Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN GOEAC 2024/04/02 (2022-2024)Committee on Governmental Operations and External Affairs 29' Session Hawaii County Building 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, Hawaii April 2, 2024 CALL TO The regular meeting of the Committee on Governmental Operations and ORDER: External Affairs was called to order at 1:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers, Hilo, by Ms. Cindy Evans, Chair. ROLL CALL: Present: Ms. Cindy Evans, Chair Ms. Susan L. K. Lee Loy, Vice Chair Ms. Michelle M. Galimba, Member Mr. Holeka Goro Inaba, Member Ms. Jenn Kagiwada, Member Mr. Matt Kdneali'i-Kleinfelder, Member Ms. Ashley L. Kierkiewicz, Member Ms. Heather L. Kimball, Member Ms. Rebecca Villegas, Member STATEMENTS The Acting 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: Matthias Kusch: Bill 143 (Comm. 785), in opposition. Douglass Adams: Comm. 782, in support. Brenda Ford: Bill 143 (Comm. 785), in opposition. Eric Weinert: Bill 143 (Comm. 785), in opposition Aaron Chung: Bill 143 (Comm. 785), comment. Chuck Flaherty: Bill 143 (Comm. 785), comment; Bill 138 (Comm. 760), in support. CHR. EVANS: Okay. Mr. Clerk, start with Communication 782. GOEAC-29 April 2, 2024 COMMUNI- The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, CATIONS.: Communications. Comm. 782: NOMINATION OF EMILY TAAROA TO THE WATER BOARD From Mayor Mitchell D. Roth, dated March 12, 2024, requesting the Council's review and confirmation. Requires Council Confirmation by: April 25, 2024 (Section 13-4(k), Hawaii County Charter) Vote on Comm. 782: Ms. Lee Loy moved to recommend confirmation of the (Approved) nomination of Ms. Emily Taaroa to the Water Board. Seconded by Mr. Kdneali'i-Kleinfelder and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Galimba, Inaba, Kagiwada, Kdneali'i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Villegas, and Chair Evans — 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. Deputy Managing Director Bobby Command came forward and provided a brief narrative of the nominee's background and experience. Committee Members spoke in favor of the appointment. Comm. 783: NOMINATION OF MARK DAVIS TO THE TAX BOARD OF REVIEW From Mayor Mitchell D. Roth, dated March 13, 2024, requesting the Council's review and confirmation. Requires Council Confirmation by: April 26, 2024 (Section 13-4(k), Hawaii County Charter) Page 2 GOEAC-29 April 2, 2024 Vote on Comm. 783: Ms. Lee Loy moved to recommend confirmation of the (Approved) nomination of Mr. Mark Davis to the Tax Board of Review. Seconded by Ms. Galimba and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Galimba, Inaba, Kagiwada, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Villegas, and Chair Evans — 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. Deputy Managing Director Bobby Command came forward and provided a brief narrative of the nominee's background and experience. Committee Members spoke in favor of the appointment. ORDER OF The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business, RESOLUTIONS: Order of Resolutions. Res. 464-24: ADOPTS THE 2024 COUNTY OF HAWAI`I ANNUAL ACTION PLAN FOR THE COUNTY OF HAWAI`I COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT, HOME INVESTMENT PARTNERSHIPS, AND HOUSING TRUST FUND PROGRAMS AND AUTHORIZES THE MAYOR OF THE COUNTY OF HAWAI`I TO EXECUTE AND SUBMIT THE ACTION PLAN AND ALL OTHER RELATED DOCUMENTS TO THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT The 2024 County of Hawaii Annual Action Plan describes the projects and activities that will be executed by the County to provide decent housing, suitable and safe living environments, and create affordable housing for low-income households. Reference: Comm.784 Intr. by: Ms. Evans (B/R) (Note: Comm. 784.1, from Housing Administrator Susan K, Kunz dated March 28, 2024, transmitting an informational packet, were circulated.) Motion to Approve: Ms. Kierkiewicz moved to recommend adoption of Res. 464-24. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy. CHR. EVANS: Any discussion? Member Kierkiewicz. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Chair, I would like to offer an opportunity to members of the Office of Housing and Community Development to come forward and provide Page 3 GOEAC-29 April 2, 2024 a brief overview of this request. I know it's an annual thing that we do. Royce, we're all friends here. (Note: At this time, Office of Housing and Community Development Specialist Royce Shiroma, came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. SHIROMA: Good afternoon, Council Committee. First of all, I wanted to recognize Ms. Alisa Hanselman in the back, which is part of the grants management team, and Mr. Brian Nishimoto, which is part of the grants management team. So, what we are bringing in front of you guys is the resolution in which we're authorizing the Mayor to enter into an agreement with HUD (Housing and Urban Development), and also to adopt the projects that are listed in the County of Hawai`i's Annual Plan. The Annual Plan for this program, which is 2024, contains projects that we have requested for proposal, RFP and went through the selection and have selected these projects that are listed. I want to also ensure that these projects are based on three Federal grants. The CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) program; the HOME, which is the Home Investment Partnership program, and the Housing Trust Fund (HTF). The CDBG, we have a total of nine projects that were selected, and actually, we have some representatives here if you guys have any questions of the projects. And also, for the HTF program, we have one project, which is the Mo`ohuli project, which is the representative is also available here if you guys have any questions. This Annual Plan, which includes those projects and will be given to HUD. We need to submit it to HUD by May 15th, in which we will receive Federal funding for these programs somewhere on or around July 1 st of the next fiscal year. And this Annual Plan is actually part of this five-year consolidated plan, which as a requirement for HUD enables us to fund projects based on the priorities that has been set forth in there. So, basically, that's the general overview of the whole program itself. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Royce, that's very helpful. So, every year the County receives Community Development Block Grant monies, CDBG. MR. SHIROMA: Yes. Page 4 Apri12, 2024 MS. KIERKIEWICZ: And that's a total of $2.7 million. There are nine projects that are being funded. Pahala Fire Station, UTV (Utility Terrain Vehicle); Puna Volunteer Fire Station Brush Truck. Some funding for the Food Basket for Emergency food storage. Arc of Kona. There's Kona Craft Group Home Renovation. Arc of Hilo equipment requisition for a laundry program for Adults with Disabilities. HOPE Services Traditional housing renovation. More funding to the Arc of Hilo for an apartment for exterior improvement. And then, Hale Ohana Domestic Abuse Shelter renovations and security improvements. So, that's CDBG. Then I noticed in the B-52, there are a couple of programs, HOME and HTF, and it was noted that it's rotational funding. So, it's funding that we don't see every year. Is that correct. It's shared amongst each of the different counties. So, this year it's our turn. So, that means we're getting an additional $6 million; $3 million for each program. So, HOME, we're able to fund Hale Ola `O Mohouli. We've seen this affordable housing project; I believe it's a 201H application that we approved. There's some Administration funding here. And then also, HTF is going to benefit the Mohouli affordable housing project. MR. SHIROMA: Yes, that's correct. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: That's wonderful. Then are we able to see an increase in our CDBG allocation in subsequent years? MR. SHIROMA: It all depends on Congress. This is based on their so-called super bill that they kind of pass their fiscal year. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Then Royce, how many folks applied for CDBG grant funding? I know nine were. MR. SHIROMA: I think we had a total of 17 total. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: You guys are pros at this, running this program. MR. SHIROMA: It's been years, yeah. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: It's been a number of years, yes, okay. I'm going to be supporting it. I think there's a really good mix of supporting County needs, community needs, housing needs, and then especially, supporting folks with disabilities. So, I appreciate the very thoughtful mix of projects and programs that are going to be funded here. Thank you. Chair, I yield. Page 5 GOEAC-29 April 2, 2024 CHR. EVANS: Thank you. Members? Member Kimball. MS. KIMBALL: Thank you for being here. Just a quick clarification particularly for folks that haven't been here before. But, the residential repair program, that additional $100,000. That's coming from the paybacks, that program. Okay. MR. SHIROMA: Yes, the payment of these loans that were from the program years ago. MS. KIMBALL: So, we haven't funded the resident repair program for a couple of years now. Is there any plans to find other funding for that? Did they apply for this? MR. SHIROMA: They didn't apply. MS. KIMBALL: They didn't apply this year. Okay. MR. SHIROMA: So, if they were to apply, you know, we can evaluate them accordingly based on what is written and the needs, yeah. And then they may have funding. MS. KIMBALL: Right. Okay. I've always thought it was a really good program, and it's unfortunate that there was no application from them this year. But I'll speak with them about it. Thank you. I yield, Chair. CHR. EVANS: Members, any other questions? Member Kagiwada. MS. KAGIWADA: Thank you. Thank you for being here. Yeah, really appreciate this report and seeing the details, especially like the parts where you talk about how many, either new or existing homes or places where people will be supported with this funding. I don't really have any questions. I'm really happy to see where you're at. Oh, I guess the only thing is, so on Exhibit D, you have all the projects you're funding with CDBG. Then there are three projects that look like they met all the criteria but didn't get any funding. Is that correct? MR. SHIROMA: The second block? MS. KAGIWADA: Yeah. Is that what that is? MS. SHIROMA: Yeah, they weren't selected for funding. They were listed and ranked. However, when we go from the top down. By the time we got to that point, we didn't have any more funds too. But we'll keep it open in case there Page 6 GOEAC-29 April 2, 2024 are, you know, if Congress gives us additional funds. Then we can include them in the list. MS. KAGIWADA: Okay. And it looks to me like you fully funded, almost fully funded except for yourselves. No, you didn't quite fully fund. You fully funded most of the projects. Couple of them, you didn't fully fund. MR. SHIROMA: Number 9 MS. KAGIWADA: Yeah, the Puna Volunteer Fire Station didn't fully fund. And the Accessibility and Renovation Improvements for Certified Kitchens for HCEOC (Hawai'i County Economic Opportunity Council) and the Hale Ohana Domestic Abuse Shelter, that one. Quite a bit. Okay. So, if you get additional funds, is your first priority to go back to fully fund these projects, or to look at funding or partially funding the next projects on the list? MR. SHIROMA: Well, normally we go from the top, and based on the —we kind of re-evaluate and see if they're ready to go. Yeah, we're kind of on a tight timeline, especially with HUD. So, that'll be one of the criteria. MS. KAGIWADA: Okay. So, some of this partial funding just may be that they're only ready to spend a certain amount at this time. I see, okay, alright, that's really helpful. Then for the people that did not meet minimum threshold, do you do anything to reach out to them to try to let them know where they could improve, or how does that work? MR. SHIROMA: Yeah, we've actually worked with Arc of Hilo before, so they're familiar. Then we're always open to any assistance that we need to have. We usually reach out to them for the following year. Like they're always welcome to apply again next year. MS. KAGIWADA: Okay, alright. Thank you so much and thanks for your whole team and the work you're doing, really important work, and look forward to actually seeing these come to fruition. Thanks. CHR. EVANS: Okay, Member Kdneali'i-Kleinfelder followed by Member Kimball. MR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Mr. Shiroma, good to see you. So, the $6 million went to the State, right, for the HOME American Rescue Plan? Sorry, $6.4 million through HHFDC (Hawai'i Housing and Finance Development Corporation) of DBEDT Page 7 GOEAC-29 April 2, 2024 (Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism) was eligible to receive $6.4 million of which $1.9 went to the County. Is that right? MR. SHIROMA: Yes. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Then under that HOME qualifying populations, would be sheltered/unsheltered homeless, currently housed at risk of homelessness; those fleeing or tempting to flee domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, stalking or human trafficking. Underneath of that, Annual Action Plan 2024, and there's two bullet points. Other populations. One, requiring services and housing assistance to prevent homelessness; and those at greatest risk of housing stability; and then veterans and families that include a veteran family member that meet one of the preceding criteria. But there were no applications received. MR. SHIROMA: We did it for two years. We did RFP. The first one, we actually had, but they weren't qualified. The project wasn't qualified. So, we did it again the following year, and there was no one. Prior to that, we also worked with the Continuum of Care group to see whether there was anyone interested. And I think because this is new. It's different from all the other grants that we've done before. It's the entire system in which the requirements for this program is different. And therefore, it wasn't something they could actually work out with their existing services. It was mainly for qualifying populations like you mentioned. It was not based on income. However, there needs to be some type of funnel system in which one agency collects all of them and be able to distribute them to other partner agencies based on their needs. That was one of the issues. The second issue is that the State did an allocation plan for this program, and they prioritized rental housing creation of units as a priority. So, any other type of services that dealt with these would not qualify or wouldn't be basically something that we could fund. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: That's interesting. MR. SHIROMA: It's a complex program, and we're not the only county that has issues. We hear that there's other counties throughout the nation that are having hard time. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: That really is too bad. I mean, for a couple of reasons, if it's new. Page 8 GOEAC-29 April 2, 2024 MR. SHIROMA: It's just one year. Sorry, one year only, though. MR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: I know, it's a big opportunity. I mean, it's $2 million. And are we able to use that elsewhere or does it just go back? MR. SHIROMA: Actually, it goes to the State. MR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: It goes back to the State. That is actually a huge miss. I'm not saying this to your department. I'm just saying this in general, $1.9 million towards sheltered or unsheltered homeless populations; those currently housed at risk of homelessness or those fleeing domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, stalking or human trafficking. Not one application came in of any of our nonprofit service providers to try and take advantage of that funding, because it sounds like different reasons. Hard to go after, hard to meet criteria. I mean that's huge, because I know a lot of our service providers actually go after that information and have been working on compiling it so they can show through data what they're doing. And to know that we couldn't meet this and couldn't get $2 million back into our community is really hard to swallow. That is too bad. Okay, thank you. yield, Chair. CHR. EVANS: Okay. Member Kimball. No? Okay, Member Villegas, you had your light on? MS. VILLEGAS: I just had a quick question for my own frame of clarification. I see that HOME American Rescue Plan, and we've done a lot of talking up here on the dais about enthusiasm about the resources that the American Rescue Plan might provide. As the population of unsheltered homeless has expanded here on the Big Island, and particularly in District 7, 1 am looking at if I'm understanding what's written here appropriately, basically, nobody put in an RFP. MR. SHIROMA: Yeah, none. The first year there was one, but they weren't qualified. So, the second year we put it out again, and no one applied. In the meantime, we have to, you the Continuum of Care group. The consortium. MS. VILLEGAS: Got yah. The Community Alliance Partners? Okay, I just wanted to make sure that I was interpreting that correctly. Thank you for this thorough reflection of what's going on. I found it really interesting to look at these mappings and see the low to moderate -income areas of the island as a whole. Then even broken down a little bit smaller. I'm looking at District 7, in particular. So, thank you for providing this information. It is very helpful. Page 9 April 2, 2024 Of course, you know, we'd all like to see projects specific to our districts that contribute to the overall good and benefit of our County. And I see, grateful for the Arc of Kona getting this. I'm hopeful that other organizations will submit applications for the RFP's because it sounds like you were able to help quite a few out of what was requested. So, thank you, I'll be supporting this moving through. I yield. CHR. EVANS: Members, any further discussion? Member Galimba. MS. GALIMBA: Thanks. I had a couple questions about the HCEOC (Hawai`i County Economic Opportunity Council) Certified Kitchen request. just was wondering if that is just going to be used to making meals for Meals On Wheels and senior nutrition or if there's actually a part of it that the community could use it for economic development projects. I don't know if there's anyone here from that. MR. SHIROMA: I'm not sure if Mr. Chad Hasegawa is on Zoom. The majority would be for the meals based on the certified kitchen. I'm not sure if they expanded their program so other areas in which there's beneficiaries among the whole island. There he is. MS. GALIMBA: Hi there, did you need me to repeat the question. I was just wondering if there was any Community Economic Development use of the certified kitchen or if it's just for that particular use of meals for Meals On Wheels and senior nutrition, which I understand goes around the island. You service people around the island, is that right? (Note: At this time, HCEOC Chad Hasegawa came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. HASEGAWA: Yeah, but also used for our employment training. HCEOC would like to back into doing job training that they once provided residents. Also, our bakery is using that as our job placement along with our training. So, as we move our kitchen from the same location up to 47 Rainbow Drive, our mission is with our Community Service Block Grant to revitalize our employment training program that HCEOC once had. But we'll be utilizing it for Meals On Wheels, our nutrition program, and our Senior Farmers Market program where we'd like to expand also. MS. GALIMBA: Thanks very much. Yeah, all sounds like great programs and definitely will be supporting this. Thank you. Page 10 GOEAC-29 April 2, 2024 CHR. EVANS: Thank you, Members? Seeing none, I have a question and a comment. If I'm not mistaken this is the end of the five-year consolidated plan in 2024. So, when will you start the effort for the 2025? MR. SHIROMA: We have kind of started already. We have done surveys. We had a public hearing recently in which we requested any input from the public as far as what priorities should be in the new 2025 to 2029 Consolidated Plan. There are key points that we wanted to ensure the public understands, is that whatever priorities that they have provided to us will ultimately shape and mold what type of projects we are going to be selecting for the five years. Similar to what we've done for this 2024 period here. The priorities that are in the plan, we wanted to be broad, how everyone to ensure that the needs of the communities are met. So, it's an opportunity for them to comment and provide us information, and that's basically the start of it. Then we'll work as the times goes along with different public hearings out there to hear what their concerns are, you know, each time. CHR. EVANS: Okay, well, I need to comment that I didn't see anything, this Action Plan here for District 7, 8, and 9, which is West Hawaii. And there may be a perception, you know, but we do have low-income and moderate low-income in our districts. I'm hoping when you do these public hearings for the 2025 Consolidated Plan, that your public hearings will be in Captain Cook; they will be in Waimea; there will be in North Kohala at Hawi, that when you do public hearings, I think you need to come out into our communities. And please don't hold them in Kona and Hilo only because the people that are really impacted really don't have cars and capability. I have a lot of volunteer groups that provide services to a lot of struggling families, and there is no way they're going to get to your public hearings. So, I got to work with you. I got to figure out a way to get them more in that kind of discussion with you. And so, again, I don't know what your outreach is going to be with the public hearings developing the plan. But I hope that you have staff and the ability to get out into the very rural areas. MR. SHIROMA: Well, we'll discuss that, yeah. CHR. EVANS: Thank you. Appreciate it. And the only final comment is when women up in North Kohala have issues with domestic violence, they're either taken to the Kona or the Hilo domestic shelter. And the statistics make it look like the domestic issue is happening in Hilo or Kona, when in fact, it's not. And Page 11 GOEAC-29 April 2, 2024 they've been using statistically, our people to justify their numbers for what's going on their shelters. I think the intake and getting the real picture of where these domestic violence cases are and the people that are using the shelters needs to be looked at. So, you know, please consider that; how they take their intake and drive their statistics. MR. SHIROMA: Okay, yeah, we don't really control those types of arrangements, but we'll relay the information to them. CHR. EVANS: Thank you. So, we have the motion on the floor, all in favor? MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Chair. Sorry, a follow-up. CHR. EVANS: Yeah, sure, Matt Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Chair. I just want a quick mahalo to you folks in the Fire Department for bringing in more equipment. We need that equipment very badly. So, thank you very much. Well done. And to everyone else who's here, thank you for being here today. I can see the projects you're doing. It means a lot for our community. Sorry, I harped on one thing that's very near and dear to me. So, but there's a lot of positive in here as well, and I didn't say that. So, thank you very much for everyone's work. Thank you, Chair. CHR. EVANS: Really good projects. Thank you. MR. SHIROMA: Thank you. CHR. EVANS: Okay, we have a motion on the floor. All in favor? Any opposed? Vote on Res. 464-24: The motion to recommend adoption of Res. 464-24 was (Approved) carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Galimba, Inaba, Kagiwada, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Villegas, and Chair Evans — 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. EVANS: I would like to pass the Chair over to my Vice Chair, Member Lee Loy, I am the author of the next bill. Page 12 GOEAC-29 Relinquish Chair: BILLS FOR ORDINANCES: April 2, 2024 At this time, the Chair relinquished the chair to Vice Chair Lee Loy. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Chair Evans. Let the reflect, the time now is 2:03 p.m., and I have assumed the Chair. Mr. Clerk. The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, Bills for Ordinances. Bill 138: AMENDS CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE 7, OF THE HAWAI`I COUNTY CODE 1983 (2016 EDITION, AS AMENDED) RELATING TO PLANNING Requires the Planning Director to submit semi-annual reports to the County Council indicating those properties for which: (1) a change of zoning district ordinance has expired without completion of all conditions; (2) an initial time extension for the performance of conditions on the change of zone has been granted; (3) applications have been approved for zoning variances, subdivision variances, subdivisions, 'ohana dwelling unit permits, nonsignificant zoning changes, approval of plans for telecommunication antennas, or additional farm dwelling agreements; and (4) the Planning Director retains exclusive authority to grant the right to build. Reference: Comm.760 Intr. by: Ms. Evans and Mr. Inaba Postponed: March 19, 2024 (Note: There is a motion by Ms. Evans, seconded by Mr. Inaba to recommend passage of Bill 138, on first reading.) ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Ms. Evans. MS. EVANS: Thank you. Last time we met, I don't believe the Director was here. We would like to invite you up. Thank you, Members. The bill before us is again trying to show transparency to the public as well as to us on the dais of what is happening in the district. Because there's many things in our Code that is Administrative approval, and it's not Council approval. So, it does tell the public and us what's been going on in the district in terms of building expansion and land use. And I think it's important to try to be transparent. So, I'd like to turn it over to you. (Note: At this time, Planning Director Zendo Kern, came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. KERN: Thank you. Zendo Kern, Planning Director. Madame Chair, may I ask a question? Page 13 GOEAC-29 April 2, 2024 ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Yes, Mr. Kern. MR. KERN: Council Member Evans, with respect, are you saying we're not transparent? MS. EVANS: No, what I'm saying is, for the public, it would be nice to have a consolidated report, so they can see what's going on as time goes on in any given year, there's decisions that are being made. So, it gets really closer to what's really happening, I think in their community. MR. KERN: Okay, so, I guess I'm kind of working on framing this properly. We do report all of this, it's on our website. It's in the newspaper; it comes on Council boards. It comes in front of just about everybody. I would say about 97 percent. I've got to check on our nonsignificant zoning changes, but everything else is on the front page of our website. Everything else goes into the Tribune Herald; everything else goes in the West Hawaii Today. That is on a monthly and sometimes bimonthly basis. So, I'm a little bit flustered and frustrated, because of this transparency thing, when we are transparent. We're extremely transparent. We follow process. And to not even have a conversation about what's going on with this. To get the lay of this instead of just legislation telling us what to do, it's frustrating when we're doing it. So, I understand the intent. And so, what I'm trying to figure out is, what can we do with this to compliment what we're already doing, so we're not having to replicate something new that you can have the information delivered instead of maybe looking at it on the website. MS. EVANS: May 1, Chair. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: You have the floor. MS. EVANS: Okay, thank you. You know, we're moving into a new age and there's people graduating from universities with these degrees, and it's called data mining. And I think there's too much information now going on in the world, and we're just getting inundated with so much, and yes, we can find the stuff that you're talking about. I'm assuming I could learn how to find it. You know, if I go to your website and do this and that. But I think data mining and having information consolidated really can serve a huge benefit to us as Council Members who represent people in our district that wants to know what's going on in terms of build -out and construction, and the changes that are coming. Page 14 GOEAC-29 April 2, 2024 I think it empowers the community and us to work together. And the community knowledge, I think we've arrived with technology, unless your department is going to struggle with this. But you said the information is already there. MR. KERN: Yes, so like I said, we have the information. We're extremely transparent. We're running through the challenges. It's being framed as we're not transparent. That's a reflection upon myself, which I take issue with. But I take further issue with our department on people that are committed and devoted to work in our community, that are transparent and working their very best. We put the publications out there. We rush to get the publications out there. We do everything that we can. We provide these background reports and recommendations. So much information and so some transparency, that again, I'm fine to work on how do we get the information in your hands in a way that can benefit you and your communities. That's not a problem. I just feel like the way it's being framed is we're not transparent. Therefore, we need this. And that to me I something I don't feel right about. MS. EVANS: Well, we can agree to disagree. But I believe you're doing a good job. It's just now with modern technology and where we're at, my terminology of transparency is not meant to criticize your department. It's meant to show that we're in a society now where there's so much information and there's so much data, that data mining and having concise reports, that's where we're headed anyway. We're moving into that, and I think this is just pushing us into kind of where we need to go. And that's how we extrapolate data; how we put data together. And 1 think as a Council Member representing my constituents, I'd like to think that they can access the information easily instead of —and having it consolidated will make a difference. And I believe it does make a difference, so anyway, I yield. MR. KERN: I share those feelings, which is why we have it on the front page of the website as well. Access to the GIS (Geographic Information System) and additional information to try to make it as available to the general public as possible. I do have a couple components of this that I do feel might be a little bit challenging if you don't mind. Can I have a little latitude, Chair? MS. EVANS: Okay. MR. KERN: The part about the Change of Zone Ordinance has expired without completion of the conditions. That is Section B, line 1. So currently, when someone goes for a change of rezoning application, and you folks, let's say approve it with conditions and there's a time condition on it, we are not proactively monitoring these applications. Page 15 GOEAC-29 April 2, 2024 Usually what happens if somebody wants to do something with it, they bring it up; we review it and say, hey, you've got two years left on it; or, in most times, your zoning ordinance has expired, go back through. So, that one is, I'd say a little bit challenging because we don't have it set up right now. We're working on having the EPIC (Electronic Processing and Information Center) system with the new applications, be able to have that red -flag ability and say, hey, your zoning ordinance is about to come up. So, that one, I think, is going to be a little bit outside of what we normally do. Because we provide all the information —that you're pretty much all the information that you're requesting here with reports already. The property owner is not always the name of the representative. So, that would be something that I don't think would be a problem to add, which would be Section C, line 6. MS. EVANS: You can provide that? MR. KERN: Like is said, it's not in a normal reporting. I'm not sure if there's a reason why we don't include the representative. Off the top of my head, I don't see an issue with it because they're representing the applicant. But making sure that we're monitoring the expired completion of conditions, I think that one will be, honestly, quite problematic to achieve right now. MS. EVANS: Okay. Alright, thank you ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Ms. Evans. Mr. Inaba. MR. INABA: Sure, thank you, Chair. I don't think anyone is saying you folks aren't transparent. So, I want that to be clear. So, with that aside, I think, you know, looking at those Change of Zone ordinances that are expiring, we've never looked at that, right? It's when they come in for a request for whether it's an extension or going through the whole process again. That's where we have it triggered. So, wondering, you know, why we can't be providing that information. Then, the initial time extensions, that's being granted by the department. That's something that's gone away, but there's still the ability for ordinances which were passed prior to the passage of Bill 194. So, where are those reported? MR. KERN: Those would be ones, like I said, there's about 95 percent that's covered there. I'd say the nonsignificant ones, rezonings, which is very few. Then the zoning time extensions would be something that we'd add to the list. MR. INABA: Okay. So, right now, it's just between the department and the applicant, right? Page 16 GOEAC-29 April 2, 2024 MR. KERN: Yeah, when they come in, exactly. MR. INABA: Okay. So, there was discussion at the last Committee hearing just about having, you know, the way this is written is twice -a -year reports. But there was discussion on whether this could be a living document, where people could go and access at any time, information that's being requested here. So, I hear what you're saying in terms of most of this is available on the County Planning Department website, but not in one area it seems, right? Their subdivision versus Ohana Dwelling Permits. They're not centralized right now, is that correct? MR. KERN: Yeah, I would say that for example, those are the ones that are highlighted on our website. Then you move over to the ones that are submitted to actually Planning Commission, and then the County Council. So, it's all being reported. Yes, if we're looking to consolidate in one report, like I said that's something we can work on in one living document, that's something that I'd have to get into with our tech team to see what they could do, which is the same conversation about the conditions of the rezoning ordinances. This isn't a conversation that just occurs up here. It's a conversation that's occurred within the department since I've been there. Especially with the EPIC system coming in. Okay, we have technology. Can we have it, kind of you know, automatically show, hey, conditions are coming close. There's a red flag that comes up just for awareness when someone is reviewing an application. That's that intelligence we're trying to build into the system to have it be less human responsive and more digital in that way. So, I've got to work with our tech team on that. We've been really trying to get the system, so it works for the team members themselves; and then secondary, continuing to work on this, really highlighting that technology for potentially this very reason. MR. INABA: Okay. With that, I think there was also a comment by Council Member Kimball last time regarding subsection (b)(3), and maybe it not being so specific. But just making it a blanket coverage statement for any approvals that are granted solely by the departments. So, like you said, you know, there are applications that go on to the commissions and to the Council. That's not what's being talked about here. This is just for applications that come to your office and are approved by your office. So, I want to kind of make that distinction. Page 17 GOEAC-29 April 2, 2024 Because there's a public process for anything not covered in this bill. And that's what we'd like to have reported in an easy way. If it's twice a year, or if we are able to get that living document. So, pretty straight forward again, happy to hold this off, maybe one more time, if we can have a discussion now that we've had open discussion. Then, wanting to hear more from colleagues today, then we can see what the best route for it would be. But again, I think there's just this need for accountability when it comes to land use and planning. And if we're making decisions, then decisions are public, and I think it's in the public's best interest to have that be provided in a simple and easily accessible report. MR. KERN: If I may add to that? I go back again to our staffing. So, my goal would be able to do it in a manner that's not added a bunch of additional burden. I know it might be a little bit more but trying to find that balance. So, I think we're not out of alignment. MR. INABA: I think we're going to be going back and forth. Because I don't want to —I've made it clear, I don't want to make any more burden on the staff either. So, we don't have to keep saying that. Thank you, Chair, I yield. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Mr. Inaba. Ms. Kimball. MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Chair. You know, this is reminiscent to me, of discussions we had about the budget and wanting to see the budget reflected in a way that made it easier for us to digest. And the solution at that time was to just support the department in their efforts to update their system and request as part of their RFP, this reporting component. So, I bring that up because I wonder —my sense says that EPIC already has all of this in it. Could we, since budget is coming up, revisit our agreement with Tyler and potentially have them do this reporting component rather than having it be an additional responsibility of your staff? MR. KERN: Yeah, that's possible. Like I said, I think a lot of it already exists. It's a couple of these deeper elements that we want to pull out that data from like a specific condition. And that might be very helpful to have somebody like Tyler help with that, so that the team members are doing that. So, I think we could get into that. MS. KIMBALL: I'm almost thinking like some of these really kind of specific unusual ones, you know, maybe it's a record and you've got an asterisk next to it, and that tells us, oh, we need to dig a little deeper on this one because something Page 18 GOEAC-29 April 2, 2024 flunky is going on. But I think you know, for most of this I would expect it to be in the system already. So, it's just a matter of pulling it out. So, my recommendation at this point is, you've given the department the guidance about the data that you want to see. Have you take it back to Tyler. Talk with them and see, is this something that we could put a little funding towards to have them produce it for us, rather than having it be something that the department has to generate. MR. KERN: I'm happy to look into that. MS. KIMBALL: If we can do 90 percent of it? I mean we kind of agreed with Finance, they couldn't do all the things we wanted, but 80 percent they were able to do, and we said, okay we'll move forward with that. MS. KIMBALL: So, that would be my suggestion at this point. MR. KERN: Happy to get into that with them. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Ms. Kagiwada. MS. KAGIWADA: Thank you, Chair. Just to the, I guess this is maybe to the Director. But what's your sense if we look at B, numbers 1 through 4. How many properties are we talking about, in the ballpark. I know you can't tell me, but are we talking about a dozen, 20, 200. Like what, because I'm just trying to figure out how helpful this would be if this is a lot. MR. KERN: I'm going to have to get back to you on the exact number. I don't want to put out something that's false, which triggered though the thought, I was going to mention to Chair Kimball on this and clarify. When it comes to these, are we going retro, or are we going now forward? Because now forward or nor forward with the EPIC system is a lot easier than post. Post is a whole another ball game. And those are the ones we see come up later, hey, I want to do my project. Oh, your rezoning has been expired for five years. And those are the ones we see are more problematic. MS. KAGIWADA: But they may not be in the EPIC system, that's what you're saying. MR. KERN: They're not in the EPIC system. MS. KAGIWADA: Okay. So, in addition to just having a ballpark for how many we're talking about. I think that question going back to, is this something that is Page 19 GOEAC-29 April 2, 2024 kind of a living document on the website or is it something that gets printed out every six months and given to us. I think the size of the information may be, and then the question is, every six months are you adding new ones to an existing large document? And you're just adding a few new ones or does the new report only account for new ones that have been added that were not reported in the last report. So, I don't know if one of the makers has any feedback on that. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: You want to follow-up, Mr. Inaba? MR. INABA: Sure, yes, if this bill is to be passed into law, it would just be for those approvals from its effective date moving forward. We don't want to go backwards. And sorry, Council Member Kagiwada, your second question was? MS. KAGIWADA: So, going forward, but also each report then is only for that time period? It doesn't count the six -months before, is that correct? MR. INABA: It would only be for actions taken within the six-month period covered by that report. MS. KAGIWADA: Okay, so I guess I'm just wondering given that a lot of the things we are seeing are older issues coming up that are not in the EPIC system. Is this going to provide everything that we need or want? I'm just wondering are we getting at what we really want if those are some of the problem ones that keep coming up that we feel like we're not aware of. I don't know. So, I'll just throw that out there as a possible discussion item. Thank you, Chair. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Ms. Kagiwada. Go ahead, Mr. Kern. MR. KERN: May I add to this process just from Legacy just for your awareness. So, we weren't able to import Legacy documents into the EPIC system. But what we do is, if the new one comes in, let's say for a Change of Zone to update their conditions, then that goes into the EPIC system. And from that moment forward, that one will be in the system and all of that data, and all the attachments will be collected with it. That's how, eventually, all of them gets cycled into the system, but it's more so, when we're triggered by an applicant coming in. Just for awareness and what our program has been. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you. I'm going to go to Ms. Villegas and then I'll go over to Ms. Evans. Ms. Villegas. MS. VILLEGAS: Thank you. You know, thank you to the makers of this. My hope is that we'll move this forward. And with the sounds of it with this digital system, with the EPIC system, and the capacity of the reporting, that once you put in the variables, the system would bring up that reporting for every six months. That sounds like what it really should do. Page 20 GOEAC-29 April 2, 2024 You know, unfortunately, we have the General Plan coming out, and I have constantly people coming to me and saying, "I can't get the information I need out of the General Plan digitally online." So, I recognize and empathize with what you're saying, we're posting things, it's there. You can go find it. But people are having real struggles with that. Historically, government hasn't had the best websites. You know, any of us who've done campaign spending reports, we're dealing with some pretty old technologies, and we've improved our website as a County. But people still find it very challenging to navigate. So, I can empathize with what you're saying, like we're putting it out there, but for whatever reason, it's not in a palatable format. And I think that the details that are being described here would provide a more specific purpose for those of us who sit on the Council to be able to really determine the issues that we're looking at and know what's going on in our districts more specifically. I get a lot of people, what, why? Then I'm not sure, and sure I could dig it up somewhere. Everybody could dig up a lot of things, but in a timeframe when people don't trust government very much. And people struggle with our Planning Department and with all of the challenges we've been through. It is imperative to provide any and all information, and to hold accountable. What I'm hearing is people wanting developers who've let things expire and lapse to be held accountable and not just be able to slip back and in and say, "Oh, well, I need an extension." But there needs to be more accountability because the needs and the resources. The capacity of the infrastructure of our communities has changed since when some of these projects were approved of and put on the books. So, thank you to the introducers for this, and I am hoping that it will be a simple process and something else that we could utilize in order to make the best decisions for the future for our island. I yield. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Ms. Villegas. Ms. Evans, you were next in line. And then I see Mr. Inaba's light after that. MS. EVANS: Thank you. It hasn't been brought up yet, but we did have a testifier this morning that commented on, is it possible to put in the SMA (Special Management Area) permits. So, that's another one that is, I believe, approved Administratively. Or actually, it goes to the Planning Commission after you, right? And so, it's done by the Planning Commission. MR. KERN: It depends if it's an SMA Minor or Major. But yeah, all of those are reported as well. Page 21 GOEAC-29 April 2, 2024 MS. EVANS: Okay, because I think they recommended that. But the other thing they said that we haven't talked about today is, they were wondering if the application could be put on there because that's where the public gets that transparency piece; if they're going to have an opportunity to comment or not. Now as I go through this, some of these are open to public comment and other ones are not? MR. KERN: So, everything is open to public comment. I think it's a little bit different perception when you have a public hearing versus public comment. That's why even applications, for like a variance application, you have to notify your surrounding property owners, so they're aware of what's going on. We actually post the application in the newspaper and on the website. So, we are actually doing it on the front end, saying, "This has been filed. You're noticed." Like it's out there. It's super transparent. This has been filed. If you have a question about it contact us. If you have a public comment you'd like to make, contact us. If you feel you want to appeal it; knowing what's coming down the pike when it comes to ministerial type permits. So, we don't have a problem with that. You know, this is where I kind of find this challenge. We do really believe in transparency. This is a land use and transparency is very important. I think this is going to help maybe refine some of those elements into a framework that might be easier, for lack of a better word. So, I don't necessarily have a problem with that. We're already doing it. MS. EVANS: I think the person who made the comment was just thinking if you had everything in one place? He wanted to see it quarterly, and we're talking semi-annually. But if you had everything in one place, and the public knew that they could see exactly what actions are taking place in this time period. Be it an application or be it an approval. So, they suggested that, so I wanted to throw that out. Thank you to the body because we didn't have that discussion yet. But thank you, I yield. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Ms. Evans. Mr. Inaba. MR. INABA: Yeah, after you have the opportunity to chime in, I want to make a motion to postpone this, and then give us a chance to regroup, and then maybe come back in a month just to give enough time for all of us to meet. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Thanks. I'm like you, yeah, I'm going to be supporting the postponement. Having done this work for probably 25 years, it's all there. And what I hear people saying is, they can't find it, or they don't know how to navigate it. Page 22 GOEAC-29 April 2, 2024 I think the other challenge that I'm having is the semi-annual report as it related to Change of Zone applications are done on an annual basis, as it's applied for during the Change of Zone process and a condition of approval. So, I've already seen conflict right there where the Zoning ordinance itself requires the applicant to provide an annual progress report. And they're all due at the end of every year. I know, because I used to write them for all the different homeowners and property owners. So, that's one areas of conflict that where our Zoning ordinance says one thing. But we now have another part of our Code that's saying something else. Every single part of these things does have a review process. Variance applications. I think the challenge is the timing of these applications are all different. Some are 10 days; some are 20; some are 30; some are 45. So, again, the department is doing a wonderful job populating this stuff up. Because other rules drive them to populate them. They're just not appearing in a manner that the public isn't consuming it, and that's where I have a problem. Because that's the kind of stuff I used to do. We did due diligence on properties. It's all there. It's all there. Real Property Tax, all there; pen -nits, Building Division, all there; Planning Department, it's all there. But what I hear this body saying is, make it easy for us. I don't know if legislation makes it easy. I think funding makes it easy. I think writing you a check and putting a lot of money into the department to put all of this wherever they want to have it, is what it's going to take. So, I'm willing to support the postponement, and we'll see where it lands. I probably won't vote for it when it comes back around. Because the real action is putting the money to get it out to the public to consume. Director, I saw your light go on. I just wanted to get your thoughts. MR. KERN: Should I put a supplemental request in my budget? I've got nothing in there right now. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Well, those are my thoughts. Mr. Inaba, I know you're going to be making a motion. So, go ahead. Page 23 GOEAC-29 Vote on Motion to Pos one: (Approved) Relinquish Chair: Mr. Inaba moved to postpone Bill 138 to April 30, 2024. Seconded by Ms. Galimba and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Evans, Galimba, Inaba, Kagiwada, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Villegas, and Acting Chair Lee Loy — 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. MR. KERN: You all have a great rest of your day. Bye now. At this time, the Vice Chair relinquished the chair to Chair Evans. CHR. EVANS: Let the record note, I'll take over at 2:34 p.m. April 2, 2024 Bill 143: INITIATES AN AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE III, SECTION 3-2, OF THE HAWAI`I COUNTY CHARTER (2022 EDITION), RELATING TO COUNTY COUNCIL TERMS Initiates a proposal to increase the term of office for Council Members from two to four years and that Council Members could serve up to three consecutive four-year terms. Includes a provision allowing any incumbent County Council Member elected in 2024 to serve a four-year term, and then be eligible for election to County Council for two additional four-year terms. Reference: Comm.785 Intr. by: Mr. Inaba (Note: Comm. 785.1 and Comm. 785.2, from Council Member Holeka Goro Inaba dated April 2, 2024, transmitting proposed amendments to Bill 143, were circulated.) Motion to Approve: Mr. Inaba moved to recommend passage of Bill 143 on first reading. Seconded by Ms. Galimba. CHR. EVANS: Member Inaba. MR. INABA: Thank you. First and foremost, there was a lot of testimony today. So, I want to mahalo former Council Members and those who have come to testify all the time for different matters before the Council, for coming to share their thoughts on this bill. Page 24 GOEAC-29 April 2, 2024 I do agree that the role of a Council Member shouldn't be a lifelong career. Also want to recognize that this measure or something similar was on the 2020 ballot and failed by five percent in that General Election. There was some significant push back from some of the serving in the State House, because they also serve two-year terms, and I believe they would be the only ones left in public office in the State that would be on a two-year term. But the intention behind introducing this was to give longer terms for long-term legislation. There're some things like affordable housing legislation that I've been working on with Council Member Kimball, and we're halfway through our time right now, and we've been held up with a report that we'll hopefully have soon. But it was also matter of introducing kind of an increase in the Legislative Branch is pau right now. Our County Government is structured with a strong executive branch. And this would have, as it currently reads, would see Council Members outstay. And Mayor's Administration, if they were to start at the same time. But I do support the public's choice and accountability for those of us serving in office. I think right now, the problem is that half of each term is spent trying to run a campaign for re-election, and that we're not necessarily being able to serve the public in the best way possible. We did hear from former Council Chair Chung regarding other options. Six two-year terms. But again, hearing what the public has shared today, I do have an amendment that I want to take up just because I don't think there's an appetite for the bill as it currently stands. Motion to Amend: Mr. Inaba moved to amend Bill 143, with the contents of contents of Comm. 785.2. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy. CHR. EVANS: Member Inaba. MR. INABA: So, the original bill was three four-year terms. What's in this communication is two four-year terms. Language specifying that upright needs to be taken isn't necessary since the bill says, "Shall not exceed two consecutive four-year terms. So, that in itself prevents somebody from running for a third four-year term. Then in Section 2 of this amendment, it says that anybody who is elected in this upcoming election shall serve for a four-year term and is eligible for an additional four-year term unless they would have served eight consecutive years by the end of 2028. Page 25 GOEAC-29 April 2, 2024 So, there was concern that some of us would serve, I don't know what it is, 12 plus eight years, 20 years? This actually, if anyone, restricts Council Chair Kimball and I the most, because it would keep us to a total of eight years. It would potentially allow those who are going into their last term and those who are in their first term right now, to be in office for a total of 10 years, as it's written. But that's where it's kind of going back and listening to what testimony was provided today. So, ask for your support in kind of steering this in the direction of the testimony provided. Happy to answer any questions. I yield. CHR. EVANS: Okay. Member Lee Loy followed by Member Galimba. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you for this amendment. I like the cadence of this kind of sticking to —it really switches it where we're not campaigning every two years. So, I'm going to be supporting this amendment going forward to amend the bill. Then when we get to the main motion, I'll speak to that. Thank you, I yield. CHR. EVANS: Member Galimba. MS. GALIMBA: I guess, it's pretty much the same. I will support this amendment and discuss the main bill when we get to that. CHR. EVANS: Okay, any further discussion? Member Kagiwada. MS. KAGIWADA: I'm kind of torn. I understand what some people were saying that you know, they want a chance to vote somebody out if they're not doing a good job. On the other hand, if we actually look at what happens, that almost never happens. So, I mean there are other ways, I think, that would make this easier to vote out somebody who is currently serving an incumbent basically running than this. I don't think this really helps that much. Yeah, I don't know, I don't like having to spend every other year campaigning while you're trying to do work. But at the same time, I hear what people are saying. So, I don't think I'll support this amendment. Thanks. CHR. EVANS: Okay. Member Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I like the amendment to the bill. I think it provides the comments coining from the public in the form of legislation. I do have concerns about the last part of Section 2, being that the Members currently on this Board deciding this, even though this will be going to the people to vote. It's an important point for the public to understand. Page 26 GOEAC-29 April 2, 2024 I may be running for an additional four-year term, if I'm reading this correctly. There is something to be said about 10 years of one voice for a district could be good but could be bad too. I can see both ways. So, for the most part, I'll be voting in favor of the amendment, and then open for some more discussion on the actual bill. CHR. EVANS: Okay, any more comments? I'd like to offer, I thought it was interesting when Brenda Ford was saying that she was moved on getting to the four two-year terms and how the current Council Members had to not take advantage it, that it would come for those that come after it. So, I think I'm going to support the amendment, but I kind of agree with Member Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, that maybe what it ends up being is maybe some will get six years, but they won't get 10 years. So, I mean there's a way to —how do you go from one to the next? And what's that transition, and I'd like to think about that more. But having said that, we have a motion on the floor Vote on Motion The motion to amend Bill 143 with the contents of to Amend: Comm. 785.2, was carried by the following voice vote: (Approvedi Ayes: Committee Members Galimba, Inaba, Kagiwada, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Villegas, and Chair Evans — 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. EVANS: Okay, Mr. Clerk, you have nine in favor of accepting the proposed amendment to Bill 143, Communication 785.2. Okay, so to the main. MR. INABA: Alright, back to the main motion. This is my opinion; I think it's in the best interest of the public to be able to see what someone's really made of after four years. And it gives the person in office the opportunity to see legislation through, as it's amended. It's still eight years; it's just two four-year terms instead of four two-year terms. And again, to be clear, it doesn't prevent anyone who's currently serving from serving eight years. If anything, there's a few Members of the current Council who would be eligible for a total of 10 years, based on those served; everyone except for Chair Kimball and me. We would cap the eight years with the language that it reads now after being amended. So, the public has provided their comments on Bill 143, as it was originally introduced, and leave it to this body. In the end, if it should move forward, it does go to the public for their vote. And they would be voting on it in the General Page 27 GOEAC-29 April 2, 2024 Election either knowing that someone was elected in the Primary Election or looking at potentially two candidates to choose from in the General Election. So, put it out there, and I'm happy to hear discussion. But I think I've tried to incorporate the feedback as provided by the public. CHR. EVANS: Member Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you. To the bill, as amended, I'm not going to support the bill. But I want to get it to a place that if it does end up on the ballot, it's something that an electorate can evaluate. And for me, it really is fundamentally advancing a Charter amendment that impacts the people who sit on this. Two areas, our salaries and the time that we serve in office should be generated by the Charter Commission or the Salary Commission. A body separate and apart from us that is objective. To our former colleague, the substantial financial interest or gain that we would get voting for this is alive and well. And so, run it through the strokes, but in the end, two areas I don't think this body should advance legislation around is how much we get paid and how long we get to sit in these chairs. So, those are my thoughts. But like I said, I wanted to get it to a place taking the feedback. We've heard a lot of feedback about opposing this, but you know, let it be the will of this body to give it to our electorate. I also want to share; I spoke to a number of Charter Commission Members. Yes, it was on the ballot, I think 2020. Our Charter Commission in 2022, it didn't even make it out of the Charter Commission. People came to testify in opposition of it even getting out of the Charter Commission. And that was something that was done just recently. I think it's gone to the voters a couple of times with, you know, the voters speaking loud and clear that they love keeping us on our toes every two years. When we talk about accountability, you can't get more accountable than that for every 24 months reconnecting with our community and hearing from them. So, that's my position on this and look forward to everyone else's feedback. I yield. CHR. EVANS: Thank you. Member Inaba. MR. INABA: Just a quick question. I wanted to call Corporation Counsel up. There was concern regarding ethics and brought up by Council Member Lee Loy and wondering if this is something to address that that would go out into the 2026 Election; if that addresses this concern of ethics, being that this is an election year. So, I don't know how that would play and would like your opinion on the matter. Page 28 GOEAC-29 April 2, 2024 (Note: At this time, Corporation Counsel Elizabeth Strance, came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MS. STRANCE: Thanks, Elizabeth Strance, Corporation Counsel. If you want a solid opinion, you would go to the Ethics Commission. The concerns that are being raised; are you're voting on something that you would directly benefit from if you're running for re-election. And so, the Fair Treatment Provision of the Ethics Code prevents you from taking actions that would benefit yourselves. Then, there's a conflict of interest if on the financial piece of it. So, after former Council Member Chung raised the issue, I did a quick look back through the prior Charter amendments. So, they were either advanced by the Charter Commission or when the bills seemed to have been presented, initiated by Council Members, the effective date was out beyond the current election cycle. So, I wasn't able to find any State Board of Ethics opinions directly on point. I haven't done a deep dive into the research, but just on the Fair Treatment and conflict of interest. Unless there's an exception on legislating, there might be a concern. But you may also want to have this cycle through Ethics and get a formal opinion. Those are kind of the buffet of issues that would be out there. CHR. EVANS: Thank you. Member Kimball. MS. KIMBALL: Thank you, Chair. I'm not going to be supporting this either and basically, for the same reasons that Council Member Lee Loy mentioned. I think that these kinds of decisions, no matter how finely we tread that line, it's more appropriate coming from a body outside of the Legislative body itself. Thanks for the opportunity to have the discussion, though. I mean I do think that it is very difficult to get as much done in a two-year term as you could maybe do in a four-year term with you know, more focused attention. And you know, I've always debated whether or not term limits really made sense from the standpoint of —that's what elections are for. I mean, if you like your person and they're doing a good job, you vote them in again. If you don't, then you vote them out. But that said, I don't think that this is the appropriate body to put forth those kinds of actions, even if it will eventually go to the voters, so I won't be supporting this bill. Thank you. CHR. EVANS: Member Kierkiewicz. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chair. Thank you for being so brave to put this forward so that we can have the discussion. I won't be supporting this measure. Page 29 GOEAC-29 April 2, 2024 I feel that it raises a lot of concerns around conflict of interest, and I think the public perception is going to be that we are trying to prioritize our own political longevity. And I know that that's not the intent, but that is the public perception. You know, walking into this role, we all knew there's an election every two years. And that's the same for Members of Congress and Members of the House Legislature. We've got to hustle for two years to really make an impact. And I think by having these two-year terms, even though it's difficult, it really is. It does give our community, the voter base, the opportunity to make adjustments in their representation. I think it ensures Members of this body are always connected to their community, and that the public has the ability to hold their representatives accountable for decisions and actions that they make. So, yes, the two years is difficult, but unless this was something that was, I think, driven by voters, like a voter -driven ballot initiative, I can't support moving this forward. I didn't hear anybody come forward today to kind of speak to that. So, I just want to make sure that our decision is reflected of the community as well. Thank you. CHR. EVANS: Member Kagiwada. MS. KAGIWADA: Thank you. Thanks for bringing this forward so we could have this discussion. I do feel like, once again, incumbents generally, are not at super great risks because of the unfair advantage of incumbency. And so, for that reason, I think the term limits are good. Generally, I don't like term limits either, but if we could get to a place where we have fully funded public elections, then I would feel a lot different about it. But because we do not and because incumbents have an unfair advantage, I think having the term limits is kind of important. So, I won't be supporting it this time. Thank you. CHR. EVANS: Member Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I think a good question to ask would be, what body would then create this if we don't? Charter Commission? Okay. And if we did vote it in, when will it go into effect? MR. INABA: Chair, can I respond? CHR. EVANS: Yes, please. MR. INABA: It would be effective this election, as it currently reads. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: General? Primary? Page 30 GOEAC-29 April 2, 2024 MR. INABA: Anyone elected in the Primary or General Elections this year. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: So, it's on the ballot. MR. INABA: In November. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: In November to anyone already in. Got yeah. Section 2, it only does benefit Members on the board. Because after this it won't matter, correct, for some of us on the dais right now? Yeah, okay. Speaking to that, the general idea, from what I've seen is two years creates volatility in the Member supporting the district. And that can be good and that could be bad. If you have a lame duck Council Person, great, vote them out in two years. But if you have someone who is doing good in the district, and they're really trying, and the powers that be deciding, they do or do not like that person, then they're going throw money at someone just to run against them because they don't like them. Then that creates, to me, volatility for the community that needs the support. When you switch a Council Person every two years, you actually do damage to the community that they support, because learning how to do this job, learning how to get funding to your community comes through the connections, comes through the ability to understand legislative process. And all of that as a whole, equals benefiting your district. So, the merit to having four-year terms is there. The accountability created by having two-year terms is very present. I can see both sides. And I've always kind of walked the line between what's best for the community. All I can say is, every two years does create volatility for the community and their representation by their sitting Council Member. That can be good or bad, but it takes a lot of time to get your feet wet in this position and understand how things work and how to get things done for your people. So, there is something to be said to the bill and listening to the room today, you know, the votes seem pretty clear. So, looking forward to seeing how the member who brought it forward goes from here. But I do appreciate you bringing this forward for conversation, and I've seen this a couple times now in my time on the Council. Thank you. CHR. EVANS: Member Villegas. MS. VILLEGAS: Yes, just really quickly. I also want to thank Council Member Inaba for the courage to have this conversation with us, and the courage to potentially be perceived as if this was self-serving. I read the article in the newspaper, and your quotes about, you know, the challenges with getting momentum and working on projects larger than just smaller one-off pieces of Page 31 GOEAC-29 April 2, 2024 policy. So, I see that vision and being able to allow that. Unfortunately, for us or the world, the chances of nefarious activities over a certain timeframe seems to outweigh the assurances of the trust by the community that, if given that longer amount of time, that a higher good would be done. After running for office, this will be my final term running for. It is a damn hard job. I mean you go from wanting to be veracious and vociferous and out there talking to people, and to wanting to just be calm and sit and always take the high road to wanting to just cry in a corner and be like, I don't want my face on yard signs all over my town again. It's very unnerving, And when it happens every other year, it's a very vulnerable position. So, I want to commend all of us for having navigated that, at least one time. If not, multiple. And for those, you know, in the community that obviously have strong opinions about it, I highly respect them. And for that reason, I won't be supporting this piece of legislation. And I feel like erring on the side of caution is the most appropriate choice right now. Even though, you know, there's a part of me that if that could have been a gift to somebody else coming forward, they wouldn't have to run every other year. But under the circumstances, don't think it's appropriate. And I will be hopefully almost done with my service, and looking forward to those that follow. Thank you, Holeka for bringing this forward. The other reason is, I feel like when it came up as a potential Charter amendment on the ballot last time, and the community said, no, is the reason to not. And the channels exist for it to happen, so that would be a wiser, more streamlined way for that to happen, which eliminates the impression being made on our communities that we are operating out of self-service. I would say much of this job is out of self-sacrifice. So, yeah, with that, I yield. CHR. EVANS: Member Galimba. MS. GALIMBA: Thank you. So, yeah, I actually was on the Charter Commission this last time, and it was a really difficult decision because there are good arguments on either side, and it did go out to the public and they made their decision. So, I feel like we should not, you know, go against that decision since it was relatively recent and for all the other reasons. However, you know, I was kind of thinking about this, and for me, being the newbie, I really and I think everybody does this. I'm constantly thinking about what is the County Council supposed to do? Like, what is our role? What is the balance of power between the Administration and us? How do we allow for longer term priorities to be more important? Page 32 GOEAC-29 April 2, 2024 Because I think we have struggled as a County with more of like the short-term thinking of like, let's do fun things so that we'll get re-elected. I think that isn't a good way to make decisions. So, I can see some of the reasoning behind this for sure. Also, you know, there's definitely arguments for a strong Mayor system that we have, but there are definitely some weaknesses to it. So, there is definitely a lot of room for conversation around this general topic, and I appreciate sort of it coming up, so that, you know, we can actually think about this briefly. I mean, I will vote against it, but I do think that conversation that it brings up is a big conversation. Like what is the best structure of government for our County as our County changes, and you know, the way we all look at the different roles that we play on the different parts of our government, especially the voters. So again, yeah, I think this is a conversation that is happening for all of us in different ways. And I yield. CHR. EVANS: Member Inaba. MR. INABA: Thank you everyone for your comments. If this was first reading, I would have us vote on it, but being that this motion is to forward, Council Member Evans, before I withdraw, do you want to make any comments on the bill? CHR. EVANS: I would like to offer a comment. I think the thing that struck me is when Brenda Ford said when it went to the two -years, that it didn't apply to anybody that was currently on the Council. And I think if we truly believe that two four-year terms is good for the County, then I would say it shouldn't benefit any of us that are sitting on the dais. And I would say you'd have to change the effective date to make that message strong and clear to constituency. But I have to tell you as a policy maker, it takes a lot more than two years to get a lot of these things done. And if you're picking up a major policy —one of the things I've noticed since I've been here, we can tweak the Code; we can take one paragraph and add a second paragraph. But when you get into bills that are 20, 30, 40 pages long that are truly shifting the policy of how we do business, those are much heavier lifts, and they take a lot longer time to get the bigger policy things done. I can see why, you know, you talk to the City and County of Honolulu where they have four two-year terms, and you talk to them and see what kind of bills and what types of things they're pushing in their county. It seems like they're really pushing the Executive Branch sometimes into a new direction. Page 33 GOEAC-29 April 2, 2024 I really appreciate Member Inaba's comment about understanding that we're the third branch of government and trying to find that balance of the Executive Branch and Legislative Branch. And I can see why going to the four-year term gives a little more power to the Legislative Branch that might balance, you know, where the Executive Branch is. So, I can see that. But you know, it is term limits, and people really like term limits. And I kind of agree with everybody that let the Charter Commission bring this forward for consideration instead of us. That's probably the better way to go. But is see some real advantages to the two four -years. But I wouldn't be okay with the 10 years that I'm seeing that's coming right now in this. So, anyway, that's my comments. Thank you. I yield. To you Mr. Inaba. MR. INABA: With that, I was informed by the Clerk that our Council Rules prohibit withdrawal of a motion after it's been amended. So, with that, I'll be making a motion to postpone Bill 143, as amended, to the Call of the Chair. CHR. EVANS: Okay, I have a motion to postpone to the Call of the Chair, Bill 143, as amended, offered by Mr. Inaba. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy. All in favor? MR. INABA: Chair? CHR. EVANS: Discussion, yeah, please. MR. INABA: Just for the public's knowledge, postponing to the Call of the Chair would be at the Chair's discretion to bring it back. And especially with Charter amendments, once we hit a certain point this year, it's impossible to get it on the ballot. And subsequently after this year, there will be a new Charter. So, even more so it would be impossible that this bill come back. So, I want to leave it at that. Ask for your support in this motion. Thank you. Vote on Motion The motion to postpone Bill 143, as amended, to the Call of Chair to Postpone to the was carried by the following voice vote: Call of the Chair: (Approved) Ayes: Committee Members Galimba, Inaba, Kagiwada, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, Villegas, and Chair Evans — 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. Page 34 GOEAC-29 =1 � Approved: April 2, 2024 Seeing no more business on this agenda, Chair Evans adjourned at 3: 10. -- Ms. Cindy Evans, Committee on Governmental Operations and External Affairs CE/dt 43 IL V — (Date) Page 35