Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN FC 2024/02/06 (2022-2024)Committee on Finance 281i Session Hawaii County Building 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, Hawaii February 6, 2024 CALL TO The regular meeting of the Committee on Finance was called to order at ORDER: 2:01 p.m., in the Council Chambers, Hilo, by Mr. Matt Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Chair. ROLL CALL: Present: Mr. Matt Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Chair Ms. Cindy Evans, Vice Chair Mr. Holeka Goro Inaba, Member Ms. Jenn Kagiwada, Member Ms. Ashley L. Kierkiewicz, Member Ms. Heather L. Kimball, Member Ms. Susan L. K. Lee Loy, Member Ms. Rebecca Villegas, Member Absent & Excused: Ms. Michelle M. Galimba, Member STATEMENTS The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of FROM THE business, 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: Timothy Rowan: Bill 131 (Comm. 715), in support. (Representing Black Sands Community and Malama O Puna) Carrie Kowalski: Bill 131 (Comm. 715), comment. (Representing Black Sands Community) Daniel Bona: Amedeo Markoff: (Representing Mainstreet P5hoa Association) Joshua Franklin: Bill 104, Dr. 4 (Comm. 600.26), comment. Bill 131 (Comm. 715), in support. Bill 131 (Comm. 715), in support. Robert Golden: Bill 131 (Comm. 715), in support. FC-28 February 6, 2024 Jon Olsen: Bill 131 (Comm. 715), in support and comment. Suzanne Frey: Bill 131 (Comm. 715), in support. Steve DeMeritt: Bill 131 (Comm. 715), in support. William Rex Curry: Bill 131 (Comm, 715), comment. Floyd D. Eaglin: Bill 131 (Comm. 715), in support. Sharon. Toma: Bill 131 (Comm. 715), in support. Deb Smith: Bill 131 (Comm. 715), in support. Tiffany E. Hunt: Bill 131 (Comm. 715), in support. Mikial Denker: Bill 131 (Comm. 715), comment. Smiley Burrows: Bill 131 (Comm. 715), in support. Emily Na`eole: Bill 131 (Comm. 715), comment. Sara Steiner: Bill 131 (Comm. 715), in support. Matthias Kusch: Bill 104, Dr. 4 (Comm. 600.26), in support. Michael McGuire: Bill 131 (Comm. 715), comment. Lanell Lua: Bill 131 (Comm. 715), in support. Shasta Fix: Bill 131 (Comm. 715), comment. Mitzi Bettencourt: Bill 131 (Comm. 715), in support. Recess: At 3:05 p.m., the Chair called for a recess. Reconvene: The meeting reconvened at 3:14 p.m. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: We are back from recess. Mr. Clerk, I'm going to bounce around a little bit today. Let's start with Bill 104. Cha-n.ge Order As directed by the Chair and with no object from the Council Members, the of Business: the following items were taken out of order: Page 2 FC-28 February 6, 2024 Bill 104: AMENDS CHAPTER 19, ARTICLE 1, SECTION 19-2; CHAPTER 19, (Draft 4) ARTICLE 7, SECTION 19-53; AND CHAPTER 19, ARTICLE 11, SECTION 19-90, OF THE HAWAI`I COUNTY CODE 1983 (2016 EDITION, AS AMENDED), RELATING TO THE CREATION OF A LONG-TERM RENTAL CLASS FOR REAL PROPERTY TAXES Establishes a Long -Term Rental tax assignment classification for properties that are occupied under a lease for at least 12 consecutive months and under a signed lease for six consecutive months or more to the same tenant. Reference: Comm.600.26 Intr. by: Ms. Kagiwada and Ms. Galimba Postponed: December 5 and 19, 2023; and January 23, 2024 (Note: There is a motion by Ms. Kagiwada, seconded by Ms. Galimba to recommend passage of Bill 104, Draft 4, on first reading.) CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Ms. Kagiwada. MS. KAGIWADA: Thank you, Chair. Thank you to the testifiers who testified on Bill 104. Because my co-author is not able to be here today because she's out sick, she asked that I postpone. Motion to Postpone: Ms. Kagiwada moved to postpone Bill 104, Draft 4, to February 20, 2024. Seconded by Ms. Evans. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Any discussion, Council Members? Council Member Evans. MS. EVANS: Thank you for the postponement. I'd really like to hear from both of you; what you think about the bill. And I don't know at what time, you know, I've got some comments on it. So, do you want us to wait? We can't talk today about any comments? MS. KAGIWADA: It's on the postponement right now. MS. EVANS: Just only on the postponement? Okay, alright. I yield. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Yeah, motioned to postpone. Okay, thank you, Council Member. Motion is on the floor. Seeing no discussion, all in favor? Any opposed? Page 3 FC-29 February 6, 2024 Vote on Motion to: The motion to postpone Bill 104, Draft 4 to February 20, 2024, Postpone: was carried by the following voice vote: JApproved) Ayes: Committee Members Evans, Inaba, Kagiwada, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Villegas, and Chair Kdneali`i-Kleinfelder— 8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Galimba — 1. Excused: None. CHR, KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: To Bill 131, please. Bill 131: AMENDS ORDINANCE NO. 23-51, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS AND FINANCING THEREOF FOR THE FISCAL YEAR JULY 1 2023 TO JUNE 30 2024 Adds the Public Works Puna Alternate Routes Study — County Project ($1,000,000); and the Puna Alternate Routes Study — State Project ($1,000,000) to the Capital Budget. Funds for this project shall be provided from General Obligation Bonds, Capital Projects Fund — Fund Balance and/or other Sources, to identify alternate routes to relieve traffic congestion and increase evacuation capacity, if needed. Reference: Comm.715 Intr. by: Ms. Kierkiewicz (Note: Comm. 715.1, from Council Member Ashley L. Kierkiewicz dated February 6, 2024, transmitting proposed amendment to Bill 131, was circulated.) Motion to Approve: Ms. Kierkiewicz moved to recommend passage of Bill 131 on first reading. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy. CHR, KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Council Member Kierkiewicz, go ahead. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chair, and mahalo nui for taking it out of order. I'm coming with tremendous aloha. Tiff Hunt, Auntie Em, bringing out the scrapper tendencies in me a little bit. And you know, I think representing Puna, you've got to be a little bit scrappy. But I just want to make clear, what happened in the past should stay in the past and I'm not going to rehash that. I don't think it's conducive in the spirit of collaboration and unity in what we're trying to do with this bill. In thinking of what happened to (Bill) 107, I ran across this quote about, sometimes the universe sends you a signal about things not being the right thing because it's unsettling. Page 4 FC-28 February 6, 2024 Bill 107 felt really unsettling, and there was just no way to kind of fix it. So, it just needed to die and provide us a clean slate, a new opportunity. I think to do things the right way. So, this bill provides us with that fresh start. I've got to say, I worked really, really hard to make sure we didn't lose $1 million. We don't have $1 million in our contingency accounts. A million dollars from the State to do something that this community of Puna has asked for, for decades. They just want a study; they want options. They want options because if you heard the testimony, it is nightmarish to think about what could happen if we're hit with another natural disaster, and people are trying to get out of Puna, upper and lower. And folks have actual lived experience that they are still traumatized by, and they just want to prevent that kind of situation from happening again. As soon as (Bill) 107 died, I immediately got on the phone with our House Transportation Committee Chair, Rep. Chris Todd, to give him this idea of, hey, I want to salvage the $1 million. I also think that it behooves us to look at Puna as an entire region. And let's just get on the record already, Hawaiian Homes is not consenting to using their lands. We've already acknowledged that in the resolution. Let's do a new bill that covers all of Puna. And I'll get the County to throw in an extra $500,000. So, there's $2 million to do this study. The testimony is clear. We need the alternate routes. Some folks have said, "Yeah, you know what, maybe people shouldn't live in Puna." We choose to live there. We want to live there, but we should not be punished for lack of good planning by local government decades ago. This is an opportunity. Small chance, right, small chance. But a really pivotal piece to resolving a lot of the historical inequities and injustices because of that planning. And it's an opportunity to ensure that our Puna community gets the respect and dignity that it deserves. I don't feel like I need to say this, but I will. The benefits of alternate routes, they provide redundancy, and they give people a route choice. It alleviates traffic congestion, and if you've been in Puna traffic, you very much know that if here is a car accident that's going to happen on these highways, you're going to be stuck for hours. And that is not a situation that you want to be in, especially if you have little kids; then you go the bathroom, and they've run out of snacks. Scary situation, right? Alternate routes will increase circulation and connectivity. They also provide our first responders; our police, our medics, the opportunity more quickly when there is a call for service. Page 5 FC-28 February 6, 2024 It also ensures that our Puna residents have better access to employment, recreational health care, and medical opportunities. A lot of which exists outside of the Puna region. And it also bolsters our ability to ensure efficient evaluation during times of emergency and national disasters. I also think this study, and you know, Public Works Director can comment on this, these additional routes will provide us the opportunity to look at additional amenities like bike lanes, multi -purpose paths, rapid bus transit. Folks have asked, well, there's got to be studies that have thought in the past. Why even waste $2 million? I think Director Pause can speak to what we can actually do to improve highways with $2 million. Not a lot you can do there. But we do have something called the Puna Regional Circulation Plan that provides a really good start. A lot of context and background for Public Works to use. As they do, this very important professional study. What we have to nail down in this study is, where are folks going? I don't always know that they're all going to Hilo. I think a lot of these folks are actually working on the West side. And so, this study will help us identify where folks are going, and that will help to inform placement of alternate routes throughout the district. This study is also going to tee up other things like environmental studies, preliminary engineering; more community consultation, final design, and construction. A lot to do, but the study is the first step and will help us to tee up additional funding opportunities. With that said, I think we know there's a clear need. We have to plan carefully; we've got to act with great care, and we have to make sure that it is a context sensitive design. And so, with that being said, Chair, I would like to amend Bill 131 with the contents of Communication 715.1. Motion to Amend: Ms. Kierkiewicz moved to amend Bill 131, with the contents of Comm. 715.1. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy. CHR. KANEAL1'1-KLEINFELDER: Council, discussion? Council member Kierkiewicz. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Just some background for my colleagues and members of the public. What this would do is, it would add an additional Section to Bill 131, and it reads, "The policy directive set forth in Resolution 416-24 is hereby incorporated." And this was very important to our neighboring homestead communities that the expressions made in the resolution, which were unanimously adopted by this body, are worked into the planning and study. I know that it is identified in the fiscal impact sheets, but we're going just a little bit further to allay any concerns to just make sure, Hawaiian Homelands off the table. We're not even considering them in the study. So, the way we could do Page 6 FC-28 February 6, 2024 that was just to ensure that we are incorporating that language into the actual body of the bill. We had discussions about it in the past with (Bill) 107. In consultation with Corporation Counsel, nothing precludes us from doing this. It is not good policy practice. But that aside, I think this is one way to just assure our community, we hear you. We hear you, we're listening to your concerns, and we are going to move forward with this study in a very informed and pono way. Thank you very much, Chair. Happy to answer any questions folks might have about Res. 416-24; about this amendment. And I just want to note that our Public Works Director Steve Pause is joining us from Kona Chambers. Mahalo nui, Director. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Discussion on the amendment? Council Member Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Chair. On the amendment, yes, in support of this amendment. I think walking out the previous bill, we were really getting wedged into some very hard corners. And as my colleague mentioned, it just was so clunky. I'm actually relieved that Bill 107 broke, because now we were able to architect something that actually matches the sentiments of community, which is why I'm in support of this amendment. You know, it is a term of art to incorporate by reference. It's a legal term. I think during our discussions with the previous bill, we acknowledged that there's the bill and a background report. But somehow there was no way to marry two documents together, and this amendment does exactly that, it incorporates by reference, Resolution 416, And the idea is in the sentiments that's expressed there, that was unanimously supported, and supported by community for that matter on both sides of this study. So, with that, Mr. Chairman, in support of the amendment and reserve comment for the final bill when we get there. I yield. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Council Member Kagiwada. MS. KAGIWADA: Thank you. On the amendment, I just want Corporation Counsel, if you could come forward, because I'm a little bit confused. I thought that we weren't supposed to put the amendment in this bill, in this kind of budget bill. I just want to understand what the difference is between this and what was discussed around Bill 107 of putting similar language into that bill. How is this different? (Note: At this time, Corporation Counsel Elizabeth Strance came forward to address the members of the Committee.) Page 7 FC-28 February 6, 2024 MS. STRANCE: Good afternoon, Elizabeth Strance, Corporation Counsel. It's not, and as Council Member Kierkiewicz indicated, it's not great policy or practice, but it's not illegal. And the difference between the prior amendment and this one was there was an expressed statement about how monies could or couldn't be used versus the reference to the policy directive that's contained in the resolution. So, like I said, I stand by the comments made previously, that it's not great policy and there may be separation of powers issues, but they're mitigated by the reference to a resolution. At some point, you know, my job is to say what's illegal and what's not illegal, and this is not illegal. MS. KAGIWADA: Not illegal, but just maybe not advised, okay. Got it. MS. STRANCE: It's a slippery slope, but I'm sitting in the cheap seats on this one. MS. KAGIWADA: Okay, alright. On the amendment, I'm going to have to think about it a minute, but yeah, I mean, the intent obviously I support the intent a hundred percent. I just want to make sure that we're doing things correctly. Thank you for bringing this forward. Appreciate the intent. I yield. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Council Member Kimball. MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Chair. You know, I'm going to support this amendment because it refers to another policy document, which is the resolution. When we were discussing making an amendment to Bill 107 that would have put the policy language in 107, that in my mind, was a slippery slope and improper. This I think, well still probably not best practice, let's try not to do this again. I think it's acceptable because it's directing towards another policy document that this body deliberated and voted on. So, I'll be supporting this amendment with the understanding that it is a different process than what we attempted to do with 107. Thank you, I yield, Chair. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Council Member Inaba. MR. INABA: Thank you, Council Member Kierkiewicz, for bringing this back. I think you've hit is spot on in terms of the process that brought us to today. In support of this amendment and the bill, as amended after it. Thank you. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Okay, seeing no further discussion, before I go to the motion, to the maker, as I expressed from the beginning, I'm looking at the entire region of Puna. And ensuring that we are addressing Puna -wide issues, and like I keep saying, we all end up on Pana`ewa stretch.. This is a study for alternate routes, understood, okay. The resolution that Page 8 FC-28 February 6, 2024 we're referring back to, Resolution 416, in the second or third to the last, "BE IT RESOLVED" clause states, and I'm saying this as we're using the resolution to be the guide for Bill 131, it states that we're only looking at makai routes immediately adjacent to Highway 130 in community such as Orchidland, Ainaloa. So, if you could speak to that, that would help me understand where we're going with this bill with the amendment. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chair, for that question. That specific language was done in response to community concerns about making sure that lower Puna communities had additional options. That does not preclude the Department of Public Works from looking at the entire Puna region. That's why this bill is called the Puna Alternate Routes Study, because it's not specifically emphasizing focus on mauka or makai. It's for the entire Puna region. And you know, I've had a number of conversations with our Public Works Director where I'd like to hear him say, on record, that he fully understands the will of this body, to look at the entire region. Thank you. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, thank you for saying that. Mr. Pause, can you speak to that? (Note: At this time, Director of Public Works Steve Pause came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. PAUSE: Certainly, yeah. Steve Pause, Director of Public Works. First of all, Council Member Kierkiewicz, I felt did a very detailed and eloquent synopsis of what the intent of this study is. And to that extent, we have heard loudly and clearly from the community what the needs are, and what rural areas are not to be considered as part of this study. So, I think I can clearly say on record that we've heard the body of the Legislative Branch here, and yes as it's also been mentioned, the concept here is to do something that's somewhat all inclusive that addresses emergency as well as traffic congestion; provides some redundancy as far as looking at options to alleviate traffic situations; does traffic counts; looks at constraints with roads and potential roads. So again, I believe the intent here is to do something that's inclusive of looking at routes out of Puna. I think Council Member Kierkiewicz also brings up that one of the more critical things that we've not talked about is, where are people going? We hear people going to Hilo, but there's also people going to the West side, and I would hope that our study could look at routes and where traffic is going, and again, do something that's comprehensive to look at traffic congestion as well as evacuation, emergency, egress, as well as incorporating the things that our Planning Department is doing as well to just look at a snapshot that's not just the here and now, but is also looking at something longer term. Page 9 FC-28 February 6, 2024 So, hopefully, you understand you know, we're committed to listen to what all is being said today and move forward in a way that benefits all of Puna. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you very much, Director. Okay, I have no further questions. Any more discussion? Okay, hearing and seeing none, the motion is on the floor to amend Bill 131 with the contents of Communication 715.1, all in favor? Any opposed? Vote on Motion The motion to amend Bill 131, with the contents of to Amend: Comm, 715.1, was carried by the following voice vote; (Approved) Ayes: Committee Members Evans, Inaba, Kagiwada, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Villegas, and Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder — 8. Noes; None. Absent: Committee Member Galimba — 1. Excused: None. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Motion carries. Back to the main motion, Bill 131, as amended. Council Member Kierkiewicz? Discussion on the main motion then. Council Member Evans. MS. EVANS: Okay, thank you. First of all, I want to thank everybody that came out and testified. You know, it's just very important that you never stop testifying on an issue like this, no matter what happens. I do think that Bill 107 was flawed. I really applaud what Member Kierkiewicz has brought in front of us. I think it really is the right way to go on this. When you ask Public Works to look at alternatives, I don't think we should strap them to being that specific to the makai side. I think we need to tell them they have to look. Because we don't know what they're going to find. We don't know what criteria the Hawaii State Department of Transportation may require. We're talking about culture. We're talking about history. We're talking about flood plains. We're talking about streams and bridges. I don't know your area that well, but my experience in my own district is that a lot of roads get really, really expensive really fast. And what we think might be the best route is not the best route, because the Department of Transportation (DOT) will say, it's just too expensive. We're not going to choose the route you prefer. We're going to choose a different route because it's less expensive. Because money will play into this in the end. But along the way, we need to understand what and how the people who are going to make the final decision, what they based their criteria on. And I know, and I have a lot of faith in our Public Works Director, Mr. Pause, and your staff to know what that criteria is going to be. Because you don't want to go down that Page 10 FC-28 February 6, 2024 path that we did up in my district and did all the alternative route study. We went through all the different hoops and finally DOT said, it's just too expensive. We're backing off. We'll see you later, and they walked away from the community. It's been a huge disappointment, and I don't want to see that happen to you. So, I think when you start this study, you know, just make sure the right criteria and the people who make decisions what they're making the decisions on, and I think we'll get there faster. And I think this is really good the way you wrote it. I do think $500,000 was not enough money. I think $2 million is closer to what I think it's really going to cost when you look at all the different options you're going to have. Yeah, I think this is going to be better in the long run. So, very supportive and thank you for your diligence again. Thank you to the community for keeping up that voice. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Council Member, Council Member Kagiwada. MS. KAGIWADA: Thank you, Chair. So, great, glad you brought up alternative solutions, Council Member Kierkiewicz, as the draft resolution I shared with you. That's a really important part to me. I'm hoping that we can with the extra $500,000, you know, include —because you are doing so much outreach, and I think you are doing so much outreach and I think you mentioned to me, Director, you're going to be doing so much outreach to the public. It would be a good time to get input on alternate solutions, not just alternate routes. And especially, because we know some of those solutions could be much less expensive than building a new road, for instance. So, I'm hoping that this extra $500,000 will allow, you know, you to collect some of that data while you're working on the plan here. Things like, you know, I hope we can involve Mass Transit; your new Safe Routes to School Coordinator, Director. Maybe even DOE (Department of Education) to look at staggered school start times. My understanding is that school days that is the absolute worse traffic in the morning. So, if we could do staggered work times for some people. Maybe at the County even, staggered school times. We could maybe alleviate some of the worse traffic. Then of course, going to our Mass Transit Plan, our Multimodal Transportation Master Plan, things like that. And looking at those things. I know some of the community members mentioned bicycle lanes, vanpooling, carpooling; even constructing like more Park and Ride lots, things like that. And I was happy to see the new Medical Campus in Puna is getting considered as well, which could, I think. You know, we heard from so many people talking about Page 11 FC-28 February 6, 2024 getting to medical appointments and how critical that is and how they don't have that in Puna. So, you know, I think there's a lot of things we can. I do realize this is a study for alternate routes. But I'm hoping that as we're collecting data from the public, this might be an easy way to do that. I don't know if either the author or the Director wants to speak to that at all. Thank you. MR. PAUSE; I'm happy to address some of that. Thank you for all of those comments, and I think the fact that more groups —obviously, public stakeholders, but also just internal to the County with a lot of really good resources. And certainly, within Public Works, we have a lot of expertise in Engineering and Traffic. But also engaging, as you say, Mass Transit and some of their long-term plans. Complete streets, yes, our Planning Department in terms of, you know, they're the authors of the CDP (Community Development Plan) and a number of previous documents that we'll look at population centers and growth. They're another important stakeholder. As is the DOT, right? So, Highway 130, as you know, is a State Road, as is Highway 11. People we need to get with them and get their input because you know, quite possibly, one of the alternatives goes back to the widening of those roads. So, again, in order to be as comprehensive as possible, I think we need to engage all of those folks. The public and the community is critical as well. Council Member, as you mentioned, DOE, we have a lot of experience working with them just because of their impacts, and the facilities and the timing of school hours and what that means to the road and our infrastructure as well. So, thank you for those comments, and most definitely, all of that needs to be incorporated, and I appreciate your input. Thank you. MS. KIERKIEWICZ; Chair, could I respond? CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Yes. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Thank you so much, Council Member Kagiwada, You know, I don't think it's fair for the County to do everything. I'll just say that. Highway 11, 130, it's not County. You know after the whole (Bill) 107 debacle, there was a little Facebook Instagram post by the Senator for Puna, Joy San Buenaventura, who was meeting with DOT, Director Ed Sniffen and our Hawaii Island Administrator Harry Takiue, and they were talking about these sorts of solutions, these remedies that you mentioned. I think it's important that everybody chip in a little bit. The State needs to lead and we certainly, as a County, I think have a responsibility to show up and help Page 12 FC-29 February 6, 2024 coordinate and do some things. But I don't think it's fair to always make the County do everything, especially when it is not our jurisdiction. I'm not saying let's not get involved. I'm just saying the State needs to step up and show a little bit of leadership in attending those meetings as well. Thank you, Chair. MS. KAGIWADA: Agreed. And my point was, you're going to be doing so much public outreach to these communities, that I just think it would be a missed opportunity if we didn't get input from these communities on these things while we're doing public outreach. So, that's my main thing, is we can go ahead. It doesn't cost us more to just ask another question or two. So, I hope we can do that. Thank you so much. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Council Member Inaba. MR. INABA: Thank you. I think we've discussed this matter as much as we can. So, if people have thoughts on where a route should go, show up to the Planning meetings, and then we can get our input there. But I think we should vote on this. Thank you. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Council Member Villegas. MS. VILLEGAS: Yes, just a quick question for Director Pause. I guess I'm wondering, just so I'd have a broader understanding because one of the concerns that I've heard from people is that this amount of money isn't actually even a sufficient amount of money to do a study like this, and can you tell me what the study would entail in order for me to just have a broader understanding of what's possible. MR. PAUSE: So, the previous time, I think I outlined what I saw moving forward and obviously, the first step is getting the funds in place. It didn't even go through a selection process for a professional services consultant. We work with them to develop the scope of work. Now, the funding, you're absolutely right. You need enough money to, you know, do all the things you want to do. But part of that whole sculping process is determining where that fits in. We can start off clearly public engagement is going to be a big portion of what we're doing here. But just developing the general data that you need, developing alternatives working at the options, doing analyses, looking at risks; looking at constraints, looking at, as Council Member Evans brought up, things like bridges and culverts and floodplains; and then there'll be archeological. So, there's a lot of work that would go into it. But I would suggest at this point, I don't want to say, $2 million is enough and I don't want to say it's not enough. I think we can do a pretty good job with this funding. And you know, it may lay out some good opportunities and good around Page 13 FC-28 February 6, 2024 alternatives and do a pretty good analysis of the pluses and the minuses. And I think most of you are probably familiar, they call it a SWOT (Strength, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threat) analysis, right, where you can actually see opportunities and such. So, there's a number of tools that we can use to identify and really get into some ranking. So, I'm comfortable with the amount of money. I think it's a really good start, and I think others have made the statement that, you know, we're not going to reach the end with the $2 million study, but it will be certainly, I think put forth a lot of really good analyses. And as we've all said is important, public input and discussion to go forward with where we might want to go in the future. MS. VILLEGAS: Thank you, Director Pause, I appreciate that. Clear as mud. But giving us some positive reinforcement for the amount of money and the capacity for it being done. I'll be supporting this piece of legislation today. 1 really appreciate your creativity in incorporating the requirements for DHHL (Department of Hawaiian Homelands) to be left out of the consideration for this. I also appreciate the challenges that were expressed and concerns by Council Member Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder with the exclusion of Puna mauka, I believe it was, because it was more Puna makai to begin with. But that we incorporate all of those options. You know, as I sat and listened, and regardless or not, we're on our computers or on our phones, we're still listening. For any of you out there, parents when your kids yell at you. You're not listening to me, because you're stirring a pot or doing something else. You can be very actively listening even if you're not having eye contact with that person the whole time. But as I was listening to the testimonies, it also brought to mind all the people that are suffering from the same issues on the West side. Those that commute from Ocean View navigate in these same, if not, greater amount of time. They have to travel just as far to a hospital and doctors' appointments. And it doesn't invalidate the needs of the people traveling from Puna into Hilo. I think what it actually does is, once again, highlights this universal issue hitting our communities that are very rural communities. Part of that responsibility lies within the people living in rural communities to understand where it is they live; and people in the mainland that live in very rural communities. It does, it takes three hours to get to a hospital. There just has to be a balance because sitting up here being demanded that we fix these things, some of it can be solved and some of it —the avenues, literally, can be created to connect those things. But other times, I think there's some wisdom in looking at our island as a whole and how we've built out and where our population centers are, and how do we realistically support those population Page 14 FC-28 February 6, 2024 centers with the things that they need, and those living in those population centers being able to have a bit of understanding based on what the possibilities even are for providing for those. I would love to be able to put —you know, we were talking today about Humane Society or an animal control shelter being able to be built in Ka`u and in the North part of the island. There are a lot of needs. So, as we continue to try to navigate the allocation and distribution of resources and the challenges facing each part of our island, I just felt like I would be remiss not to mention the similarity of many of these issues on the West side. I appreciate you talking about being able to take H61ualoa as an alternate route. But I could tell you all the people that emailed me about not enjoying the fact that H61ualoa has become this other alternative route, because it doesn't have curb, gutters, sidewalks. It doesn't have always the proper striping. There's no lighting. It's like taking another side road in some of your neighborhoods, which then other people squawk about. So, we have some issues, and we have some capacity issues, and we have some infrastructure issues on this island. But I'll be supporting this today and look forward to us navigating our way to solution. And the reason I am supporting it is because DHHL lands were more specifically excluded from a potential route. So, with that I yield. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Council Member Kimball. MS. KIMBALL: Thank you. Ms. (Tiffany) Hunt, I hope you take this process and use it as another case study for your class. I know you do a lot of civic engagement with your students. And this is a case where it's a lot about procedure. So, I'm going to do something, and it's just for the record because our body is prohibited from considering something that is voted against. Point of Order: MS. KIMBALL: So, what I'm going to do is say, is Point of Order, Chair. This is not substantially different from Bill 107. The reason for —again is to have this on the record because we are prohibited from doing it. I don't want the public, anyone other there that wasn't participating today, to have the mistaken impression that we've done a kind of a bait and switch thing here, because the comment was made so many times in the testimony. Thank you, Council Member Kierkiewicz, for bringing Bill 107 back. I want to make it expressly clear that this is not Bill 107, it doesn't look like Bill 107, and it is not the same thing. So, Chair, could I have a ruling on my Point of Order, whether or not this is not substantially different from Bill 107? Page 15 FC-28 February 6, 2024 MR. HENRICKS: Before you do so, that's not actually a Point of Order. Your point of order would be that it is substantially the same. Therefore, a violation of the Rules. MS. KIMBALL: My Point of Order is that it is substantially the same as Bill 107, and therefore, in violation of our Rules to consider. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you for that, Ms. Kimball. In this case, I'm going to disagree that this bill is substantially the same; that we can proceed with hearing this bill because it is substantially different for a number of reasons. Thank you for that. MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Chair. And appreciate you ruling on that quickly. You know, words matter, as we've always said when we talk about legislation. As Chair, I got a lot of calls about what the clown show the Council is. And I've got to say, no, this Council did what we were supposed to do, which is legislate carefully and deliberately. Bill 107 was flawed. It was brought to us flawed. We listened to the community. We said, no. And Council Member Kierkiewicz brought back a new substantially different bill that addresses the original concerns. And while it may not appease a number of folks in the Puna community that it's taking a little longer, I want to just assure everybody, that in my mind, we did the right thing. We followed the legislative process the way it is intended to be followed. So, you know, completely opposite, this is not a clown show, this is a body that is very careful, deliberate, and makes sure our T's are crossed and our I's are dotted. The only other final comment I make, you know, obviously supporting this going forward. One of the concerns that I also heard from folks is, "Oh, the State's never going to give us money again." I have talked with many of my friends over there in the square building, that's not going to be a repercussion of this. Also, many of them understand the position we were put in and that more homework needed to be done. I am not concerned that this process of us doing our job the right way has impacted us in any way. So, again, thank you Council Member Kierkiewicz for coming back again and resolving this issue with the way this body is supposed to do our work. Thank you, I yield Chair. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Council Member Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Chair. Mr. Pause, question, timeline, assuming all of these passes will be somewhere in the middle of March. What does that timeline look as far as engaging our stakeholders? Page 16 FC-28 February 6, 2024 MR. PAUSE; So, I had originally made the statement that, from the date that the funds are in place, we'd be looking at an 18 to 24-month time period. I'll retrack that somewhat in the sense that, once we get a consultant on board, work scope done, you're really looking at a 12 to 18-month period. Now, having said that, what I'm saying is, it's beholding upon us to get going right away once the funds are in place to get that work scope ironed out and get a professional services contractor on board. And that process, ideally, takes three to four months and then we start. So, I don't know if I clouded the issue, but you know, best case, we've got a study complete in 18 months. I think your question is, when do we start engaging stakeholder, and I would say, from the time we get the funds in place, probably four to six months. So, before the year is done, I would hope to be on the way with the study. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Mr. Pause. You know, as you launch that process, if you could please keep all of us aware of that. I think we have valuable networks in which we can reach out to the community. I'm actually really excited about where this goes, because I actually see it as a model on how we do future alternative route studies in other districts. I would encourage my colleagues to work with their partners at the Legislature to secure funding and provide the match so that some of these other rural areas that we have to begin to look at, can begin that process. You know, I want to echo what my colleague, Ms. Kimball mentioned, words matter. And in this case, what really resonated for me was the definition, and it's something that I mentioned during our deliberations of Bill 107. And knowing now, that this is Puna Alternative Routes, pleural Study, really gives me great confidence and great hope that we can really begin to address some of the traffic problems in Puna. But more importantly, as others have mentioned, the reason why we are experiencing such traffic volumes in and out of Puna. I understand why in, but I'm still very curious as to why out and what we can do to provide those services within the community. Then finally, I just want to really appreciate the rumble we went through. I think there's always another way, and Ms. Kierkiewicz has provided us a new way to ensure that we continue to have the funding but also put additional funding there so that the work can get done. I would also encourage in the future, Mr. Pause, we heard information about monies for Hazard Mitigation Studies, and that's actually what I think community is looking for, is alternative routes as it relates to hazard mitigation, emergency access, emergency routes. So, I would love to see this become the model, but how we can actually use our Sustainability Office to look at communities across Page 17 FC-28 February 6, 2024 the island to address this issue. Thank you, Ms. Kierkiewicz, well done. Way to work hard. I yield. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Council Member Evans. MS. EVANS: I just wanted to just make a quick comment about, sometimes bills come in front of us and it feels like we're being rushed to a decision. And sometimes bills come to us, it's like rubbeistamp it because we say it's good. But I have to applaud my colleagues, it's been one of the better bills I think we've worked on this year. We've asked really, really hard questions. We really dug into it, and I actually think we now have something to move forward on that is not going to cause us grief in the future. I think it's in the right form now, and I'm really pleased about that. And I will say, having been a State representative, how many times we had to go back and fix flawed bills. Flawed things that were in a budget; flawed language that wasn't right in a bill, and we'd have to come back the following year to amend it, because it just wasn't right. So, these things happen. You know, people try and sometimes they just aren't quite, hit the mark, and we have to go back and correct it. So, again, I want to applaud the community that spoke up and had your voice continued to be heard on this issue. And I want to thank Member Kierkiewicz for reaching out to the Senator and to the Representative that represent the district, so they understand that, you know, we are doing this; we care, and we just want to make sure it's done right. So, thank you very much. I yield. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Okay, seeing no further discussion, mahalo to Ms. Kierkiewicz for bringing this forward and re -invigorating something that I think truly was a miscommunication issue. Not a miscommunication, a communication problem we have of where the money came from. I did fail to ask the question at the previous meeting. I wasn't here for the last vote, and I apologize for that. I did fail to ask the question from the State directly and to get an authoritative answer on this. But whether or not that funding could be applied district -wide, this new bill covers that. And I like that because Puna is a whole, and what you've done is take something and say, hey, there's no boundaries, there's no upper and lower. I've seen these comments go back and forth on Facebook. Puna to Volcano, we all deal with the same issues. It's the same thing, maybe a little bit different. But we all get the same roads. You have to see it as a whole. So, I really appreciate where we're at right now with this. I had some staff dig into the past. So, I wanted to feel this out. This isn't the first time PMAR (Puna Makai Alternative Routes) has been discussed, and what I found is really interesting to me, and it needs to be said. Page 18 FC-28 February 6, 2024 Pm going to submit this as a communication to the bill as well for everyone's reference, both folks in the County and folks interested in what's happened before this bill today. And the importance of it is, it highlights past funding that's been appropriated, and it also highlights the importance and longstanding of this issue. There's an old saying, "You measure twice, you caught once." And as an electrician, I know that. You cut a pipe too short, you're back to bending the same pipe. You've got to go back and put it in and it's a pain in the ass. But there's also, "Measure ten times and never cut." And I'm saying that because the discovery that I went through with my staff highlights something similar. I'll summarize this so I don't take up everyone's hour, but PCDP (Puna Community Development Plan) 2008 PMAR; PCDP 2015, Connectivity, Emergency Response Subcommittee. Puna Regional Circulation Plan 2005 PMAR $338,000. Ad Hoc Committee on Puna connectivity, "Find an Alternate Route." Puna Makai Study. Federal Aid Highway 2035 Transportation Plan for Hawaii District 2014. Recommendations: Alternate Routes from Highway 11, 130 and 132. Study, Population Growth. Hawaii County General Plan 2005, Hawaiian Beaches to Railroad Study. CIP (Capital Improvement Projects) 2016-2017, PMAR Study $2.4 million ($1.3 from the State, $190,000 from Feds); 2012-2013 PMAR Study $1.5 million (State CIP revolving fund); 2011 PMAR General Obligation Bonds (PMAR issuance for General Obligation Bonds, $500,000); 2009-2010 PMAR Study ($190,000 Federal Grant; $1.5 million General Obligation Bond), $1.69 million in total; 2008-2009 PMAR Study, ($190,000 plus $250,000; 2006-2007 CRF (Contingency Relief Fund) for $30,000 to the Planning Department Capital Projects; 2005-2006 $30,000; 2004-2005 PMAR Study reappropriation from 2001-2002 Ordinance 2-79 CIP PMAR. I'm going to tack that on to the communication so that we can all read that document. So, we can understand the history behind where we are right now. And I'm not saying this to the detriment of this bill. I'm saying this because we have measured ten times and never cut. And if you come from private industry and you never cut that pipe, then I'm going to kick you off my crew because you just wasted my entire day while I waited for you to cut a pipe and come back to me and put it in. I'm mostly saying that to caution us as we reappropriate $2 million more towards the study, and I show this history of funding whether used or not used. I don't know what the outcome of all these studies was, but I tell you what, we don't have an alternate route. So, I'll be voting with my Council Member counterpart from Puna on this because the issue is important. We need the alternate access route. The Study is what's important. I really do provide this information to the Department of Public Works Page 19 FC-28 February 6, 2024 for your knowledge. So, you can look at this and go, okay, we've been here. There may be a lot of juicy tidbits in all of these studies that provide recommendation already and doesn't send us back to the drawing board. With that said, you know, I'm going to yield. Council Member Kierkiewicz, any statements? MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Real quickly. Thank you, Chair, for the opportunity. Thank you for the community for being here. Thank you to my colleagues for having an open mind and compassion and understanding of the struggles that are being faced by our Puna community. We're asking for money for a professional study. And my colleague from upper Puna went through a very long legislative history of attempts to get a study done. With Bill 107, we weren't able to do it, but this Council, our office, we showed leadership so that we could save that money and get this study done for our community. Public Works, going to be your best friend. Checking in on all the time on progress made for this study, because the ball's going to be in your court. I'm going to encourage you to continue to engage in our community. Not just Puna, but homestead too. Uncle Pat wants to be engaged. And to please ensure that we are also looping in our Planning Department and our Transportation Planner. I don't want silos within the County. I want the best possible study on the best possible recommendations because our community has been more than patient and they deserve the very best. Thank you to my colleagues for their support. yield. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Okay, seeing no further discussion, we have the motion on the floor to forward Bill 131, as amended with the contents of Communication 715.1 to Council with a favorable recommendation. All in favor? Any opposed? Vote on Bill 131: The motion to recommend passage of Bill 131, as Draft 2 amended to Draft 2, on first reading was carried by (Approved) the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Evans, Inaba, Kagiwada, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Villegas, and Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder — 8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Galimba — 1. Excused: None. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEI NFELDER: Please take us up to the top of the agenda. Page 20 FC-28 February 6, 2024 Return to Order The Chair directed the Committee to return to the order of business. of Business: COMMUNI- The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, CATIONS: Communications. Comm. 12.25: REPORT OF FUND TRANSFERS AUTHORIZED: DECEMBER 16 — 31 2023 From Controller Kay Oshiro, dated January 5, 2024. Motion to Close File: Mr. Inaba moved to close file on Comm. 12.25. Seconded by Ms. Kimball. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Council Members, discussion on the communication? Okay, hearing and seeing none, just for everyone's information, in speaking with our new Finance Director, Ms. Nakagawa and her Deputy, Mr. Brown, they are going to be asking the different departments to be here for these communications. Usually, they come to these last, but I do appreciate that the departments will be here. I recognized some of you guys out there today. The departments will be here to answer a lot of our questions, which is very helpful, as different things arise. And I appreciate this shift from our new Finance Director and her Deputy. Seeing no further discussion on Communication 12.25, motion is on the floor. All in favor? Any opposed? Vote on Comm. 12.25: The motion to close file on Comm. 12.25 was carried by Filed the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Evans, Inaba, Kagiwada, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Villegas, and Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder — 8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Galimba -- 1. Excused: None. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Mr. Clerk, please go to Bill 120. This is by request. Change Order As directed by the Chair and with no object from the Council Members, the of Business: the following items were taken out of order: Page 21 FC-28 February 6, 2024 Bill 120: AMENDS CHAPTER 19 OF THE HAWAPI COUNTY CODE 1983 (2016 EDITION, AS AMENDED) BY ADDING A NEW ARTICLE RELATING TO A REAL PROPERTY TAX STABILIZATION PROGRAM Establishes a fixed-rate property tax stabilization program for property owners who are at least 85 years old that utilize the property as their principal residence. Reference: Comm.674 Intr. by: Ms. Evans Postponed: January 23, 2024 (Note: There is a motion by Ms. Evans, seconded by Mr. Inaba to recommend passage of Bill 120 on first reading.) (Note: Comm. 674.2, from Council Member Cindy Evans dated February 5, 2024, transmitting a proposed amendment to Bill 120, was circulated.) CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Council Member Evans. Sorry, didn't you give you a warning on that one. MS. EVANS: You can give me the warning because I do have an amendment. Motion to Amend: Ms. Evans moved to amend Bill 120, with the contents of contents of Comm. 674.2. Seconded by Mr. Inaba. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Council Member Evans, discussion? MS. EVANS: Thank you. So, the last time we met on the bill, there was some concern about who would benefit from this. And when the question was asked of the Real Property Tax Division, what would be the assessed value of the properties that would be impacted by this, and the answer was 43,000 to I believe, 27 or 27 and a half million dollars. People were really concerned about the benefit of the properties of the higher value. So, the amendment that I have that you'll see is that it would apply to properties where their net taxable real property value is $2 million, except for the net taxable real property value of $2 million or more. Which means this Real Property Tax program would not apply to properties that are valued at more than $2 million or more. I think what it gets to is my original intent, which was when people turn 85 years -of -age and they are residents and homeowners, and they're residents and qualify with the homeowners' tax exemptions, then when they turn 85, their taxes are frozen until such time when the title of their property would be transferred from them to whatever, an entity, a family member; or you know, they die, and we get notification that the title is no longer under their name. Page 22 FC-28 February 6, 2024 The other thing about this bill that I really like is it's an opt -in bill. So, people sign up for it. So, this is not automatic when they turn 85. They'll actually have to sign up for this, which would be a tax -freeze. I do know that. I asked Lisa Miura if they could recalculate the actual tax impact, and I believe that we have Real Property Tax Division here that can comment on what this change would do in terms of the actual Real Property Tax impact. So, would you please tell us what this change is? I think it's significant. (Note: At this time, Real Property Tax Assistant Administrator Keita Jo came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. JO: Keita Jo, Assistant Administrator for Real Property Tax Division. With the amendment going through, the implication would be to drop the overall loss in revenue from $170,000 down to about $8,000. So, we're talking about $164,000 would be the total loss in revenue, and that represents a drop of three parcels. So, three parcels were categorized as being valuable; valued above $2 million. MS. EVANS: Okay. So, I'm asking my colleagues for a favorable support on the amendment. Thank you. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Council Member Evans. Discussion on the amendment? Okay, Mr. Jo, so you're saying that revenue loss of $178,000, given this amendment would drop to $170,000. MR. JO: Actually, what I'm saying is the revenue loss would be closer to $164,000. Originally, the calculation was $172,000, thereabouts. So, a loss of about $8,000. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, that's if Bill 120 became reality; passed, we would lose as a County $170,000. MR. JO: $164,000. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: With the amendment? MR. JO: Correct. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. Thank you. Council Member Kimball. MS, KIMBALL; On the amendment, I'll support it moving forward, although I still have qualms about the main bill itself. But I'll support this change, thank you. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. On the amendment, all in favor? Any opposed? Page 23 FC-28 Vote on Motion to Amend: (Approved) February 6, 2024 The motion to amend Bill 120, with the contents of Comm. 674,2, was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Evans, Inaba, Kagiwada, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Villegas, and Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder — 8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Galimba -- 1. Excused: None, CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Motion carries, Back to the main motion, Bill 120, as amended with the contents of Communication 674.2. Council Member Evans. MS. EVANS: Thank you. So again, I ask my colleagues to consider this. I personally believe fixed income, especially for people who are 85-years-of-age, cost of living, food, and gasoline. And just when you go on fixed income, it's really, really a challenge. And we know the value of the dollar. If you know present value due to economics and present value of dollars, we know our dollars and pensions that we get are not the same dollars if go out into the future when you look at present value. So, I think this is one way I hope to help people stay in their homes and not be taxed out of their homes. We know in my particular district; the assessments are really going up because the houses are selling at a higher value. So, I kind of hope that we keep local families and people who have lived their whole lives here so that they can stay in their homes till their end of life. And so, that was my intent. I personally know family members that's lived in Illinois where I grew up, till the age of 17. My god mother, and my aunts, and uncles have said when they did the freeze for them on property tax; it really made a difference for them. So, I do come from personal experience that, in fact, it does make a difference when you're on a fixed income. So, I ask for your favorable support and comments. Thank you. CHR. KANEALFI-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Council Member Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Chair. You know, Keita, thanks for being here. I think when we're evaluating this bill, you know, we ask you what kind of hole is it going to put in our budget right now? I think what I want to ask is, what kind of hole does it put in the budget year after year after year? I think that's the information that's missing. Page 24 FC-28 February 6, 2024 We make a good decision here to help others, but as we heard in other bills, if it comes out of one pocket, it has to go back in from somebody else's pocket. Do we have any information around that and what that work ask looks like? MR. JO: So, that $172,000, well now $164,000 that I quoted was in the first year of this program. And what it does is because it's a stabilization, over the course of every successive year, ordinarily the County would see an increase in revenue by, all things considered equal, value, tax rates, about three percent. You're losing that three percent year to year. So, in your sixth year, the County's actually losing $1 million a year with the stabilization. So, I think that speaks to your point of year to year. MS. LEE LOY: And then there's no sunset provision on this, right? It just continues on until some future Council decides to — MR. JO: Correct, as it's written, there's no sunset provision. MS. LEE LOY: Okay. You know, maybe I'm going to have a conversation offline with you. You know, like any good thing, it's hard to take it back once we give it away, right? And absolutely in support of our kupunas; and fixed income; and those issues that actually are beginning to affect not just kupunas, but a lot of working-class individuals. Yeah, I'm going to be supporting now, but I'm going to have another conversation, Keita, if that's okay? Separate and apart and see where we land at Council. Thank you, Chair, I yield. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Council Member Kimball. MS. KIMBALL: Thank you. Definitely appreciate Council Member Evans, what you're trying to do here. But can't support the mechanism, and as Council Member Lee Loy pointed out, we're talking about compound interest, which if anybody knows finance, it goes really sky high very quickly. With that said, you know, with the example that you brought up of Illinois, I'm not sure that they have that three percent protection. I mean, that is a really critical protection that we have for homeowners across the board, not just our seniors. As I said in the previous hearing, you know, we've made a lot of tweaks here and there in our tax system recently. All I think good measures, but I'm concerned about adding one more until we've seen about how all those have been sorted out. When I was looking at the Ag Tax bills before and the Homeowner's exemption, which again, I think is a really good tool for some of these things, it's much more Page 25 FC-28 February 6, 2024 progressive in the sense that it helps lower income folks more so, than these flat things. I did spend a lot of time looking at them, correct me Keita Jo, what's the name of the International Appraisers, Assessors, what do they call those guys? MR. JO: International Association of Assessing Officers. MS. KIMBALL: Thank you. They have a lot of great recommendations about mechanisms, and a lot of great descriptions about how those levers incentivize and disincentivize different things. So, I'm not going to support this legislation today, but I would encourage you to look at some of the reports that they have online, because there might be other mechanisms that are little bit more appropriate and equitable than 1 think this particular approach would be. Then again, I think we need to kind of see how some of these other programs settle out before we do any more playing in this puddle. So, thank you. I yield Chair. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Council Member Kagiwada. MS. KAGIWADA: Thank you, Chair. I was kind of playing with some of the same stuff in my mind, which is, yes there are some seniors that, you know, may have some issues about being on fixed income. But I also know there are a lot of seniors at this point where their expenses are way lower. I'm just thinking of our young families that are also really struggling, and given that we have limited resources, I feel like we did the highering the exemption for homeowners for gradations and increasing those as people get older. So, starting at 60 and then they go up, and up, and up, and up. I feel like we did that recently. We have the three percent cap. Overall, our real property taxes are lowest in the nation. So, yeah, I don't know that I can support this right now. I do think, you know, if there was something that was really getting at people specifically, who may be struggling, but not necessarily spending for people who can afford it. I don't know if there's a way to do it. But looking into that a little bit more, I think I'd be much more apt to support something like that. Thank you, I yield. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Council Member Evans. MS. EVANS: Thank you. When I started looking at this bill, I was reading the obituaries every day and I was printing them to see kind of what's really happening with our older people, and it's pretty shocking if you start looking at the statistics in actuary. So, you know, this is about if someone passes it on to Page 26 FC-28 February 6, 2024 their children, if they die, whatever, this goes away. Whenever the title changes, this goes away. It's pretty amazing to me to see how many people are actually —now the older people that we have on our island are really starting to pass away at a higher rate, and I don't know, maybe we need some actuary information here. But I have to tell you, you know, I don't think your analysis that when you say, it's going to be that much in the future, I'm not sure that's real, because it's really based on longevity and people living and people not giving their property over to their children or not selling it; maybe not selling it because they have to go in a nursing home, and they have to pay for it, so they've got to sell their house to pay for, you know, being in a nursing home or an assisted living facility, which happens to so many people when they get old. So, I think that the number that we're talking about, the $164,000, I don't see that as really playing out in the long run, because there's so many variables when people get over the age of 85, how they have to sell their home or have to give it away to their children; maybe to protect the family inheritance or whatever. But we're just saying that if that person lives at home, and I was thinking in my mind, so many widows. You know, I meet so many widows in my district that are over the age of 85. Their husband has passed and they're at home. They want to stay in their homes. I know they want to stay in their homes, and I'm just thinking a lot of the widows, especially the older ones that we have in our communities now, a lot of them are homemakers. So, they didn't bring a pension, right? They weren't working. Yes, they were working. They took care of their family. So, a lot of the people that I'm thinking of are people that I know. People and the faces of kupuna that are in our communities today. So many of them, yeah, these fixed incomes and the taxes going up. It's really stretching a lot of people. So, I'm trying to make sure they can stay in their home as long as they can stay in their home. So, that's really my intent. So again, asking for favorable support. Thank you. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Council Member Kimball. MS. KIMBALL: Just to respond, and I want to make sure you understand, Council Member Evans, I totally understand where this is coming from, and appreciate and support that. You know, I have a lot of folks, particularly, there's an aunty in Honoka`a who I used to deliver groceries to during the pandemic, who you know, we talked about this a lot, right? But there's a flipside to this. One, we already have a trend of more senior population to youthful population. And that silver tsunami, as we call it, is affecting other locations but it's particularly drastic here. Then you add to what we've been talking about, wanting to incentivize and disincentivize. My concern is, you put something in place like this, and what you're doing is you're Page 27 FC-28 February b, 2024 incentivizing more retirees to come and move here and basically park their money and displace more local families with this mechanism. So, what I suggest is, that there might be another mechanism. I'm certain there's another mechanism to accomplish what you're trying to accomplish which has an income element to it, that is not going to create that incentivization, that I think is exactly the opposite of what, as a body, have talked about wanting. We want to make sure that our local families can stay here. And this isn't any kind of ageism. We want all the families to stay here. But the more we incentivize, the County being a place to basically land beg, because with this you're capturing all those people too. That puts us in danger of having a really imbalanced population. So, want to just caution. This, I think, is something that needs to be pulled and go back to the drawing board to think of a different mechanism. And like I said, there are others out there that may be more equitable in approach. Thank you, I yield. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, Mr. Jo. So, I have come to realize, numbers can just play havoc, because someone is going to quote you in the paper tomorrow. Council Member Evans' bill is going to cost the County $10 billion, yeah, I don't know. It's magical. You didn't say $10 billion, but you know, you said a million. Maybe there's, I think, some truth to what Ms. Evans is saying. We're looking at the stabilization of 85 and older. There's a lot of variables. But I would think, you know, as we get older, and we all get older in life. You know, I may not see 85. Even my wife, well maybe she makes 90, but it's hard to say how long someone is going to live and participate in the program. Ms. Kimball, you know, she kind of caught me off guard with those retirees, and then as well as the —I'm thinking you could have someone who's 85 or older in the program, but whose family lives with her or him. At that point, you've actually got a home being stabilized for tax purposes, but it's not just the retired individual in the home or someone 85 and older. It's an entire ohana. So, I mean, there's a lot of different ways to look at this. That's what I'm getting down to. To the maker, just listening to the room, do you want to go ahead with the vote? MS. EVANS: I just wanted to ask a question to Real Property Tax. Do we have other taxes where we could put a qualifier of how long they've lived in Hawaii? How long have they been homeowners? Do we do that type of additional criteria? MR. JO: So, I believe Corporation Counsel would probably have to weigh in on this, but there's a Commerce Clause that prohibits treating individuals who are out of state any differently than in -state individuals. The mechanism for the homeowner's cap is probably the best way to prevent individuals from seeing huge spikes in their taxes. Page 28 FC-28 February b, 2024 If I would go further, the legislation that was passed over the last two years to increase the exemption amounts was essentially a stabilization. Tax rates remained the same. In some cases, a lot of individuals saw a reduction in their tax for the current 2023 tax year from what they were paying before. I'd also point to the IAAO (International Association of Assessing Officers), because Council Member Kimball pointed out to the IAAO. The Council commissioned an IAAO study back in 2012. One of the big caveats to that study was the complexity of the Real Property Tax system in the County of Hawaii. A stabilization adding that on to a homeowner's exemption would just add another level of complexity to our Real Property Tax Program, which individuals as it is, including staff within the Real Property Tax Division have difficulty understanding and conveying that. So, I would just provide that insight if I could. MS. EVANS: My only comment was, 2012 is not 2024, and a lot has happened. And when you freeze someone's taxes at the age of 85 until such time the title transfers, I think is pretty understandable. So, you know, I respect my colleagues who have been here a lot longer than me. This is my first year here. I think it's a good idea. I'd like to see it advance, but I will roll with the vote today. I recommend that we take the vote. Thank you. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Okay, Council Members, the main motion, Bill 120, as amended with the contents of Communication 674.2. All in favor? Any opposed? Vote on Bill 120: The motion to recommend passage of Bill 120, as Draft 2 amended to Draft 2, on first reading was carried by (Approved) the following roll call vote: Ayes: Committee Members Evans, Lee Loy, and Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder — 3. Noes: Committee Members Kagiwada, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, and Villegas — 4. Absent: Committee Members Galimba and Inaba — 2. Excused: None. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Just as a general informative for everyone, the motion moves forward to Council with a negative recommendation, it doesn't die. Thank you. Mr. Clerk, if we could, I'm going to take up a few out of order again. Let's go to Resolution 417-24, please. Page 29 FC-28 STATEMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC ON RES: 417-24: Res. 417-24: February 6, 2024 The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business, Statements from the Public. The following individual registered to speak and came forward when called by the Chair: Tiffany Edwards Hunt. Comment. AUTHORIZES THE PAYMENT OF FUNDS OF A LATER FISCAL YEAR AND OF MORE THAN ONE FISCAL YEAR FOR MULTI -YEAR LEASES FOR FOUR WALKING FLOOR TRAILERS AND FOUR COMPACTING TRAILERS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT Authorizes the Mayor to enter into a five-year lease agreement with an approximate monthly cost of $17,200 for the walking trailers and $18,800 for the compacting trailers, to be used by the Solid Waste Division, Reference: Comm.699 Intr, by: Mr. Kaneali `i-Kleinfelder (B/R) Motion to Approve: Ms. Lee Loy moved to recommend adoption of Res. 417-24. Seconded by Ms. Kimball. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Council Member, discussion? We do have the department here joining us today. Thank you for your patience. Seeing no discussion, quick question, Director. Mr. Inaba, go ahead. MR. INABA: Thank you. We just have, I believe, four resolutions for the department today, and we've had resolutions recently for different equipment. So, just kind of want to see in the big picture where we are in terms of the overall replacement of our equipment and how many times we might be seeing you in the future, Director. Thank you. (Note: At this time, Department of Environmental Management (DEM) Director Ramzi Mansour came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. MANSOUR: Good afternoon, Ramzi Mansour, Director for DEM. That's a great question. DEM has been going through the inventory list for the entire department. So, we have quite a bit of spreadsheets for equipment. So, I'll give you a summary for just the trailers and heavy trucks. The Department has a total of 106 trailers. Currently, we have 80 out of the 106 that are working. So, we're already behind with trying to do the catch up. Most of our equipment has not been purchased. If you look at the history of this equipment, we go to 1994 equipment that's never been replaced. Page 30 FC-28 February 6, 2024 We're recommending that as we go through the list, every fiscal year, we try to budget a reasonable amount till we come out of that gap. Once we come out of that gap, assets will be monitored based on maintenance, usage, mileage, and age. And we're going to set priorities so we can be able to put a small amount every year, so we don't fall behind like we're doing now. So, that is the strategy. As far as the heavy truck tractors, the department had 56 total. We've got 37 working currently. So, we're short and we're trying to catch up so we can provide the services without any interruption. And I want to give kudos to my staff; Mike Kaha and his staff. When we first started under this Administration, I remember I was in the Mayor's Office, and he was getting calls. Some of the transfer stations have closed because we don't have equipment. We couldn't move garbage from East to West. The reload facility in Hilo caught on fire about a year ago because we didn't have enough equipment to move. That's been controlled, I'm glad to say, over the last three years, the number of closures for services have minimized. And thanks to our staff, Mike Kaha here, he's the Acting Deputy Chief, and his staff to continue providing the services to your constituents. MR. INABA: Our constituents, okay. My question, though, originally, was we'd seen a lot come through. Where are we in terms of the overall replacements. Are we 80 percent there? How many more times will we see resolutions like this? There's multiple pieces of equipment in four different resolutions. So, I'm just trying to get a picture, because we keep getting them piecemealed out, as you folks are finding out, which is totally —nobody's questioning, we want things to work right. But we just want an idea. MR. MANSOUR: This year, this equipment. Next year, we're going to come to you 2024-2025 fiscal year, we're going to come and ask for a few more. But this year, this is what you see and that's what we're going to order. To let you know, this went through the budget. It's already in the budget this year. So, this is probably the process, we have to come before with the Form B-52 to request the authorization. We went through that during the budget last year. So, we usually try to include it in the budget, so we can talk about it during the budget hearings, Once the budget gets approved, we come before you to ask for authorization to purchase. So, this equipment were included in last year's budget hearings. MR. INABA: Circling back again, overall, how close are we to making sure that overall, we have working equipment that we're supposed to have? MR. MANS OUR: With this, I mean from 106 out of 80, and if we get the six that we're asking for or the four Floor Trailers and four Compacting Trailers, then you Page 31 FC-28 February 6, 2024 can see it in the number. We're going to have 84 versus 106. So, the intent to meet that goal. So, if you look at the working vehicles, the trailers 80, and we need 106, so we're going to continue coming to you till we reach that goal. So, today, we're asking for four Walking Floor and four forty -foot Compactors. So, that give us eight. So, that brings our number to 88. We still need to target 106. So, net year we may come to you with more just to be able to sustain the services. That's the reason I created that need and where we need to be. So, to answer your question, 88 versus 106, we're going to get eight this year. So, that'll be 88 versus 106. So, probably within the 85 percent. Our goal is to get to the 100. MR, INABA: So, if you wouldn't mind sharing that with us, just so we're able to get an idea of what your goals are, and we can have that understanding, and just ahead of you sending that, the 106 is based on what? What was at one time in the inventory, and that's what you folks go off of or where do those numbers come from? MR. MANSOUR: This is based on equipment inventory the department has. So, we have a total of 106; a combination of compacting trailers, loaded trailers, walking floor trailers, roll -offs. And that will give us a total of 106 based on our department spreadsheet inventory list. MR. INABA: So, that's the minimum you need to be able to carry out the services? MR. MANSOUR: To continue with these minimum services to our constituents. MR. INABA: Alright. Thank you, yes, if you could send that over to us, we appreciate it. MR. MANSOUR: Sure. CHR, KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Before you go, Council Member, I believe last time we had this many resolutions, I did ask for a spreadsheet, and I believe that's why you have that in front of you. Did you submit that as a communication for our review? MR. MANSOUR: We will submit it to you. CHR. KANEALI'I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Council Member Kierkiewicz. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chair, Director, thank you for being here. I think a couple years ago, I think we had a conversation about an Asset Management Program. And I know you and your team worked really hard to basically inventory what you've got and what state it's in. Is it in good working Page 32 FC-28 February 6, 2024 order, or is it like patched up with duct tape and needed to go 10 years ago? And honestly, I feel like that's kind of true. That's a true statement about a lot of the equipment our employees are forced to work with, and they're forced to make do every single day. I will be supporting this, as you say this is to ensure minimum services to community. Need to elevate. Transfer station in Kalapana is still open one day a week. We're going to resolve that real soon, by the way. But this is just to ensure their minimum services are met for our community. I'll be supporting this, but to the testifier who elevated, is this what we want to be doing long-term? Is this contributing to our climate -change goals? Trucking our trash to the other side of the island? No. And I know you know that. So, as we prepare for the budget, I'm going to urge you to ensure that the presentation includes not just the Asset Management Plan, but what we're doing to just have a cleaner more sustainable future. I'll leave it at that. You don't need to respond. I appreciate the hard work and the presence today. MR. MANSOUR: Thank you so much. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Seeing no more discussion, I look forward to seeing the spreadsheet in helping a lot. Sounds like you had a number of different pieces of equipment within the Trailor Section. Not 106 Walking Floor trailers. MR. MANSOUR: No, you're right. The 106 consists of Compacting trailers, Low -Bed trailers, Walking Floor trailers, roll -offs, and regular trailers. So, the Compacting trailers, we have a total of 69; Walking Floor, we have a total of 21. Working, we have 51 out of 69 for the Compacting trailers; we have 17 out of 21 in the Walking Floor trailers. So, we're trying to get to where we were when this whole thing started. So, we're playing catch up. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Sounds like it. Thank you for that. Love to see the spreadsheet. That reminds me of our Mass Transit having 60 something buses, but only 20 something working. Don't quote me on that, but I mean, same idea. Okay, seeing no further discussion, thank you for being here, both of you, and your department as well. Seeing no further discussion, motion is on the floor to forward Resolution 417-24 to Council with a favorable recommendation. All in favor? Any opposed? Page 33 FC-28 Vote on Res. 417-24: tAp ip 'oved) Res. 418-24: Motion to Approve: February 6, 2024 The motion to recommend adoption of Res. 417-24 was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Evans, Inaba, Kagiwada, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, and Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder — 7. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Members Galimba and Villegas — 2. Excused: None. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Res. 418-24, please. AUTHORIZES THE PAYMENT OF FUNDS OF A LATER FISCAL YEAR AND OF MORE THAN ONE FISCAL YEAR FOR MULTI -YEAR LEASES FOR TWO TRAILER MOUNTED PUMPS AND ONE PORTABLE PUMP FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT Authorizes the Mayor to enter into five-year lease agreements with an approximate monthly cost of $3,780 for the two trailer mounted portable pumps and $4,300 for the portable pump, to be used by the Wastewater Division. Reference: Comm.700 Intr. by: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder (B/R) Ms. Lee Loy moved to recommend adoption of Res. 418-24. Seconded by Ms. Kimball. CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Any discussion? Director Mansour, just brief high-level overview. MR. MANSOUR: Sure, this is now for the Wastewater. Portable pumps are usually used for emergencies, We have around the island, we have almost 16 plus pump stations. They have permanent pumps within these stations. Currently, the department has about one eight -inch portable pump that doesn't work. We have three ten -inch portable pumps from 1991. None of them work. We have eight six-inch portable pumps located here in Hilo. They are in working condition. We have two four -inch pumps located in Hilo; they are in working condition. So, we're here before you today asking to replace or purchase a new one ten -inch portable pump, because the three that we have don't work. And, also to purchase two four -inch portable pumps. Because we have different sizes in these pipes, and sometimes if we don't have the right pump to be able to connect to that certain size pipe, it's not going to work in cases of emergency. That's just to get us out of the hot water with these. Page 34 FC-28 February 6, 2024 Even permanent pumps. Most of them right now, within the pump stations, are not functioning. So, we end up using these portable ones as kind of a band -aid to the permanent pumps within these pump stations because it takes a long time to purchase and deliver to the island. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Seeing no further discussion, motion is on the floor to forward Resolution 418-24 to Council with a favorable recommendation. All in favor? Any opposed? Vote on Res. 419-24: The motion to recommend adoption of Res. 418-24 was (Approved) carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Evans, Inaba, Kagiwada, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Villegas, and Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder — 8. Noes: None, Absent: Committee Member Galimba --- 1. Excused: None. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Resolution 419-24, please. Res. 419-24: AUTHORIZES THE PAYMENT OF FUNDS OF A LATER FISCAL YEAR AND OF MORE THAN ONE FISCAL YEAR FOR A MULTI -YEAR LEASE FOR TWO GRAPPLE TRUCKS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT Authorizes the Mayor to enter into a five-year lease agreement with an approximate monthly cost of $11,000, to be used by the Solid Waste Division. Reference: Comm.701 Intr. by: Mr. Kdneali`i-Kleinfelder (B/R) Motion to Approve: Ms. Lee Loy moved to recommend adoption of Res. 419-24. Seconded by Ms. Kimball. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Any discussion, Council Members? Hearing and seeing none, Director, Grapple trucks? MR. MANSOUR: Yes, we're asking for two additional Grapple trucks. One will be located for the Ka`u district to receive additional services that we added for the Ocean View Transfer Station of more recycling bins. And for the Wai`ohinu new constructed transfer station. Waimea has more demand, as we've seen over the years for services and has more bins being utilized due to population growth. Page 35 FC-28 February 6, 2024 So, we're asking you to approve the two purchases, two additional Grapple trucks. And just to let you know, we have two that also, you know, goes back to 2007 and 2008 the last time we had purchased or replaced. So, it's been a long time. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, thank you very much, Director. Seeing no discussion, motion is on the floor to forward Resolution 418-24 to Council with a favorable recommendation. All in favor? Any opposed? Vote on Res. 419-24: The motion to recommend adoption of Res. 419-24 was (Approved) carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Evans, Inaba, Kagiwada, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Villegas, and Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder -- 8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Galimba — 1. Excused: None. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Resolution 420-24, please. Res. 420-24: AUTHORIZES THE PAYMENT OF FUNDS OF A LATER FISCAL YEAR AND OF MORE THAN ONE FISCAL YEAR FOR MULTI -YEAR LEASES FOR TWO BACKHOES, TWO WHEELED LOADERS, SIX ROLL -OFF TRUCKS, AND SEVEN TRUCK TRACTORS FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT Authorizes the Mayor to enter into five-year lease agreements with an approximate monthly cost of $6,800 for the two backhoes, $23,700 for the two wheeled loaders, $32,400 for the six roll -off trucks, and $36,400 for the seven truck tractors, to be used by the Solid Waste Division. Reference: Comm.702 Intr. by: Mr. Kaneali `i-Kleinfelder (B/R) Motion to Approve: Ms, Lee Loy moved to recommend adoption of Res. 420-24. Seconded by Ms. Kimball. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Director? MR. MANSOUR: Yes, thank you. I'll start with the backhoe, and we'll go downward. We're asking to replace two backhoes. The department currently has a total of three working and one being worked on. Most of these, the two we're asking to replace, goes back to 1998; and the other one, 2004. So, they're definitely standard lifespan on these, about ten years or 3,500 to 1,600 hours. Page 36 FC-28 February 6, 2024 Once again, I want to thank staff for being able to run this equipment and give them a double lifespan. So, just kind of give you an idea of what staff have been dealing with and try to provide the services. It's just overwhelming, but they did a great job, and they're going to continue doing a great job. So, that's far the backhoe. The two -wheeled loaders, also the same scenario. Lifespan is about ten years. To these wheeled loaders, between 7,000 hours to 12,000 hours. The one we're asking to replace was 2007, So, that's almost beyond the required lifespan as well. For the roll -off trucks, it's the services and demand. Part of it is due to population growth. And we have more bins on the sites, and we're asking to replace two 2011 to 2016; and two 2018. Just the demand for these bins we have at these transfer stations requires more hauling. As far as the seven truck tractors, it's difficult because we're asking to replace the 1994, 2005, and three 2007, and two 2009. Also, these have reached their lifespan as well. And that goes back to my starting summary. We have inventory of 39 total for these trucks, and we've got 24 out of 39 working. Think about it, we've got 21 transfer stations, 24 tractor trucks, and one landfill. So, just do the math. It doesn't add up. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Council Member Evans. MS, EVANS: Thank you. So, moving forward, do you see that it's by years or is it by mileage that will be the wear and tear on these things that we're going to get? MR. MANSOUR: It's a combination as I stated earlier, is the year the maintenance record, the usage. All that considered in making the decision. So, when you have equipment that spends more time at the repair shop than on the road, it's time to pull the plug, MS. EVANS: Right. But if it's a lease agreement, will the vendor repair it, or do we still have to pull it into our shop? And the only reason I say that is you're going to need parts, and sometimes —I remember when I was looking at cars to buy, I had to think about how expensive was the parts? And sometimes the parts are so expensive, you don't buy that car. You know because it's just too expensive. So, the analysis, when you chose who to lease from and did you look at the cost of parts? MR, MANSOUR: This is leased to purchase to ease the financing process rather than come up with big cash dollar up front. And because we have our maintenance repair shop, so we have to send it to our mechanics to work on. But if it's within the warranty, then that will be --so, we'll make sure as we write Page 37 FC-28 February 6, 2024 these specs, we get some maybe two to three years warranty on the equipment of five years. So, we could work the details. MS. EVANS: Right. Because sometimes parts will get you. Like change orders. MR. MANSOUR: That's true. MS. EVANS: Thank you, I yield. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Council Member Kimball. MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Chair. I just wanted to use this opportunity, since we're still talking about solid waste, to briefly respond to the testimony, which is yes, we're always chasing our child when we're trying to deal with solid waste, and we ultimately do need better solutions. So, just wanted to put out there to Ms. Hunt, that there are two bills right now at the State Legislature; 1186, that's a House Bill; 2368, which is a Senate Bill. Make sure you have those numbers after. These are two bills that deal with Extended Producer Responsibility, which actually puts some of the responsibility for controlling the production of waste on the people that make it in the first place. Which is, I think, one of the key things that we need to look at is going forward. It's not just managing the waste once we have, but reduce the amount that's coming in. So, I encourage you to support that to help us with, I think, an objective we all have, which is to solve this problem of trucking across the other side. Thank you for the leeway, Chair. I yield. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Okay, seeing no further discussion, thank you very much, Director. Mr. (Michael) Kaha, who's your mechanic? (Note: At this time, Department of Environmental Management Acting Chief, Solid Waste Division Michael Kaha came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. KAHA: Our mechanics, there's three ways we do mechanics. So, during warranty, we utilize Cummins, a third party. So, currently, we'd go to Kenworth Hawaii. We also utilize our own DPW (Department of Public Works), Automotive. The Solid Waste Division has recently brought on board a mechanic. Super happy about that. That's really helping us. So, our mechanic in West Hawaii is doing great job, I don't know if I want to share names, and we recently got one in East Hawaii, Page 38 FC-28 February 6, 2024 CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: What's the names? Because I mean, what he just laid out is, you got equipment from 1990's till today. And you guys have managed to keep it together. And these are expensive pieces of equipment. These are not cheap. I mean a small excavator goes for $50,000. MR. KAHA: I want to extend all the accolades to our County DPW Automotive, who's been with us, you know, all along the way. So, I've been with the County now since 2014, and those guys do a phenomenal job. So, it's a team effort. I mean, you know, it's how we operate and the help we get from Automotive. So, I'll just take that opportunity to extend that Aloha to those folks. CHR. KANEALPI-KLEINFELDER: What's the names? Give me the names. MR. KAHA: So, in Kona, the people that we use; Ernie, out in Kona side. Jerry, in Waimea. These guys, they know who they are. Here in Hilo, Rocket. There's a bunch of people, and I kind of feel bad if I forget people's names. But it's a collaborated effort, right? So, there's a bunch of people there. But those names that I just shared with you, those are the names that I can think of right off the bat, that they come out all the time and help us. But you know, that's not to say that's there's only them. There's a few others, and right now, I'm just drawing a blank, but those three that I mentioned do a phenomenal job. They're leaders. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Give them a Mahalo from me, but I think from us, for keeping everything going on the backend. And they probably don't get that a lot, besides from you guys. You know, so, I'm saying from us to them, tell them thank you, and if they don't do what they do, then nothing runs, and everything falls apart. And they held pieces of equipment together for 20-something years. That's not easy. MR, KAHA: It's not. Mahalo. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. Thank you, appreciate it. Okay, with that, we have the motion on the floor to forward Resolution 420-24 to Council with a favorable recommendation. All in favor? Any opposed? Vote on Res. 420-24: The motion to recommend adoption of Res. 420-24 was (Approved) 'oyed) carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Evans, Kagiwada, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Villegas, and Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder — 7. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Members Galimba and Inaba -- 2. Excused: None. Page 39 FC-28 February 6, 2024 CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you to the department for staying with us this late. Mr. Clerk let's go to the top of the agenda, please. Return to Order The Chair directed the Committee to return to the order of business. of Business: Comm. 13.27: REPORT OF CHANGE ORDERS AUTHORIZED: DECEMBER 16 — 31 2023 From Finance Director Diane Nakagawa, dated January 5, 2024, transmitting the above report pursuant to Section 2-12.3 of the Hawaii County Code. Motion to Close File: Ms. Lee Loy moved to close file on Comm. 13.27. Seconded by Ms. Kimball. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Any discussion. Okay, hearing and seeing none, motion is on the floor to close file on Communication 13.27. All in favor? Any opposed? Vote on Comm. 13.27: The motion to close file on Comm. 13.27 was carried by Filed the following voice vote: Ayes; Committee Members Evans, Kagiwada, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Villegas, and Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder — 7. Noes: None. Absent; Committee Members Galimba and Inaba — 2. Excused: None. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Next item, please. Comm. 95.4: SECOND QUARTER REALLOCATION REPORT: OCTOBER 1 — DECEMBER 31 2023 From Human Resources Director Sommer J. Tokihiro, dated January 17, 2024. Motion to Close File: Ms. Lee Loy moved to close file on Comm. 95.4. Seconded by Ms. Kimball. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Discussion? Hearing and seeing none, motion is on the floor. All in favor? Any opposed? Page 40 FC-28 Vote on Comm. 95.4: Filed The motion to close file on Comm. 95.4 was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Evans, Kagiwada, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Villegas, and Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder — 7. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Members Galimba and Inaba — 2. Excused: None, CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Next item, please. February 6, 2024 Comm. 231.5: SECOND QUARTER REPORT OF PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER A CONTRACT FOR LESS THAN 90 DAYS: OCTOBER 1— DECEMBER 31 2023 From Human Resources Director Sommer J. Tokihiro, dated January 8, 2024, transmitting the above report pursuant to Section 2-12.5 of the Hawaii County Code. Motion to Close File: Ms. Lee Loy moved to close file on Comm. 231.5. Seconded by Ms. Kimball. CHR KANEALPI-KLEINFELDER: Any discussion? Hearing and seeing none, there were no persons employed. Thank you. Hearing and seeing none, the motion is on the floor. All in favor? Any opposed? Vote on Comm. 231.5: The motion to close file on Comm. 231.5 was carried by Filed the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Evans, Kagiwada, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Villegas, and Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder — 7. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Members Galimba and Inaba — 2. Excused: None. Comm. 556.1: SECOND QUARTER REPORT OF UNCAPITALIZED DONATIONS: OCTOBER 1 — DECEMBER 31, 2023 _ From Finance Director Diane Nakagawa, dated January 19, 2024, transmitting the above report pursuant to Resolution No. 186-23. Motion to Close File: Ms. Lee Loy moved to close file on Comm. 556.1. Seconded by Ms. Kimball. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Discussion? Seeing lights. Council Member Kierkiewicz. Page 41 FC-29 February 6, 2024 MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chair. You know, I just wanted to take a moment to acknowledge that, in the last quarter, we've received more than $28,000 in community donations from a variety of stakeholders. We have, you know, been able to offset travel costs for police, fire, R&D (Research and Development, Finance, to attend a number of different conferences and training opportunities that they'd bring wealth of knowledge back to our County, and there's also just been a lot of generosity from members of the community. Donations of Koi fish; like $4,500 worth of rubber stamps that support elder recreation service classes; Park benches; meals, drinks, and snacks for our first responders. You know, supporting different wildfires. So, just tremendous generosity from folks. I just wanted to take a moment to acknowledge and appreciate that. Thank you, Chair. CHR, KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you for that, Council Member Kierkiewiez. Okay, seeing no more discussion, motion is on the floor to close file on Communication 556.1. All in favor? Any opposed? Vote on Comm. 556.1: The motion to close file on Comm. 556.1 was carried by Filed) the following voice vote: ORDER OF RESOLUTIONS: STATEMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC ON RES: 421-24: Ayes: Committee Members Evans, Kagiwada, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Villegas, and Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder — 7. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Members Galimba and Inaba — 2. Excused: None. The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, Order of Resolutions. (Note: Items in this category were taken up previously, out of order.) The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business, Statements from the Public. The following individual registered to speak and came forward when called by the Chair Tiffany Edwards Hunt: Comment. Page 42 FC-28 February 6, 2024 Res. 421-24: AUTHORIZES THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE OF HAWAI`I OFFICE OF PLANNING AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT Allows for the receipt of $400,000 of state -derived funds to support the assessment, design, and feasibility of low-income affordable housing in a portion of Kukuiola Village 9 in North Kona. Reference: Comm.703 Intr. by: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder (B/R) Motion to Approve: Ms. Lee Loy moved to recommend adoption of Res. 421-24. Seconded by Ms. Kimball. CHR. KANEALI`1-KLEINFELDER: Discussion on the motion? Council Member Evans. MS. EVANS: Just a question to the Office of Finance. When I look at it, it's a two-year grant for $400,000, and it's Office of Housing and Community Development. I was wondering, is it Community Block Grant? And it's interesting, two years, and it's Transient Oriented Development. Did they give you little more specifies on the grant? (Note: At this time, Finance Director Diane Nakagawa came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MS. NAKAGAWA: Good afternoon, Council Members, Diane Nakagawa, Finance Director. Council Woman Evans, I'll have to look into that further, and I thought Housing would be on, but it doesn't look like it. MS. EVANS: Even offline I'd like to know, because it says Transient Oriented, and I do know there have been discussion about Kona Hub. I don't know if this is related to it, but very curious about this funding. So, it's really great to see this come. I mean, Transient Oriented Development is around the rail in Honolulu, so it'll be curious how that would be defined and see if there might be other opportunities elsewhere on the island. MS. NAKAGAWA; Sure, we can work with Housing and set that up. MS. EVANS: Okay, thank you. I yield. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Council Member Villegas. MS. VILLEGAS: Sure, just going to take the opportunity to help clarify for a testifier and my colleague. Kukuiola is essentially the homeless shelter that they're building out across the street from the Civic Center. It's four or five years behind schedule build out. So, it's my understanding that part of this funding, as Page 43 FC-28 February 6, 2024 it relates to transient accommodation, is that the way it's going to be built is for people to have the connectivity for walkability and whatnot. But Kukuiola and Village 9 is the new bigger County homeless shelter that has graduating levels of moving into more long-term housing opportunities. So, just for point of reference on that. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you for that background, Council Member Villegas. Seeing no further discussion from the Council Members and no one from Housing being on at the present, this will be at Council for another hearing as well. We can ask our questions then. If not, offline. With that, seeing no further discussion, motion is on the floor to forward Resolution 421-24 to Council with a positive recommendation. All in favor? Any opposed? Vote on Res. 421-24: The motion to recommend adoption of Res. 421-24 was (Approved) carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Evans, Inaba, Kagiwada, Kimball, Lee Loy, Villegas, and Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder — 7. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Members Galimba and Kierkiewicz — 2. Excused: None. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: We have one more bill, please. BILLS FOR The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, ORDINANCES: Bills for Ordinances. (Note: Items in this category were taken up previously, out of order.) Bill 129: AMENDS ORDINANCE NO. 23-50, AS AMENDED, THE OPERATING BUDGET FOR THE COUNTY OF HAWAI`I FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING TUNE 302024 Appropriates revenues in the State Grants — Transit -Oriented Development Capital Improvement Projects for Kukuiola Village 9 account ($400,000); and appropriates the same to Transit -Oriented Development Capital Improvement Projects for Kukuiola Village 9 account. Funds would be used to support the assessment, design, and feasibility of low-income affordable housing in a portion of Kukuiola Village 9 in North Kona. Reference: Comm, 703 Intr. by: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder (B/R) Page 44 FG28 Motion to Approve: Vote on Bill 129: (Approved) February 6, 2024 Ms. Lee Loy moved to recommend passage of Bill 129 on first reading. Seconded by Ms. Kagiwada. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Any discussion on the motion? Hearing and seeing none, motion is on the floor. All in favor. Any opposed? The motion to recommend passage of Bill 129 on first reading was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Evans, Inaba, Kagiwada, Kimball, Lee Loy, Villegas, and Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder — 7. Noes: None, Absent: Committee Members Galimba and Kierkiewicz — 2. Excused: None. CHR, KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: That does bring us to the end of our agenda. ADJOURN- There being no further business, at 5:18 p.m., Mr. Inaba moved to adjourn MENT: the meeting. Seconded by Ms. Kimball and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Evans, Inaba, Kagiwada, Kimball, Lee Loy, Villegas, and Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder — 7. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Members Galimba and Kierkiewicz — 2. Excused: None. CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: We are adjourned. We will reconvene tomorrow for other committees. Thank you very much. Approved: Mr. Matt Kaneali`i Kleinfelder, Finance Committe MK/dt (Date) Page 45