Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN PCHSW 2024/04/30 (2022-2024) Policy Committee on Health, Safety, and Well-being 12th Session West Hawai`i Civic Center 74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Highway, Building A Kailua-Kona, Hawai`i April 30, 2024 CALL TO The regular meeting of the Policy Committee on Health, Safety, and ORDER: Well-being was called to order at 3:38 p.m., in the Council Chambers, Kailua-Kona, by Ms. Jenn Kagiwada, Chair. ROLL CALL: Present: Ms. Jenn Kagiwada, Chair Mr. Matt Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Vice Chair Ms. Cindy Evans, Member (came in later) Ms. Michelle M. Galimba, Member(via video conference from Hilo) Mr. Holeka Goro Inaba, Member Ms. Ashley L. Kierkiewicz, Member (via video conference from Hilo) Ms. Heather L. Kimball, Member (via video conference from Hilo) Ms. Susan L. K. Lee Loy, Member Ms. Rebecca Villegas, Member STATEMENTS The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order FROM THE of 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: Sierra Sugrue: Bill 153 (Comm. 823), in support. Sylvia Dolena: Bill 153 (Comm. 823), comment. Michael Allen: Bill 153 (Comm. 823), comment. CHR. KAGIWADA: Thank you to the testifiers for contributing today. Mr. Clerk, would you please read in the bill. PCHSW-12 April 30,2024 BILLS FOR The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, ORDINANCES: Bills for Ordinances. Bill 153: AMENDS CHAPTER 4, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 4-4-26, OF THE HAWAI`I COUNTY CODE 1983 (2016 EDITION, AS AMENDED), RELATING TO ANIMALS Increases the penalties for a noisy dog violation from $25 to $50 for the first violation, $75 to $100 for the second violation, $100 to $200 for the third violation, and $200 to $400 for any subsequent violation. Reference: Comm. 823 Intr. by: Ms. Galimba Motion to Approve: Ms. Galimba moved to recommend passage of Bill 153 on first reading. Seconded by Mr. Inaba. CHR. KAGIWADA: Council Member Galimba. MS. GALIMBA: Thank you, Chair. So, this is what I think is a pretty simple tweak. I've just increased most of the fines; doubled them except for the second violation, which to me seemed like a little bit too steep of a ramp up. So, that one just increased $25. I will say that this bill was very much inspired by community requests, especially Mr. Allen. However, I am looking at the fee structures of the fines in Chapter 4, they probably all could use some updating. However, wanted to start with this particular part of Chapter 4, since I think for me it was the easiest to justify raising those fines and probably the most effective. So, there is a fairly high standard for justifying a citation for noisy dogs. And some folks perhaps, would like to lower that standard. In other words, it's making it easier to justify a citation. But I feel like we need to really balance this and not make it so easy that it becomes a problem with neighbors sort of picking on neighbors over their dogs, which I think very much it can be a thing. So, it is a fairly high standard and I'd like to keep it that way, and I feel like this raising of the fees is the best way to sort of balance the high standards for justifying a citation. Because it requires so much effort to get it to a citation, it really should have a higher penalty than the very low current fine structure. I think this is really in the interest of the community in order to help prevent some of the nuisance barking, and also barking as some folks have pointed out, is a sign of an unhappy dog sometimes. So, it also has some humane aspects to it as well. Page 2 PCHSW-12 April 30,2024 I am an owner of some very noisy dogs, so I am very sensitive to people having dogs that bark, you know, for a reason; passerby's. They are guard dogs or working dogs. So, I definitely don't want to be too draconian about noisy dogs. Perhaps a certain amount of self-interests for dog owners. Dogs do bark, but we also need to be sensitive to neighbors and not have overly noisy dogs, and therefore, we should have some higher penalties for those types of situations. Hoping for my colleagues' support on this small tweak to Chapter 4. Thanks, I yield. CHR. KAGIWADA: Thank you, Council Member. Council Members, questions or comments? Council Member Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: To the maker. You know, I spent this morning going back and forth with some folks from my community on the same issue. There's a number of different reasons why this comes up. There are facilities that dogs bark in, and there are neighbors with dogs that bark. The interesting thing about our—I just had this question so, it's very fresh. Our Planning and our land use or Ag lands allows for the use of dog kennels. Dog kennels can be had. That's fine. They can actually border right up to their property line, and those dogs can be personal. Those can be a boarding kennel. And if it's a boarding kennel, those dogs can bark incessantly, and we all know what happens when one dog starts barking, then the other dog bark back. Then you have this beautiful concussion of dogs barking together, which is beautiful, but not for the neighbors. So, I like that you're taking up this simple measure to help with the enforceable opportunities for the community. From my understanding in the Planning Department specifically, you know, their hands are a little tied. There used to be a special permit tied to getting a kennel operating, but that was removed by a State opinion that these are legal uses of Agricultural land. So as such, people should be able to raise livestock, and I completely agree with that. But there is no recourse for an owner who feels that their neighbor's dog is just driving them crazy. So, I like what you're doing here. I like the simplicity. And with a higher fine, I'm sure this fine hasn't been adjusted for a very long time. It may be a start to addressing some of the problems that we have and help provide relief to community members when they feel like there's no solution left. Doing this also highlights for the community, you know, this is an option for them; work with your neighbor. If to no avail, then you have another option, and that's always, I think,just a good thing for community members to have in their back pocket. So, I'll be supporting this today. I love simple bills that have Page 3 PCHSW-12 April 30,2024 such a nice impact on our community. So, well done, I'll be supporting this. Thank you. Before I yield, one question for you, Michelle. And maybe you know or don't know; maybe Corporation Counsel can lean in, but does this include commercial kennels or is this specific to only residential dogs? Is this for somebody who keeps, you know, their own personal dogs or is this for boarding kennels as well? If you do not know, Council Member Galimba, I'll be happy to go to Corp. Counsel for their opinion. MS. GALIMBA: Alright, I don't particularly know. Sorry, Chair, is it okay that I respond? CHR. KAGIWADA: Yes, go ahead and respond. MS. GALIMBA: Thanks. Yes, I don't believe Chapter 4 addresses it specifically, but I'll be happy to hear from Corporation Counsel. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, Ms. Strance, don't have to be now, but maybe before the next hearing or if you're ready now. I read in her bill, after notifying the owner or custodian. Custodian begins to touch on someone holding dogs for someone else or in charge of those animals. So,just understanding that this can be addressed towards existing kennels. And providing community members who have the ability to go a step in the right direction within their neighborhood or with their neighbor, if it's just your average person with a dog or two, or if it's someone who operates a full-on boarding kennel on their property. CHR. KAGIWADA: Corporation Counsel, go ahead. (Note: At this time, Corporation Counsel Elizabeth Strance came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MS. STRANCE: Good afternoon, Elizabeth Strance. I will have to get back to you. This discussion has raised a couple of interesting questions. The bill as drafted, talks about any person disturbed. So, the focus is on the person who is disturbed, and it raises issues about time, and place. And so, we will do some research and be ready to report to you at the next hearing. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. CHR. KAGIWADA: Thank you so much. Page 4 PCHSW-12 April 30,2024 MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Council Member Galimba for bringing this forward. I yield, Chair. CHR. KAGIWADA: Thank you. Council Member Evans. MS. EVANS: Thank you. I wanted to ask if you gave any consideration to, it says, the person disturbed may then notify the appropriate enforcement agency. Have you given it any thought if it should be the Police or Animal Control? And the reason I say that is, it would be nice to have one of them really focus on doing the noisy—so that they're not pointing fingers at each other. Like the testifier said they called Animal Control and they didn't get an answer, then they tell you to call the police. So it might be worth finding out who's pointing fingers at who, and maybe as the Council, we can actually give direction on who should people report it to. That's one recommended amendment. Then I just want you to know that I spent hours working on drafting a noisy dog piece of legislation, and I kind of stopped because ended up with things that came up. I want to point out that urban communities like Kona has condominiums and apartment buildings, and people have dogs and dogs can bark maybe 30 minutes, which would be able for you to call the police and file a complaint. And what you find is in urban cities, they have some pretty extensive barking dog legislation versus what we were just talking about today which tends to be our agricultural rural communities that have, you know, a lot of people have their dogs that do hunting, and bird dogs, and cattle, you know. And so, you find like out where I'm at in Kohala, there's a lot of people that have four to eight dogs. And I've had people in Kohala that had to sell their house and move because the dogs would start barking in the middle of the night and not stop, and they just couldn't live that way anymore. So, they had to move. The only thought I had on that, was there is legislation. I believe it's State legislation that does regulate people that have kennels. That actually, you know, take people in. What do you call those? Boarding. So, there is laws on boarding. People who board dogs, there is quite a bit of legislation to hopefully mitigate any noisy barking. So, people have put a lot of energy into that, but not so much with people, you know, their children, right? Their dogs are their pets; they're part of the family. So, you know, there's definitely been a huge difference on how people looked at it. But just a suggestion, I think raising and bringing it to people's attention that we're finding that really being conscious that is a nuisance and affecting people's lives, raising the fees may get people's attention a little bit. But I'd really like to see us nail down what agency should be responding to noisy dogs. But that's it. Thank you, I yield. Page 5 PCHSW-12 April 30,2024 CHR. KAGIWADA: Thank you. And I believe we might have Administrator Matt Runnels on, is that correct? (Note: At this time, Animal Control and Protection Agency Administrator Matthew Runnells came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. RUNNELLS: That's correct. CHR. KAGIWADA: Oh, great. So, you may be able to answer the question that Council Member Evans had about who's responsible to answering these issues when people have concerns. Could you speak to that, please? MR. RUNNELLS: Well, to be honest, it all depends on the time of day. A lot of these barking dog calls are in the middle of the night and barking dog calls aren't considered Priority One calls. Which is, we answer Priority One calls at night and then the barking dog calls we would answer in the day, but of course, Priority One calls still take precedence over the Priority Two and Three calls that we'd have. But we still answer those calls, and then a lot times it is a very time-consuming method to try to narrow down the barking issue. CHR. KAGIWADA: Okay. So, did that answer your question? Depending on the time of day, that's who you call. It's the Police if it's after hours, it's Animal Control if it's during the day. MS. EVANS: May I comment? CHR. KAGIWADA: Yes, go ahead. MS. EVANS: I just want to make a recommendation we give it to the police. So, I just think we need to have an agency that really has that responsibility. But that's my take on it. I yield. CHR. KAGIWADA: Okay, thank you. Anybody else have questions or comments? Council Member Inaba? MR. INABA: Yes,just want to clarify. So for Section (a), it says to notify the appropriate enforcement agency. Overall the enforcement of this Chapter, for the most part is with Animal Control. So, I'm just wondering if we want to make sure to specify Animal Control, because I don't know if we want Police to be called when we have a dedicated Animal Control Agency at this point. So that's a question to the maker, if we would want to specify that? CHR. KAGIWADA: Council Member, I think that's what we just were talking about, is that right now it depends on the hour of the day. During the day, it Page 6 PCHSW-12 April 30,2024 goes to Animal Control and during the night if it's not a Level One issue; if it's barking dogs, it goes to the Police. MR. INABA: Apologies on the double question. I don't know, when I think about it, we have a distinct agency now and understanding where there is priority calls in those off hours, when are we going to get the public to really start relying on Animal Control for animal issues versus calling the Police? So, I just have that concern and understanding we're standing it up, and Administrator Runnels, he and the team are working there. Anytime we touch a part of the Chapter it just makes me like—we keep touching this Chapter, and I just think that we really need to be very clear if we can. Then, the whole thing is about the penalties. And I just think if it's an ongoing thing that maybe the animal needs to be removed, because well, when is enough, enough or we're going to just keep fining people $400. And maybe some people can afford the $400, so at what point does the neighbor who is experiencing all of this get any relief? Just throwing that out there. Alright, thank you. CHR. KAGIWADA: Thank you. Other comments or questions? Over in Hilo? MS. GALIMBA: I just wanted to respond to some of the comments, and I guess I will definitely take them into consideration. I guess I wanted to touch this Chapter very lightly because it is, as we all know, animals are a subject of great passion. So, I'm going to be very careful doing this. And also, as we all know, the appropriate enforcement agency has changed quite a bit in the past few years. So, a certain amount of flexibility in the language might be wise. I mean, I do hope that we won't be staying with our current situation for some time. Perhaps there might be someplace not necessarily imposed, but I think some education around who is the appropriate enforcement agency to call at what time in the community. Not sure that putting into code is the right pace, but I'll definitely think about it and you know, talk with folks about that. And we'll be also thinking about the questions of, you know, city dogs versus country dogs. So, it's always a bit of a conundrum in our County, but both are important. With that, I yield. CHR. KAGIWADA: Thanks. Any other comments or questions from Hilo? MS. KIMBALL: We're good, Chair. CHR. KAGIWADA: Thank you. Council Member Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: Thanks, Chair. Absolutely in support of, but the maker, Page 7 PCHSW-12 April 30,2024 Ms. Galimba touched upon it I think. We have animals for all kinds of reasons. For those in the country or on the farm, they're using it, you know, to protect their property, right? So, having a barking dog when you're on a ten-acre lot is a good thing. It's a bad thing if you have a neighbor who doesn't like the dog barking. So, absolutely in support of, but I think there is some nuances between the city dog and the country dog. But we can get there. I yield. CHR. KAGIWADA: Thank you. Council Member Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Just on that, some of the last comments that were made, I'd really would like to see our police officers not being utilized for smaller issues. We're already under-staffed and I would like them focusing on the bigger things at hand. So, if we can work to find a nice balance between who's fielding the calls; whether it's non-emergency, Animal Control, or hotline; that would be incredibly useful to free up our officers to do other things. I know it's been mentioned and talked about. I just wanted to really highlight that our officers need to be focusing on some of the more hefty crimes. Thank you. CHR. KAGIWADA: Thank you, Council Member. Alright, any other? MS. EVANS: A quick comment because I did have my people who were basically having a nervous breakdown because of the barking dogs. And I do think that calling the Police and not getting a response when you're just having a meltdown from barking dogs' makes it feel like you don't matter. So, if you're going to have a law that says it's against the law to have a dog barking longer than 30 minutes and someone calls, they're hoping and expecting some response. So yeah, it may not be an emergency to us, but to these people who are having a nervous breakdown; it was an emergency. So, I don't know, maybe the Fire Department, 9-1-1, or EMS (Emergency Medical Services) come and help me. But, I'm telling you people really have meltdowns over these dogs that bark right next to their bedroom window for hours and hours from midnight. They go crazy. And I had a couple, two different homes up in Kohala call me saying they were just having a mental breakdown over it. So, anyway,just had to share, thanks. CHR. KAGIWADA: Thank you, Council Member. Alright, I just have a couple comments here, then we can hopefully wrap this up. Administrator Runnels, I'm just wondering, there was a testifier who talked about having a very difficult relationship with their neighbor and maybe not feeling like they could approach them on an issue like barking dogs and feel safe. Is that something that you can take into account if somebody calls, or is this strictly if you have not actually reached out, then we cannot do anything? Is that how you read it? Page 8 PCHSW-12 April 30,2024 MR. RUNNELS: I mean if you have a neighbor that's definitely aggressive, I wouldn't approach the neighbor. Even from our standpoint where our officers, who are not armed or wear body armor, those particular cases are—especially, if they were both for,you know, for our officers to deal with, and oftentimes we end up having to call in the Police anyway for those instances. So, but you know, we have to get the calls in. And you know, if you have a complaint, definitely call in about it and we try to answer those as quickly as we possibly can. CHR. KAGIWADA: Okay. To the maker, I'm wondering if you would possibly consider working with the Administrator on this to maybe just tweak the language a bit to make sure that if somebody—or just checking in with Corporation Counsel or something to see that we're okay if somebody is feeling, you know, like it's a safety issue, that they don't have to necessarily follow the first rules in (a) for safety reasons? I don't know if it needs to be codified or not, but I would love it if you could at least have a conversation and look at that, if you're amenable to that? Thank you. I don't have anything else to say, except for I am supportive. I know this can be very disturbing to one's life, one's sleep. You know, if you have young children, it can be very hard. So, I appreciate it and I appreciate the simplicity of it. And it sounds like, you know, as we work with Animal Control to support them and get their services and information out to the public, hopefully, we can make sure that we're sharing the correct information and getting it out there, so, that everybody knows the correct steps to take. So, I don't see any other lights on. So, we will go ahead and take the vote. All those in favor of forwarding Bill 153 to Council with a favorable recommendation, please say "aye." Any opposed? Vote on Bill 153: The motion to recommend passage of Bill 153 on first (Approved) reading was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Evans, Galimba, Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz, Kimball Lee Loy, Villegas, and Chair Kagiwada—9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. Page 9 PCHSW-12 April 30,2024 ADJOURN- Seeing no further business, Chair Kagiwada adjourned the meeting MENT: at 4:14 p.m. CHR. KAGIWADA: Thank you. Approved: Ms. J Ka iwa a, it (Date) Policy Committee on ealth, Safety, and Well-being JK/dt Page 10