ashley L. Kierkiewicz, dated October 21, 2022,
transmitting proposed amendments to Bill 212.
Motion to Approve: Ms. Kierkiewicz moved to pass Bill 212 on second and
final reading. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy.
Motion to Amend: Ms. Kierkiewicz moved to amend Bill 212 with the
contents of Comm. 1003.3. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy.
CHR. DAVID: Ms. Kierkiewicz.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chair. Just looking for everyone's support for
this particular amendment. It was flagged by Parks and Recreation for me. They
just wanted to point out that the number of elements and the way the park is
structured right now categorizes the park to be a district park. As we move out
for the buildout of additional phases of the park, we could rename it the William
"Billy" Kenoi Regional Park at some point. But this is to just kind of honor what
the park is at this point. So just looking for everyone's support. Thank you.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you for that. Anyone else?
MR. INABA: Chair, sorry, real quick.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Mr. Inaba.
MR. INABA: Ms. Kierkiewicz, in Section 3, you're changing `Billy"to `Billy"?
Am I just—I'm not reading this amendment correct?
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Chair, if I might?
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Ms. Kierkiewicz.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Council Member Inaba, we're adding the word"District"
to the name of the park.
Page 87
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
MR. INABA: I'm looking at the amendment, and we have an underlined `Billy"
next to a crossed out Billy.' Am I looking at the right 1003.3?
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: No, you are. And it looks like, as they're going to be
creating the signage, instead of the one quotation mark, it's going to be double
quotation marks around his name: `Billy." But we're also adding the word
"District"to the name of the park.
MR. INABA: Okay, got it. I understand. Thank you.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Inaba. Anyone else on the amendment?
MS. KIMBALL: Never mind. I think we're okay.
CHR. DAVID: Okay. Are we okay?
MS. KIMBALL: I think we might possibly have a clerical error of an extra
quotation, but I'm not—yeah, I think it's
MR. HENRICKS: No, it's correct. It's supposed to
CHR. DAVID: Have a double.
MR. HENRICKS: (Inaudible.)
CHR. DAVID: It's fine. Okay, on the amendment, all those in favor of
approving the motion to amend Bill 212 with the contents of
Communication 1003.3,please say "aye."
Vote on Motion The motion to amend Bill 212 with the contents of
to Amend: Comm. 1003.3 was carried by the following voice vote:
(Approved)
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards,
Villegas, and Chair David–8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Chung– 1.
Excused: None.
Page 88
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Vote on Motion to Ms. Lee Loy moved to suspend Council Rule 24 to waive
Suspend Council the holdover for the substantive amendment of Bill 212.
Rules: Seconded by Mr. Richards and carried by the following
(Approved) voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards,
Villegas, and Chair David–8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Chung– 1.
Excused: None.
CHR. DAVID: Council Members, discussion? Ms. Lee Loy.
MS. LEE LOY: Absolutely support this. I really did, I think, envision, like you
said, this is a big district park; and setting the framework for that to get filled in
later on is just perfect. Yeah, looking forward to the celebration in a few days, so
wholeheartedly support this measure. I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. Anyone else? Ms. Kierkiewicz, go
ahead.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chair. I just want to mahalo nui everybody
the community, my colleagues—for all of their support on this. I mean,
Mayor Kenoi was an incredible leader, and this is one way that we can be
honoring his impact and his legacy here on Hawaii Island.
Earlier today I was getting text messages from Parks and Rec. (Recreation) about
"Okay, the pohaku is here. Where you like put the signs?" So, everything is
really coming together and just look forward to seeing everybody next week
Wednesday, November 9h, 11:30 at Pahoa District Park; now going to be named
the William `Billy" Kenoi District Park to just honor this incredible man. So
thank you very much. Chair, I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you for that, Ms. Kierkiewicz. Mr. Richards, go ahead.
MR. RICHARDS: I've just got to say it: It's a good deal. Billy was great. So,
good deal. Thanks.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Anyone else? Seeing none, all those in favor of
approving Bill 212, as amended with the contents of Communication 1003.3,
please say "aye."
Page 89
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Vote on Bill 212: The motion to pass Bill 212, as amended to Draft 2, on
Draft 2 second and final reading was carried by the following voice
(Adopted) vote:
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards,
Villegas, and Chair David—8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Chung— 1.
Excused: None.
Bill 213: AMENDS ORDINANCE NO. 22-63, AS AMENDED, THE OPERATING
BUDGET FOR THE COUNTY OF HAWAII FOR THE FISCAL YEAR
ENDING JUNE 30, 2023
Appropriates revenues in the Federal Grants —Workforce Innovation &
Opportunity Act(WIOA) account($1,647,337); and appropriates the same to the
following 2022-2023 WIOA accounts: Administration Planning ($164,734); Adult
Program ($615,398); Dislocated Worker Program ($277,263); and Youth Program
($589,942), bringing the total appropriation to $1,647,337. Funds would be used
by the Department of Research and Development to assist adults, dislocated
workers, and youths by providing services that will train individuals to increase
employment, retention, earnings, skills, and literacy.
Reference: Comm. 1011
Intr. by: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder(B/R)
First Reading: October 19, 2022
Vote on Bill 213: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder moved to pass Bill 213 on
(Adopted) second and final reading. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy and
carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards,
Villegas, and Chair David—8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Chung— 1.
Excused: None.
Page 90
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Bill 214: 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 Federal Grants —Hawai`i County Roadblock Program
account($62,578.20); and appropriates the same to the Hawaii County Police
Department Roadblock Program account, bringing the total appropriation to
$487,578.20. The additional funds would be used by the Police Department to
reduce the number of drivers operating a vehicle while impaired.
Reference: Comm. 1012
Intr. by: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder(B/R)
First Reading: October 19, 2022
Motion to Approve: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder moved to pass Bill 214 on
second and final reading. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder.
MR. KANEALII-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Chair. I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Anyone else? Actually, I want to say thank you so
much, Mr. Keltner, for being here and your patience. Do you want to say
anything since you've been here? No? Okay. All right, thank you very much.
All right, all those in favor of approving Bill 214 at second and final reading,
please say "aye."
Vote on Bill 214: The motion to pass Bill 214 on second and final reading
(Adopted) was carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards,
Villegas, and Chair David—8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Chung— 1.
Excused: None.
Page 91
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Bill 215: 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 Federal Grants —Occupant Protection Program account
($24,966); and appropriates the same to the Occupant Protection Program account,
bringing the total appropriation to $148,966. The additional funds would be used
by the Police Department for seatbelt and child safety enforcement projects.
Reference: Comm. 1013
Intr. by: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder(B/R)
First Reading: October 19, 2022
Motion to Approve: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder moved to pass Bill 215 on
second and final reading. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder.
MR. KANEALII-KLEINFELDER: Just appreciate Mr. Keltner. Thank you.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Anyone else? Seeing none, all those in favor of
approving Bill 215 at second and final reading, please say "aye."
Vote on Bill 215: The motion to pass Bill 215 on second and final reading
(Adopted) was carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards,
Villegas, and Chair David—8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Chung— 1.
Excused: None.
Bill 216: 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 Federal Grants —Hawaii County Police Department
Data Grant account($1,400); and appropriates the same to the Hawaii County
Police Department Data Grant account, bringing the total appropriation to
$74,400. The additional funds would be used to establish a statewide traffic data
system and ensure compliance with national standards.
Reference: Comm. 1014
Intr. by: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder(B/R)
First Reading: October 19, 2022
Page 92
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Vote on Bill 216: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder moved to pass Bill 216 on
(Adopted) second and final reading. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy and
carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards,
Villegas, and Chair David—8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Chung— 1.
Excused: None.
Bill 217: AMENDS ORDINANCE NO. 22-63, AS AMENDED, THE OPERATING
BUDGET FOR THE COUNTY OF HAWAII FOR THE FISCAL YEAR
ENDING JUNE 30, 2023
Appropriates revenues in the Federal Grants —Hawaii County Police Department
2023 Special Traffic Enforcement Patrol Grant account($574,234); and
appropriates the same to the Hawaii County Police Department 2023 Special
Traffic Enforcement Patrol Grant account. Funds would be used for the
department's Distracted Driving, Traffic Services, and Speed Enforcement
programs.
Reference: Comm. 1015
Intr. by: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder(B/R)
First Reading: October 19, 2022
Vote on Bill 217: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder moved to pass Bill 217 on
(Adopted) second and final reading. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy and
carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards,
Villegas, and Chair David—8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Chung— 1.
Excused: None.
Page 93
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Bill 219: AMENDS ORDINANCE NO. 22-64, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO PUBLIC
IMPROVEMENTS AND FINANCING THEREOF FOR THE FISCAL YEAR
JULY 1, 2022 TO JUNE 30, 2023
Adds the Parks and Recreation—Kamakoa Nui Park—Recreation Facilities
Expansion project($2 million)to the Capital Budget. Funds for these projects
shall be provided from General Obligation Bonds, Capital Projects Fund—Fund
Balance and/or other Sources ($2 million), and would be used for the development
of pickleball and tennis courts at Kamakoa Nui Park in Waik6loa.
Reference: Comm. 1019
Intr. by: Mr. Richards
First Reading: October 19, 2022
Note: Requires 2/3 vote of the entire
membership to amend,pursuant to
Section 10-6(e), Hawai`i County Charter
Motion to Approve: Mr. Richards moved to pass Bill 219 on second and final
reading. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Mr. Richards.
MR. RICHARDS: Yeah, thank you. This is taking the step to get this on the CIP
(Capital Improvement Projects) list so we can move forward. Apparently, we are
going to have the All World Champion Pickleball Competition between District 1
and District 9 coming up. So we have to get our facilities to host this event. I've
been challenged by Ms. Kimball.
Anyway, I ask for my colleagues' support. Again, this is stepping in the right
direction. That area is going to show growth, and we're trying to set things up so
we can set the stage for pickleball because it is growing. It is. So I understand
that. So I ask for my colleagues' support.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Richards. Anyone else? Seeing none, all those
in favor of approving Bill 219 at second and final reading, please say "aye."
Vote on Bill 219: The motion to pass Bill 219 on second and final reading
(Adopted) was carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards,
Villegas, and Chair David—8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Chung— 1.
Excused: None.
Page 94
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
CHR. DAVID: Now we can go to the top of our agenda. Oh, yes,
Resolution 596, before we do that.
STATEMENTS The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business,
FROM THE Statements from the Public.
PUBLIC ON
RES. 596-22 The following individual registered to speak and came forward when called by
(COMM. 1075): the Chair:
Aina Aloha Ioane: In support.
Res. 596-22: TRANSFERS/APPROPRIATES AN APPROPRIATION OUT AND FROM A
DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT AND CREDITS SAME TO A DESIGNATED
FUND ACCOUNT TO PROVIDE A GRANT TO KELI`I WILLIAM IOANE
LEGACY FOUNDATION FOR THE 2022 MAKAHIKI COMMUNITY
CELEBRATION
Transfers $3,100 from the Clerk-Council Services —Contingency Relief account
(Council District 3); and credits to the Department of Parks and Recreation,
Administration Other Current Expenses account.
Reference: Comm. 1075
Intr. by: Ms. Lee Loy
Motion to Approve: Ms. Lee Loy moved to adopt Res. 596-22. Seconded by
Mr. Richards.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Ms. Lee Loy.
MS. LEE LOY: Yeah, I'll make this brief. Aina was just amazing, and this is the
second year doing it. As she mentioned, there is just so much education that goes
around this time of year with Lono-i-ka-makahiki. And so I do really encourage
all my other colleagues to come,partake, learn some of the chants, the hula. It's
really a wonderful experience. This last year, I had the privilege and honor not
only learning the chant of the season, but to do it alongside Auntie Nalani, which
is just, I don't know, bucket-list item for anybody who knows.
But I do encourage my colleagues to really engage in these cultural practices
because they are just filled with history and story. And one thing that was really
amazing is Uncle Skippy, who is the most amazing orator that I know. He tells
these stories in such ways with such depth and kauna, and it was just a wonderful
time. I'm asking for my colleagues' support. I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. Anyone else? Seeing none, all those in
favor of approving Resolution 596-22, please say "aye."
Page 95
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Vote on Res. 596-22: The motion to adopt Res. 596-22 was carried by the
(Adopted) following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards,
Villegas, and Chair David—8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Chung— 1.
Excused: None.
CHR. DAVID: Now we can go to the top of the agenda. Thank you.
Return to Order The Chair directed the Council to return to the order of business.
of Business:
ORDER OF The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business, Order of
RESOLUTIONS: Resolutions.
(Note: Items in this category were taken up previously, out of order.)
Res. 576-22: ACCEPTS A GRANT OF PUBLIC ACCESS AND PRESERVATION
EASEMENT FROM KULEANA SPIRITS, INC., TAX MAP KEY: 5-5-006:010
(Area: 43.854 Acres)
Provides for the preservation of pedestrian and vehicular public access along the
makai property boundary to align with the historic Ho`ea Road in North Kohala.
Reference: Comm. 1037
Intr. by: Ms. Kierkiewicz (B/R)
Approve: PC-80
Motion to Approve: Ms. Kierkiewicz moved to adopt Res. 576-22 and Planning
Committee Report No. 80. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Ms. Kierkiewicz. Thank you. Seeing no other
discussion, all those inoh, Mr.
MR. RICHARDS: I just was going to say this is appreciated. This is connecting
that whole Kohala Coastline. It's just formalizing, but that goes from Pololu out
to `Upolu and wrapping around the Mahukona lands that we received with the
PONC (Public Access, Open Space, and Natura Resources Preservation
Commission) or in process of purchasing. So this is all in the same corridor.
CHR. DAVID: Mahalo for that. Anyone else? Seeing none, all those in favor of
approving Resolution 576-22, please say "aye."
Page 96
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Vote on Res. 576-22: The motion to adopt Res. 576-22 and Planning Committee
(Adopted) Report No. 80 was carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards,
Villegas, and Chair David—8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Chung— 1.
Excused: None.
Res. 580-22: AUTHORIZES THE PAYMENT OF FUNDS OF A LATER FISCAL YEAR AND
OF MORE THAN ONE FISCAL YEAR FOR A MULTI-YEAR AGREEMENT
FOR MANAGED SERVICES FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY
Authorizes the Mayor to enter into a three-year agreement with Hawaiian Telcom
for cybersecurity protection, with an approximate monthly cost of$3,088.20.
Reference: Comm. 1045
Intr. by: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder(B/R)
Approve: FC-218
Motion to Approve: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder moved to adopt Res. 580-22 and
Finance Committee Report No. 218. Seconded by
Ms. Lee Loy.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I believe we had a good discussion
regarding this resolution in Committees. Look for everyone's support.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Anyone else? Seeing none, all those in favor of
approving Resolution 580-22, please say "aye."
Vote on Res. 580-22: The motion to adopt Res. 580-22 and Finance Committee
(Adopted) Report No. 218 was carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards,
Villegas, and Chair David—8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Chung— 1.
Excused: None.
Page 97
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Res. 584-22: AMENDS RESOLUTION 743-20 AUTHORIZING THE PLANNING
DEPARTMENT TO AWARD FUNDS TO VARIOUS NONPROFIT
ORGANIZATIONS THROUGH THE KILAUEA RECOVERY GRANT
PROGRAM
Amends Exhibit A to change the fiscal sponsor for Vacationland Hawaii
Community Association to Men of Pa`a.
Reference: Comm. 1049
Intr. by: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder(B/R)
Approve: FC-219
Motion to Approve: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder moved to adopt Res. 584-22 and
Finance Committee Report No. 219. Seconded by
Ms. Kierkiewicz.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: No discussion.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: No, I did want to mention Ms. Patty Pinto is
here. She's here specifically for this resolution, correct, should there be any
questions. So, she's here if you want her. Thank you for being here today,
Ms. Pinto. I yield, Chair.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Anyone else? Seeing none, all those in favor of
approving Resolution 584-22, please say "aye."
Vote on Res. 584-22: The motion to adopt Res. 584-22 and Finance Committee
(Adopted) Report No. 219 was carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards,
Villegas, and Chair David—8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Chung— 1.
Excused: None.
Page 98
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Res. 586-22: 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 BIG ISLAND LIONS
FOUNDATION TO SUPPORT THE DOWNTOWN HILO CHRISTMAS LIGHTS
PARADE
Transfers $3,500 from the Clerk-Council Services —Contingency Relief account
(Council District 1); and credits to the Department of Liquor Control, Public
Programs account.
Reference: Comm. 1055
Intr. by: Ms. Kimball
Motion to Approve: Ms. Kimball moved to adopt Res. 586-22. Seconded by
Ms. Kierkiewicz.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Ms. Kimball.
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Chair. Just looking forward to supporting the return
of this particular parade. I've marched it many times with my kids because
they're in the band, and my daughter is the percussionist, and she always makes
them walk really fast because her tempo is off. Anyway, I love parades. Very
excited to support this and just ask for my colleagues' support. Mahalo.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Anyone else? Seeing none, all those in favor of
approving Resolution 586-22, please say "aye."
Vote on Res. 586-22: The motion to adopt Res. 586-22 was carried by the
(Adopted) following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards,
Villegas, and Chair David—8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Chung— 1.
Excused: None.
Page 99
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Res. 588-22: 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 FOOD BASKET, INC.,
TO PURCHASE FOOD FOR ITS KONA WAREHOUSE AT NA KAHUA
HALE O ULUWINI
Transfers $3,000 from the Clerk-Council Services —Contingency Relief account
(Council District 8); and credits to the Office of Housing and Community
Development, Transfer to Housing Fund account.
Reference: Comm. 1057
Intr. by: Mr. Inaba
Motion to Approve: Mr. Inaba moved to adopt Res. 588-22. Seconded by
Ms. Lee Loy.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Mr. Inaba.
MR. INABA: Thank you. We know of the good work that the Food Basket does,
so I ask for your support. Mahalo.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Anyone else? Mr. Chung.
MR. RICHARDS: Yeah, I know; we're twins. It's hard to
CHR. DAVID: Mr. Richards.
MR. RICHARDS: Mr. Inaba, I just want to make sure you didn't want to go for
the full 6,000 again. I was just touching bases.
MR. INABA: Thank you for double-checking. The 3,000 is the right amount.
MR. RICHARDS: And you're just working it. Thank you, I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Richards. Anyone else? Seeing none, all those
in favor of approving Resolution 588-22,please say "aye."
Vote on Res. 588-22: The motion to adopt Res. 588-22 was carried by the
(Adopted) following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards,
Villegas, and Chair David—8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Chung— 1.
Excused: None.
Page 100
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Res. 589-22: TRANSFERS/APPROPRIATES AN APPROPRIATION OUT AND FROM A
DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT AND CREDITS SAME TO A DESIGNATED
FUND ACCOUNT TO PROVIDE A GRANT TO ARTS AND SCIENCE
CENTER FOR EXPENSES FOR THE NANAWALE COMMUNITY
ENGAGEMENT EVENT
Transfers $5,000 from the Clerk-Council Services —Contingency Relief account
(Council District 4); and credits to the Department of Liquor Control, Public
Programs account.
Reference: Comm. 1061
Intr. by: Ms. Kierkiewicz
Motion to Approve: Ms. Kierkiewicz moved to adopt Res. 589-22. Seconded
by Ms. Lee Loy.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Ms. Kierkiewicz.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chair. I just appreciate the opportunity to
support community members in organizing events that are meant to bring
residents together and to curate and put more resources out into community. So,
looking for everyone's support. Thank you.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Anyone else? Seeing none, all those in favor of
approving Resolution 589-22, please say "aye."
Vote on Res. 589-22: The motion to adopt Res. 589-22 was carried by the
(Adopted) following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards,
Villegas, and Chair David—8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Chung— 1.
Excused: None.
Res. 590-22: 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 NORTH HAWAII
HERITAGE FOUNDATION FOR THE HONOKA`A RENAISSANCE FAIRE
Transfers $5,000 from the Clerk-Council Services —Contingency Relief account
(Council District 1); and credits to the Department of Parks and Recreation,
Administration Other Current Expenses account.
Reference: Comm. 1062
Intr. by: Ms. Kimball
Page 101
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Motion to Approve: Ms. Kimball moved to adopt Res. 590-22. Seconded by
Ms. Lee Loy.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Ms. Kimball.
MS. KIMBALL: Thank you. Just excited to support the first renaissance fair in
Honoka`a. We invite everybody to attend. It should be a good event. It is on
November I Ph, so is that right? That's the weekend, yeah? That's Saturday.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Friday.
MS. KIMBALL: Friday. Okay, the 12'h then. My apologies. Don't want to
I'll send you an invite. How about we say that? It should be fun, and just really
looking for ways to encourage folks to visit our lovely town of Honoka`a. So I
hope you'll come. Thanks, I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Anyone else? Seeing none, all those in
favor of approving Resolution 590-22, please say "aye."
Vote on Res. 590-22: The motion to adopt Res. 590-22 was carried by the
(Adopted) following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards,
Villegas, and Chair David—8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Chung— 1.
Excused: None.
Res. 591-22: 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 HILO EDUCATION
ARTS REPERTORY THEATRE TO PURCHASE EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES
FOR ITS EDUCATIONAL AND MENTORSHIP PROGRAMS
Transfers $5,000 from the Clerk-Council Services —Contingency Relief account
(Council District 2); and credits to the Department of Parks and Recreation,
Administration Other Current Expenses account.
Reference: Comm. 1063
Intr. by: Mr. Chung
Motion to Approve: Ms. Lee Loy moved to adopt Res. 591-22. Seconded by
Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder.
CHR. DAVID: Ms. Lee Loy.
Page 102
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
MS. LEE LOY: Ask for everyone's support.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Any other discussion? Seeing none, all those in
favor of approving Resolution 591-22, please say "aye."
Vote on Res. 591-22: The motion to adopt Res. 591-22 was carried by the
(Adopted) following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards,
Villegas, and Chair David—8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Chung— 1.
Excused: None.
Res. 592-22: TRANSFERS/APPROPRIATES AN APPROPRIATION OUT AND FROM A
DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT AND CREDITS SAME TO A DESIGNATED
FUND ACCOUNT TO PROVIDE A GRANT TO HO`OULU LAHUI FOR
EXPENSES RELATING TO ITS GENKI HOU PROJECT
Transfers $2,750 from the Clerk-Council Services —Contingency Relief account
(Council District 6); and credits to the Department of Parks and Recreation,
Administration Other Current Expenses account.
Reference: Comm. 1064
Intr. by: Ms. David
Motion to Approve: Ms. Lee Loy moved to adopt Res. 592-22. Seconded by
Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder.
CHR. DAVID: Just ask for my colleagues' support. And I just want to say thank
you to Susie Osborne for being here this morning to support this. All right.
Ms. Lee Loy, go ahead.
MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Chair. We heard so much good stuff about this
project; and really actually excited to partner with Chair David on putting this
funding together. What I'm really excited about is I believe, it must have been
three maybe four years ago, I put in a CII'project to dredge Lili`uokalani Park for
about a half-a-million dollars, if not more. This funding is about 5,600. And if
we can accomplish this with 5,600, the return on investment will be huge for our
community, for our taxpayers; but also something that we can model not only on
the east side, but just across the Island. So I do thank you, Ms. David, for your
support.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you. I was just so stoked and impressed with what that
little ball could do. Thank you. All those in favor of approving
Resolution 592-22, please say "aye."
Page 103
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Vote on Res. 592-22: The motion to adopt Res. 592-22 was carried by the
(Adopted) following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards,
Villegas, and Chair David—8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Chung— 1.
Excused: None.
Res. 597-22: TRANSFERS/APPROPRIATES AN APPROPRIATION OUT AND FROM A
DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT AND CREDITS SAME TO A DESIGNATED
FUND ACCOUNT TO PROVIDE A GRANT TO HO`OULU LAHUI TO ASSIST
WITH EXPENSES ASSOCIATED WITH ITS WAIHONU RESTORATION
PROGRAM AT LILI`UOKALANI GARDENS
Transfers $2,650 from the Clerk-Council Services —Contingency Relief account
(Council District 3); and credits to the Department of Parks and Recreation,
Administration Other Current Expenses account.
Reference: Comm. 1076
Intr. by: Ms. Lee Loy
Motion to Approve: Ms. Lee Loy moved to adopt Res. 597-22. Seconded by
Mr. Richards.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Ms. Lee Loy.
MS. LEE LOY: Just ask for my colleagues' support.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Anyone else? All those in favor of approving
Resolution 597-22, please say "aye."
Vote on Res. 597-22: The motion to adopt Res. 597-22 was carried by the
(Adopted) following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards,
Villegas, and Chair David—8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Chung— 1.
Excused: None.
Page 104
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Res. 600-22: TRANSFERS/APPROPRIATES AN APPROPRIATION OUT AND FROM A
DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT AND CREDITS SAME TO A DESIGNATED
FUND ACCOUNT TO PROVIDE A GRANT TO VIBRANT HAWAII TO
ASSIST WITH EXPENSES FOR A MAKAHIKI EVENT TO BE HELD AT THE
UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII AT HILO
Transfers $5,000 from the Clerk-Council Services —Contingency Relief account
(Council District 2); and credits to the Department of Parks and Recreation,
Administration Other Current Expenses account.
Reference: Comm. 1080
Intr. by: Mr. Chung
Motion to Approve: Ms. Lee Loy moved to adopt Res. 600-22. Seconded by
Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder.
CHR. DAVID: Ms. Lee Loy.
MS. LEE LOY: Ask for everyone's support.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Chair David?
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Ms. Kierkiewicz.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Just want to disclose that I'm a volunteer
Board Director for Vibrant Hawaii, and so I'll be recusing myself from this vote.
Thank you.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Anyone else? Seeing none, all those in favor of
approving Resolution 600-22, please say "aye."
Vote on Res. 600-22: The motion to adopt Res. 600-22 was carried by the
(Adopted) following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair David—7.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Chung— 1.
Excused: Council Member Kierkiewicz— 1.
Page 105
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Res. 601-22: TRANSFERS/APPROPRIATES AN APPROPRIATION OUT AND FROM A
DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT AND CREDITS SAME TO A DESIGNATED
FUND ACCOUNT TO PROVIDE A GRANT TO GOING HOME HAWAII FOR
ITS REENTRY AND RECOVERY HOUSING PROGRAM
Transfers $5,000 from the Clerk-Council Services —Contingency Relief account
(Council District 2); and credits to the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney, Other
Current Expenses account.
Reference: Comm. 1081
Intr. by: Mr. Chung
Motion to Approve: Ms. Lee Loy moved to adopt Res. 601-22. Seconded by
Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Ms. Lee Loy.
MS. LEE LOY: Ask for my colleagues' support.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you. All those in favor of approving Resolution 601-22,
please say "aye."
Vote on Res. 601-22: The motion to adopt Res. 601-22 was carried by the
(Adopted) following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards,
Villegas, and Chair David—8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Chung— 1.
Excused: None.
Res. 602-22: 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 ALOHA CLUB OF HILO
FOR EXPENSES RELATED TO THE 2022 HALE `OLUEA CLUBHOUSE
HOLIDAY EVENT
Transfers $1,000 from the Clerk-Council Services —Contingency Relief account
(Council District 2); and credits to the Department of Liquor Control, Public
Programs account.
Reference: Comm. 1083
Intr. by: Mr. Chung
Page 106
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Vote on Res. 602-22: Ms. Lee Loy moved to adopt Res. 602-22. Seconded by
(Adopted) Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder and carried by the following
voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards,
Villegas, and Chair David—8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Chung— 1.
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):
(Note: Items in this category were taken up previously, out of order.)
Bill 156: AMENDS CHAPTER 19, ARTICLE 7, SECTION 19-53, OF THE HAWAII
COUNTY CODE 1983 (2016 EDITION, AS AMENDED), RELATING TO
REAL PROPERTY TAX VALUATION; CONSIDERATIONS IN FIXING
Establishes that the value of property classified as apartment, hotel and resort,
commercial, industrial, agricultural or native forests, or conservation cannot be
assessed by the County at more than 15 percent than the previous year's assessed
value for that property.
Reference: Comm. 739
Intr. by: Ms. Lee Loy
Negative: FC-220 (Due to a vote of 2-ayes, 7-noes)
Motion to Approve: Ms. Lee Loy moved to pass Bill 156 on first reading.
Seconded by Mr. Richards.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Ms. Lee Loy.
MS. LEE LOY: Thank you. I think my colleagues know the die has been cast on
this particular piece of legislation. And I know, in our folder, we also have a
letter from the International Association of Assessing Officers; something that
Lisa Miura talked about. And I heard very clearly from my colleagues. I think
we can there's a lot for us as a legislative body to learn through this process.
But if I could,just for a second, borrow the soapbox from my colleague and say,
yesterday, although I wasn't here, I know there was some discussion around a
$72 million fund balance. And when this piece of legislation and others were
advanced to try and provide credit to our taxpayers, I tried every single way. I've
learned a lot. I do know that it is a complex situation, but I think, as a body and a
future legislative body, that this is some area that we really need to tackle.
Page 107
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
I mean, we're hearing it all around on how we just kind of manage the
expectations of our taxpayers, along with bargaining unit contracts, supply or
workforce issues. I mean, there is a lot in front of us. And I think we can do
better. I think we can manage expectations better,but more importantly, let the
taxpayers know that the budget we set out with will get accomplished, get done.
We heard a lot of frustration about aged infrastructure; how it's not meeting the
needs of community in other areas. This is where we need to press hard. I just
want to swing for the fence one more time, but I understand that my colleagues
will put this down this session, and maybe we can pick it back up next session.
Thank you for that opportunity, Chair. I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. Mr. Richards.
MR. RICHARDS: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. I supported this previously and I'll
continue to support it, recognizing with all due respect to Real Property Tax. I get
it and I understand what they're saying. But I don't like our budgeting process,
and that's, in part, why I supported this bill. I think we can do better, and we're
trying to help out our constituency get some guardrails around it. So this was a
swing, and I appreciate the fact that we are having a conversation because, going
forward, I think there's going to be other ways to try and get our arms around it.
So I will support it, though I recognize it's symbolic. I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Richards. Anyone else? Seeing none, roll call,
Mr. Clerk,please.
Vote on Bill 156: The motion to pass Bill 156 on first reading failed by the
Failed following roll call vote:
Ayes: Council Members Lee Loy and Richards —2.
Noes: Council Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Villegas,
and Chair David—6.
Absent: Council Member Chung— 1.
Excused: None.
(Note: Due to the negative recommendation in Finance
Committee Report No. 220, the report was adopted.)
MR. HENRICKS: The motion fails.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you. All right, moving to Bill 222 [sic], please.
Page 108
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Bill 223: AMENDS ORDINANCE NO. 22-64, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO PUBLIC
IMPROVEMENTS AND FINANCING THEREOF FOR THE FISCAL YEAR
JULY 1, 2022 TO JUNE 30, 2023
Adds the Environmental Management Hilo Waste Water Treatment Plant
Upgrades –State Revolving Funds project($17 million) to the Capital Budget.
Funds for these projects shall be provided from State Revolving Funds
($17 million), and would be used for improvements to the wastewater treatment
plant in Hilo.
Reference: Comm. 1038
Intr. by: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder(B/R)
Approve: FC-221
Note: Requires 2/3 vote of the entire
membership to amend,pursuant to
Section 10-6(e), Hawai`i County Charter
Motion to Approve: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder moved to pass Bill 223 on first
reading and adopt Finance Committee Report No. 221.
Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I look for everyone's support. Thank you,
Chair.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Ms. Kierkiewicz, go ahead.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chair. I just want to note for the record that I
have not received any communication from the Department of Environmental
Management. In Committee, I had requested a copy of their master plan. I know
Director Sako is coming forward, but just trying to understand where this
particular investment fits into the larger plan to upgrade all of our wastewater
facilities here on the east side.
Definitely want to be supporting it, know the condition of our assets; but again,
just want to see how this initial investment plays out in the longer game we just
talked about: budgeting, fund balance, the many needs of our community. So
this is a sizable investment for one small piece just the design element—of a
larger upgrade. So, Director, if you have any information you can share, that
would be good.
(Note: At this time, Finance Director Deanna Sako came forward to
address the members of the Council.)
MS. SAKO: Yeah, it was copied to a thumb drive. It was too large to email. So
I'm not sure if they had a chance to drop it off. Some people have been out. But
Page 109
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
we also wanted to clarify that this master plan is the master plan for the Hilo
Wastewater facility and not the entire master plan that they're working on for all
wastewater facilities. Just so that we don't have any miscommunication when
you guys get the plan.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Okay, great. Anybody from DEM out there? I think we
would all love to be able to get a copy of this plan.
MS. SAKO: Yeah and they actually did have it copied to a thumb drive. I think
it's just some people have been out, so it may not have gotten delivered. But
we'll make sure it's delivered before the next reading.
MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Okay, thank you, Director. Chair, I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kierkiewicz. Thank you, Director Sako.
Anyone else? Mr. Richards, go ahead.
MR. RICHARDS: I'm definitely going to support this moving forward. No,
we're good. Environmental Management is doing a phenomenal job with the
facilities that they're trying to manage, and we, as a body, must support getting
that stuff fixed. So, fully support this. I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Richards. Anyone else? Oh, thank you,
Mr. Mansour; you're still here.
(Note: At this time, Environmental Management Director Ramzi Mansour
came forward to address the members of the Council.)
MR. MANSOUR: I heard the department, so I was moved by tasking.
CHR. DAVID: Okay.
MR. MANSOUR: Just to address some of the concerns that Council
Member Kierkiewicz has. It's true; Eric has been sick out for two weeks, but he
did deliver a thumb drive. We'll make sure you get it. I just directed Peter to
create a zip file, and then he can email it to you directly. So hopefully we'll get it.
Just to give you an idea, this is what we presented to you back in October of last
year: the condition assessment report and actually the master project plan for the
Hilo treatment plant itself. So that was done by the Bay Area consultant that we
presented to you back in October that addressed the condition of the (inaudible)
and the parts, and the equipment that needed to be replaced. And it kind of gave
us a layout of the schedule and the components.
So that's, I believe, what Eric intended with the master plan, and how we're going
to go around completing the Hilo plant facility. And that's why we end up
Page 110
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
breaking it into two phases. Phase One, which is already under design; our
anticipation is to bid it out by the end of this year, early January probably, with
the hope that we can encumber the money prior to June 30'h of 2023. And that
will, for Phase One, approximate cost around $90 million to $100 million project.
Phase Two will follow right after, and we're just following the same plan that was
presented in the condition assessments.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Director Mansour. Anyone else? Ms. Kimball, go
ahead.
MS. KIMBALL: Yeah, I just had a brief comment. I had met with
Director Mansour recently just to get an update on things. You didn't mention
your new staff member who's putting together some really excellent visuals on
the timelines of their process and their intended goals and targets, which I think
you'll be presenting to us shortly. But I encourage you folks to reach out to DEM
and get that presentation about what they're developing as well because I think
it's going to help us a lot moving forward. Thanks, Chair, I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Anyone else? Seeing none thank
you, Director—all those in favor of approving Bill 223, please say "aye."
Vote on Bill 223: The motion to pass Bill 223 on first reading and adopt
(Approved) Finance Committee Report No. 221 was carried by the
following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards,
Villegas, and Chair David–8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Chung– 1.
Excused: None.
Page 111
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Bill 224: AMENDS ORDINANCE NO. 22-64, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO PUBLIC
IMPROVEMENTS AND FINANCING THEREOF FOR THE FISCAL YEAR
JULY 1, 2022 TO JUNE 30, 2023
Adds the Planning Kona Open Space Network Plan—Fair Share project
($250,000)to the Capital Budget. Funds for this project shall be provided from
Fair Share Contributions ($250,000), and would be used to enhance opportunities
for residents and visitors to engage in recreational, educational, subsistence, and
gathering activities.
Reference: Comm. 1039
Intr. by: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder(B/R)
Approve: FC-222
Note: Requires 2/3 vote of the entire
membership to amend,pursuant to
Section 10-6(e), Hawai`i County Charter
Vote on Bill 224: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder moved to pass Bill 224 on first
(Approved) reading and adopt Finance Committee Report No. 222.
Seconded by Ms. Villegas and carried by the following
voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards,
Villegas, and Chair David—8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Chung— 1.
Excused: None.
Bill 225: AUTHORIZES THE MAYOR OF THE COUNTY OF HAWAII TO ENTER
INTO AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT FOR A STATE WATER
POLLUTION CONTROL REVOLVING FUND LOAN FOR WASTEWATER
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS; AND AUTHORIZES THE ISSUANCE
OF $17,000,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS OF THE COUNTY OF
HAWAII FOR THE PURPOSE OF FINANCING QUALIFIED WASTEWATER
PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS OF THE COUNTY OF HAWAII
The issuance of General Obligation Bonds would serve as security for the
repayment of funds loaned to the County via the State Revolving Fund program.
Reference: Comm. 1040
Intr. by: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder(B/R)
Approve: FC-223
Motion to Approve: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder moved to pass Bill 225 on first
reading and adopt Finance Committee Report No. 223.
Seconded by Ms. Villegas.
Page 112
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder.
MR. KANEALII-KLEINFELDER: Pretty straightforward and ties into Bill 223
that we just spoke about with the Director. Look for everyone's approval.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Anyone else? Seeing none, all those in favor of
approving Bill 225 at first reading, please say "aye."
Vote on Bill 225: The motion to pass Bill 225 on first reading and adopt
(Approved) Finance Committee Report No. 223 was carried by the
following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards,
Villegas, and Chair David—8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Chung— 1.
Excused: None.
Bill 227: AMENDS CHAPTER 19, ARTICLE 13, SECTION 19-104 OF THE HAWAII
COUNTY CODE 1983 (2016 EDITION, AS AMENDED), RELATING TO
REAL PROPERTY SOLAR WATER HEATER TAX CREDIT
Eliminates eligibility for the tax credit when the installation of a solar water heater
is required by law and increases the tax credit from $300 to $400.
Reference: Comm. 1050
Intr. by: Mr. Chung
Approve: FC-225
(Note: The following from Council Member Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, transmitting
proposed amendments to Bill 227, were circulated: Comm. 1050.1 and
Comm. 1050.2 (dated November 1, 2022).)
Motion to Approve: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder moved to pass Bill 227 on first
reading and adopt Finance Committee Report No. 225.
Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder.
MR. KANEALII-KLEINFELDER: Mr. Chung is not here and I did bring
forward some amendments that he asked me to kind of bring forward. So I'm
looking forward to everyone's support in the way that he brought it forward, and
he does a great job at this. I'm going to go ahead in his absence. There's two
amendments that I brought forward, and I did speak to him about these. It was
actually under his direction. He said, "Well, I don't know why we don't just do
more."
Page 113
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
So, as you can see, there's two amendments. One is particularly large; one is
smaller. Both an increase from where it was originally set, as increased by this
bill that's in front of us.
Motion to Amend: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder moved to amend Bill 227 with
the contents of Comm. 1050.2. Seconded by Ms. Villegas.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: It's pretty straightforward. It's taking the
amount from $400 to $1,000. This does not include the minimum tax for all
property taxes. This is not for folks who are on minimum tax for their property
taxes. Albeit this is a very large jump, the cost of these installations has gone up
and the cost of our property taxes has gone up substantially. This functions as a
rebate for the tax property owner.
So I think, as far as incentivizing people, lessening their impact on our HELCO
(Hawai`i Electric Light Company) infrastructure, which we've seen again and
again, have, you know,pushing for people to reduce usage and grid issues, and
just jumps in people's electricity costs. A normal water heater for someone, given
my expertise in this field, is usually about a third of someone's electric bill.
So, with that in mind, I think incentivizing this sector in this particular solar hot
water tax credit, it would be big for the community and really help push towards
sustainability and kind of hit our goals as far as reducing people's usage for
electricity, and lessening their costs. So, look for everyone's support on this and
I'm open. Again, there's another amendment to this that's substantially less. So,
look for everyone's comments.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. Ms. Lee Loy, go ahead.
MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Chair. This might be more of a point of personal
privilege or maybe something I can get guidance from Corporation Counsel, and
this is in no disrespect to Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. Because we've all heard,
over time, his subject-matter expertise in this area. And out of genuine concern
for my colleague, I don't want this to smack of special interest for which an
industry in which you are employed. I can support this. I'm concerned that it's
Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder who's advancing this. I have been scouring our Ethics
Code on conflicts of interest, along with our own rules on disclosure and what
constitutes substantive financial gain or interest.
Maybe this might be an opportunity, Chair, for us to take a recess and
Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder discuss that with Ms. Strance, because I doI think
this is great to incentivize this process, but I don't want it to get muddied because
of the way it's being advanced.
Page 114
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. Given that, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
would you be up to having a discussion in recess while we take a recess?
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I'm just going to save everyone the time and
trouble. I think Ms. Lee Loy is confused. The industry that I work in is the solar
photovoltaic industry, which is a whole different kind of solar. I know it's
confusing to people, but there is photovoltaic solar, which is electricity-based, and
then there is solar hot water, which is thermal heating of water using solar energy.
So, although it is confusing people always ask, "Do you guys install solar hot
water?" No, we don't. So, I've actually never installed a solar hot water heater
system. But it is confusing for people, so I appreciate that that may have been
confusing for you, but there is no conflict of interest. As an electrical
journeyman, we don't do this job.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. Given that explanation,
Ms. Strance, do you still wish or suggest that we take a short recess to confer?
(Note: At this time, Corporation Counsel Elizabeth Strance came forward
to address the members of the Council.)
MS. STRANCE: Elizabeth Strance, Corporation Counsel. With Councilman
Kaneali`i-KI einfelder's disclosure, I concur with his assessment.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you very much. All right. Ms. Lee Loy, we're good?
Okay. Anyone else?
MS. LEE LOY: On the amendment, Chair.
CHR. DAVID: Oh, yes, on the amendment.
MS. LEE LOY: Thank you for clarifying. Completely support this. I appreciate
the disclosure. I think the installation of solar hot water heater is one thing, but
you work for an industry that provides the solar panels, so I do think there's some
gray area. But since we have it on the record, look forward to supporting this
amendment, and I do think incentivizing this is a good idea in an effort to provide
offsets, not only by way of tax credits, but our energy bills. I yield.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, go ahead.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Just to clarify for the record, it was said that
the company that I worked for provided solar hot water heating panels, and that,
again, is a very incorrect statement. They don't sell hot water panels; they sell
solar photovoltaic panels, which produce electricity when exposed to the sun.
Very different from solar hot water heating equipment in a very different industry.
Page 115
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
One being plumbing, the other being electrical. So just to put that on the record
so it's clear for everybody, as an ethical violation was—what would the correct
word be—implied. So thank you.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you for those clarifications. Anyone else? Ms. Villegas.
MS. VILLEGAS: Just a quick question. Judge Strance, if you're still there? I
guess, for my own clarity, regardless of the separation of the two kinds of solar
equipment and what they're utilized for, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder no longer
works in that field. He runs a restaurant and then works here in Council. So,just
for my greater understanding because of the question, if we once worked in a field
that is related to something we've brought forward, is that relevant at all anyway?
MS. STRANCE: We're talking about two different things. One is a conflict,
which it wouldn't be, and then the other is kind of the fair dealing (inaudible).
Given Council Member Kaneali`i-KI einfelder's explanation, he didn't have a
connection with the industry that's the subject of this bill, and so there wouldn't
be any kind of ongoing relationship or something that would seem to imply or
suggest that somebody had an advantage. And so the information just highlights
it's one more step (inaudible).
MS. VILLEGAS: Okay, thank you.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Villegas, and thank you again, Judge Strance.
Ms. Lee Loy.
MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, and again I started this as no disrespect. I was
actually trying to look out, but we have rules on disclosure of interests. And it's
very clear, financial interests mean interest held by a Council Member, his or her
spouse, domestic partner, children, sibling, parent, and so on and so forth. We've
all learned valuable lessons in front of the Board of Ethics to disclose, disclose,
disclose. And it's better to just disclose and move forward not argue about it.
Like I said, no way in disrespect,just flushing out the rule on conflicts of interest
and disclosure of interest.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy, and I think we got a perfect explanation
and clarification on both your concerns and Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder's. On that,
Mr. Clerk, a roll call vote,please.
Page 116
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Vote on Motion to The motion to amend Bill 227 with the contents of
Amend: Comm. 1050.2 was carried by the following roll call vote:
(Approved)
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards,
Villegas, and Chair David—8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Chung— 1.
Excused: None.
MR. HENRICKS: The motion carries.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you. All right, moving on. Main motion, as amended.
Any further discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor of approving Bill 227, as
amended with the contents of Comm. 1050.2, please say "aye."
Vote on Bill 227: The motion to pass Bill 227, as amended to Draft 2, on first
Draft 2 reading and adopt Finance Committee Report No. 225 was
(Approved) carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards,
Villegas, and Chair David—8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Chung— 1.
Excused: None.
Bill 235: 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 Federal Grants —Volunteer Fire Assistance account
($66,120); and appropriates the same to the Volunteer Fire Assistance—Federal
account, bringing the total appropriation to $156,120. The additional funds would
be used for volunteer fire assistance.
Reference: Comm. 1070
Intr. by: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder(B/R)
Waived: FC
Page 117
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Vote on Bill 235: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder moved to pass Bill 235 on first
(Approved) reading. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy and carried
by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards,
Villegas, and Chair David—8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Chung— 1.
Excused: None.
Bill 236: 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 Federal —Emergency Rent Assistance 2 COVID-19
account($15,000,000) and Interest—Other Federal account($75,000); and
appropriates the same to the Emergency Rent Assistance 2 COVID-19 account
($11,250,000) and Emergency Rent Assistance 2 Admin COVID-19 account
($3,825,000). The additional funds would be used to assist eligible households at
risk of experiencing homelessness or housing instability resulting from the
COVID-19 pandemic.
Reference: Comm. 1071
Intr. by: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder(B/R)
Waived: FC
Motion to Approve: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder moved to pass Bill 236 on first
reading. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder.
MR. KANEALII-KLEINFELDER: I moved to approve; I hope for everyone's
support. My only comment was we just got an email from Cyrus (Johnasen)
regarding the winding down of the ERAP program, or the Emergency Rental
Assistance Program, but this is substantial. It's $15 million from the Federal
Government, specifically for the Emergency Rental Assistance Program for
COVID-19 (Coronavirus Disease 2019).
I was hoping someone would be on from the Office of Housing. This was waived
to Council to expedite the funding and understanding they may need to wind
down one program to start up another. This really is the same thing, and this
funding is geared towards this rental assistance.
So I was hoping to hear from Ms. Hirota. All right, good job. Okay, Sharon,
thank you for joining us. I got the email from Cyrus either yesterday or today
regarding winding down and assessing where we stand, and I know this was
Page 118
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
coming. So can you kind of give us some background? Are we winding down?
Are we looking to come back up? Or are we winding down and wrapping it up
and then moving on to different things? Because, I believe there were some other
allowable uses of this ERAP funding that Ms. Kunz had mentioned. So give us
some background on this. This is a huge piece for our community. I got some
mixed opinions on this, but I'd like to hear from you what's going on.
(Note: At this time, Community Engagement Division Manager
Sharon Hirota of Office of Housing and Community Development
came forward to address the members of the Council.)
MS. HIROTA: Aloha, everyone. Sharon Hirota, County of Hawaii Office of
Housing, Division Manager with the Community Engagement Division. So thank
you for allowing me to share information about this Bill 236. So,just to give you
some background, the initial program was launched in April of 2021 with direct
funding that we received from the U.S. (United States) Treasury; close to
$10 million.
We are currently on contract with Hawaii Community Lending, who is working
with six on-island nonprofit organizations to deliver these services into the
community. As of last week Saturday, October 20, we've provided assistance to
over 2,700 households on our island, allowing 7,982 individuals to remain housed
as we went through the pandemic and as we worked ourselves out of it. We've
paid out a little over $23 million thus far in rental and utility assistance, with the
average grant amount a little over $3,000.
So, first of all, I also want to publicly thank our contractor for bringing together
these six nonprofits and working through the process. They include Habitat for
Humanity, Hawaii County Economic Opportunity Council (HCEOC), Hawaii
First Federal Credit Union, HOPE Services Hawaii, Neighborhood Place of
Puna, and the Salvation Army. To all of the leaders and the staff that worked so
hard to collaboratively work in unison in the delivery of services.
So what they were able to do was use one application: six entry doors into the
program, managed through one data software, to eliminate duplication of services
and ensure a timely payment because it was being processed on-island.
So, as you may have seen the notice issued through the Mayor's Office, we are
just about close to spending down the initial funding that we received from the
U.S. Treasury; and recently, in partnership with the State, was able to secure an
additional $15 million to support a similar program. We've learned a lot over the
last 18 months in administering this program alongside our partners.
Really, as we indicated in the public release, we are winding down the existing
program, reevaluating, and then moving forward in developing a more robust
program to ensure housing stability services are incorporated. And so we're not
Page 119
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
only providing the immediate rental assistance, but also connecting them to other
opportunities, including workforce development programs, financial
empowerment programs, and other appropriate programs to ensure that the family
can sustain their housing beyond this emergency assistance.
The program allows for a maximum of up to 18 months of housing assistance, but
we truly want to make sure that people are looking at other opportunities when
possible to increase their household income to ensure that they can sustain their
housing long-term without the financial assistance provided by this program.
Thank you.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you very much, Ms. Hirota. That's a
very good explanation and I appreciate that. I was concerned when I saw the
email. I was like, "Wait, are we stopping the program? What are we going to do
with $15 million when it's supposed to go into the community?"
But you also touched on something, which I think is extremely important. We
had Mr. Leopoldino here today describing that we have a fairly large vacancy,
and we can't find people to fill positions, and it's across the board. I think the
link to continued services and getting them stable and getting people back to work
is really what we need to be focusing on right now. Glad to hear that you're
incorporating that into this program. So thank you for the explanation. Thank
you for being here and able to jump on with us. I yield, Chair.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. Anyone else? Thank you,
Ms. Hirota, for being here. All right, all those in favor of approving Bill 236 at
first reading, please say "aye."
Vote on Bill 236: The motion to pass Bill 236 on first reading was carried
(Approved) by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Richards,
Villegas, and Chair David—8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Chung— 1.
Excused: None.
MS. HIROTA: Thank you.
CHR. DAVID: If I'm not mistaken, that brings us to the end of our agenda.
MR. HENRICKS: No. We have four referrals for Executive Session.
CHR. DAVID: Yes. I mean our bills.
Page 120
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
MR. HENRICKS: I thought you were being rather optimistic there.
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): (Note: Items in this category were taken up previously, out of order.)
REPORTS: The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business, Reports.
(Note: Items in this category were taken up previously, out of order.)
REFERRALS FOR The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business, Referrals
EXECUTIVE for Executive Session.
SESSION:
Comm. 1052: DOMINIC YAGONG V. COUNTY OF HAWAII; CIVIL
NO. 3CCV-22-0000234
From Deputy Corporation Counsel Lerisa L. Heroldt, dated October 10, 2022,
requesting an attorney-client confidential discussion to consult with the Council
regarding the above-referenced lawsuit filed by Frank Jung, Esquire, on behalf of
his client Dominic Yagong.
(Note: At this time, Deputy Corporation Counsel Lerisa L. Heroldt came
forward to address the members of the Council.)
CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Go ahead, Ms.
MS. KIMBALL: Chair if I may? I'm actually going to make the motion that we
file Communication 1052 and accept the recommendation of Corp. Counsel,
because I understand that there's a number of people that would have to recuse
themselves from this decision. I personally have read the recommendation and
I'm willing to support it. So that's the motion I'll make. If anybody doesn't need
to recuse themselves from decision-making and just would like to go into
Executive Session, I think that can be done as a separate motion. Clerk, is that
okay? Am I doing that right?
MR. HENRICKS: Yeah. I think just the initial motion to close file is good, and
then you can make the motion—if there is no motion into Executive Session, then
you can make a motion to approve Corporation Counsel's recommendation as a
second motion.
MS. KIMBALL: All right, I will do it that way then. Thank you for the
clarification.
Page 121
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Motion to Close File: Ms. Kimball moved to close file on Comm. 1052.
Seconded by Ms. Kierkiewicz.
CHR. DAVID: Go ahead. Oh, Ms. Lee Loy, you have a ?
MS. LEE LOY: Yeah. I think this particular matter—well, I'll just lay it out. I
just don't think I can be objective on this one. Earlier, my colleague asked
Ms. Strance about prior employment and if we had to carry that forward, and if
that was a conflict of interest. In this particular matter, there is no financial gain
for me in this one, but I did have previous employment on this matter. I have
strong opinions about this particular matter and can be objective. However, I
think it would be just wise to recuse myself from this vote while no conflicts
actually exist through substantive financial gain. From a position of fairness, I
think it just would be wise for me, on this particular matter and then on
Communication 1053, to recuse myself and be excused from the vote.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. And on that note, Mr. Clerk, I also
have a personal conflict with this case. I have recused myself in prior
communications that have come forward, and I will be asking to recuse myself as
well. Mr. Clerk, do we just leave the room, because I'm not going to vote on this
one?
MR. HENRICKS: There is no need to leave the room unless there is a motion to
enter into Executive Session.
CHR. DAVID: Oh, we'll just recuse. Okay. All right then. Perfect.
MR. HENRICKS: But you may not I don't know. Whether you can chair the
meeting or not is up to you to decide.
MS. KIMBALL: That was my recommendation, maybe yield to chair to
CHR. DAVID: So I'm going to recuse myself, and I'm also going to leave the
room and I'll have
MR. HENRICKS: I don't think you need to leave the room.
CHR. DAVID: I don't?
MR. HENRICKS: No. It seems like you want to,though. It depends on what
happens next.
CHR. DAVID: Okay, all right. I'll recuse myself and I will be turning over the
chair to Finance Chair Matt Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. Go ahead.
Page 122
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Relinquish Chair: At this time, Chair David relinquished the chair to Acting
Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder.
ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Let the record reflect I have
assumed the chair of the meeting.
MS. LEE LOY: Chair?
ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Yes.
MS. LEE LOY: I am going to leave, but I also wanted to state, for the record, I
know we got a confidential packet. I have not read that just because I think I'm
too intimate with this particular matter, so I've returned that. That's been with my
staff. I just wanted to make that very clear on the record. So they'll be returning
that to Corporation Counsel. I'm going to leave, not only because of that, but I
also have another appointment to get to. So thank you.
ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy.
Ms. David, you're recused.
MS. DAVID: Yes. I'm recused and I think I will be leaving as well, and I'll be
back for the other two Executive Session matters. Very well. All right.
ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Ms. David.
MS. DAVID: Thank you.
Motion to Concur: Ms. Kimball moved to concur with the recommendation of
Corporation Counsel regarding Comm. 1052. Seconded by
Ms. Kierkiewicz.
ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Council Members, discussion on
the motion? Ms. Kimball.
MS. KIMBALL: I'll just briefly say that, having read through the
recommendation, it seems logical and appropriate. I don't feel the need for
further elaboration; it was quite detailed. So I appreciate the effort that must have
gone into that. I don't want to deprive you of your moment to shine. It was a
very well-written brief. I do appreciate it. But I agree with your assessment and
don't feel the need to go into Executive Session for further detail.
ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Any
further discussion? Okay. Anything to add, Ms. ?
MS. HEROLDT: No. I don't have anything to add. Thank you.
Page 123
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: What is your name, for the
record?
MS. HEROLDT: Lerisa Heroldt.
ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Okay, Ms. Heroldt,
thank you. Mr. Clerk, do we need a roll call or just"all in favor"?
MR. HENRICKS: You can do a roll call just for Mr. Inaba's benefit.
ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you.
Vote on Motion The motion to concur with the recommendation of
to Concur: Corporation Counsel regarding Comm. 1052 was
(Approved) carried by the following roll call vote:
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kierkiewicz,
Kimball, Richards, Villegas, and
Acting Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder—6.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Chung— 1.
Excused: Council Members David and Lee Loy —2.
MR. HENRICKS: The motion carries.
Vote on The motion to close file on Comm. 1052 was carried by the
Comm. 1052: following voice vote:
Filed
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kierkiewicz,
Kimball, Richards, Villegas, and
Acting Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder—6.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Chung— 1.
Excused: Council Members David and Lee Loy —2.
Comm. 1053: KAWAUCHI V. COUNTY OF HAWAII; CIVIL NO. 14-1-000336
From Deputy Corporation Counsel Lerisa L. Heroldt, dated October 10, 2022,
requesting an attorney-client confidential discussion to consult with the Council
regarding the above-referenced lawsuit filed by Douglas Halsted, Esquire, on
behalf of his client Jamae Kawauchi.
(Note: At this time, Deputy Corporation Counsel Lerisa L. Heroldt came
forward to address the members of the Council.)
Motion to Close File: Ms. Kimball moved to close file on Comm. 1053.
Seconded by Ms. Kierkiewicz.
Page 124
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Council Members, discussion?
Motion to Concur: Ms. Kimball moved to concur with the recommendation of
Corporation Counsel regarding Comm. 1053. Seconded by
Ms. Kierkiewicz.
ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Any discussion, Council
Members?
MS. KIMBALL: I'll just say again, Deputy Heroldt, thank you so much for this
very detailed report. It was very clear, concise, and your argument was well made
I thought. Please, if you'd like to have a deeper discussion with us for any reason,
please speak up and say so, but I personally agree with your assessment and am
willing to support your recommendation. Thank you.
MS. HEROLDT: Thank you very much, Council Member Kimball. I have
nothing further to add.
ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Thank
you, Ms. Heroldt. With that, seeing no further discussion, the motion to accept
the recommendation for Communication 1053 by Corporation Counsel is on the
floor. All in favor?
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Aye.
ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Any opposed? Mr. Clerk, you
have six members in favor, Mr. Chung being excused, and Ms. Lee Loy and
Ms. David being excused as well.
MR. HENRICKS: I think we'll just mark them all as absent. It's the same net
effect. They weren't here to specifically request when this item came up but it's
the same thing, I think.
ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay.
Vote on Motion The motion to concur with the recommendation of
to Concur: Corporation Counsel regarding Comm. 1053 was
(Approved) carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kierkiewicz,
Kimball, Richards, Villegas, and
Acting Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder—6.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Members Chung, David,
and Lee Loy —3.
Excused: None.
Page 125
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Vote on The motion to close file on Comm. 1053 was carried by the
Comm. 1053: following voice vote:
Filed
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kierkiewicz,
Kimball, Richards, Villegas, and
Acting Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder—6.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Members Chung, David,
and Lee Loy —3.
Excused: None.
Relinquish Chair: At this time, Acting Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder relinquished the chair to
Chair David.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. Let the record show that
I'm assuming the chairmanship. Go ahead, Mr. Clerk.
Comm. 1058: GEORGE K. YOUNG V. STATE, ET AL.; CASE NO. CV12-00336
From Deputy Corporation Counsel Steven K. Idemoto, dated October 12, 2022,
requesting an attorney-client confidential discussion to consult with the Council
regarding the above-entitled matter, including settlement discussion.
Motion to Close File: Ms. Kimball moved to close file on Comm. 1058.
Seconded by Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder.
Vote on Motion Ms. Kimball moved to enter into Executive Session in
to Enter Into order to hold attorney-client privilege discussion regarding
Executive Session: Communication 1058, as authorized by Section 92-5(a)(4)
(Approved) of the Hawaii Revised Statutes. Seconded by Mr. Richards
and carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair David—7.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Members Chung and Lee Loy —2.
Excused: None.
CHR. DAVID: We're going to take a recess while we go into Executive
Session.
MR. RICHARDS: Chair?
CHR. DAVID: Oh, go ahead.
Page 126
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
MR. RICHARDS: A procedural question. Clerk, since there's one other item,
we don't know if we're going into Executive Session on that. Should we read it
in now or do we go out and come back in?
MR. HENRICKS: We'll wait until this item is fully disposed of.
MR. RICHARDS: Okay. Thank you.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Richards. We're in recess.
Recess: At 4:25 p.m., the Chair called for a recess in order to clear the
room.
Reconvene: The meeting reconvened at 4:59 p.m.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you. We're back on the record and out of Executive
Session at, what time, five o'clock. Ms. Kimball, the motion please.
Vote on Motion Ms. Kimball moved to concur with the recommendation of
to Concur: Corporation Counsel regarding Comm. 1058. Seconded by
(Approved) Ms. Villegas and carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair David—7.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Members Chung and Lee Loy —2.
Excused: None.
Vote on The motion to close file on Comm. 1058 was carried by the
Comm. 1058: following voice vote:
Filed
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair David—7.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Members Chung and Lee Loy —2.
Excused: None.
Comm. 1059: MALAMA I KE KAI O WAIPI`O, ET AL. V. ROTH, MITCHELL, ET AL.;
CIVIL NO. 3CCV-22-106
From Deputy Corporation Counsel Steven K. Idemoto, dated October 12, 2022,
requesting an attorney-client confidential discussion to consult with the Council
regarding the above-entitled matter, including settlement discussion.
Page 127
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
Motion to Close File: Ms. Kimball moved to close file on Comm. 1059.
Seconded by Mr. Richards.
Motion to Enter Ms. Kimball moved to enter into Executive Session in
into Executive order to hold attorney-client privilege discussion regarding
Session: Communication 1059, as authorized by Section 92-5(a)(4)
of the Hawaii Revised Statutes. Seconded by
Ms. Villegas.
CHR. DAVID: Discussion?
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: In looking over this communication, I know
one of these people very well. We're not a family. We're not immediate family.
I don't have any business relations with them, but I don't know where that leaves
me.
CHR. DAVID: Mr. Clerk, are you ?
MR. HENRICKS: It doesn't sound like a conflict on its face.
CHR. DAVID: Okay.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay.
MR. HENRICKS: I mean, that's not for me to decide. It's very vague. So it's up
to you.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Given that you have quorum and I know this
person very well, I'm going to remove myself from this so I'm not questioned
later on. Thank you.
MR. RICHARDS: I think that would be prudent. Good move.
CHR. DAVID: All right. Let the record show that Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder has
recused himself from this matter. Any other discussion on the Executive Session
motion? Seeing none, all those in favor of going into Executive Session, please
say "aye."
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Aye.
CHR. DAVID: Any opposed? Mr. Clerk, we have six "ayes" and three
"excused": Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder
MR. HENRICKS: I'll note that Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder is being excused from
this vote in particular, and Mr. Chung and Ms. Lee Loy are absent.
Page 128
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
CHR. DAVID: Yes. Okay, thank you.
Vote on Motion to The motion to enter into Executive Session was carried by
Enter into the following voice vote:
Executive Session:
(Approved) Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kierkiewicz, Kimball,
Richards, Villegas, and Chair David—6.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Members Chung and Lee Loy —2.
Excused: Council Member Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder— 1.
CHR. DAVID: All right, we are now going into Executive Session.
Recess: At 5:03 p.m., the Chair called for a recess in order to clear the
room.
Reconvene: The meeting reconvened at 5:30 p.m.
CHR. DAVID: Aloha, everyone. I'm taking this meeting out of Executive
Session. Thank you, everyone. Thank you, Mr. Idemoto.
Vote on Motion Ms. Kimball moved to concur with the recommendation of
to Concur: Corporation Counsel regarding Comm. 1059. Seconded by
(Approved) Mr. Richards and carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kierkiewicz,
Kimball, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair David—6.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Members Chung and Lee Loy —2.
Excused: Council Member Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder— 1.
CHR. DAVID: Thank you. We're back on the main motion. All those in favor
of filing Communication 1059, please say "aye."
COUNCIL MEMBERS: Aye.
CHR. DAVID: Any opposed? We have seven "ayes," Mr. Clerk, and
Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder is recused, and Mr. Chung and
MS. KIMBALL: Six.
CHR. DAVID: Oh, six, I'm sorry. Mr. Chung and Ms. Lee Loy are absent and
excused.
MR. HENRICKS: I just recorded Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder as absent.
Page 129
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
CHR. DAVID: Okay, that's fine.
MR. HENRICKS: But not absentminded.
CHR. DAVID: He was absent and excused.
Vote on The motion to close file on Comm. 1059 was carried by the
Comm. 1059: following voice vote:
Filed
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kierkiewicz,
Kimball, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair David—6.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Members Chung, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
and Lee Loy —3.
Excused: None.
OTHER The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business,
BUSINESS: Other Business.
(There was none.)
ANNOUNCE- The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business.
MENTS: Announcements.
(There were none.)
ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, at 5:32 p.m., Ms. Kimball moved to adjourn the
meeting. Seconded by Ms. Villegas and carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Richards, Villegas,
and Chair David—7.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Members Chung and Lee Loy —2.
Excused: None.
Page 130
Hawaii County Council-52 November 2,2022
CHR. DAVID: We are now adjourned at 5:32. Thank you, everybody, for this
long day. We are adjourned.
Approved: FEB 0 8 2023
CO' ,T RK
JH/tk/dt
Page 131