Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN CRCOC 2024/05/01 (2022-2024)Committee on Communications, Reports, and Council Oversight 27' Session West Hawaii Civic Center 74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Highway, Building A Kailua-Kona, Hawaii May 1, 2024 CALL TO The regular meeting of the Committee on Communications, Reports, and ORDER: Council Oversight was called to order at 9:04 a.m., in the Council Chambers, Kailua-Kona, by Ms. Rebecca Villegas, Chair. RC)T.T. C'AT.T.- Present: Ms. Rebecca Villegas, Chair Ms. Jenn Kagiwada, Vice Chair Mr. Holeka Goro Inaba, Member Ms. Cindy Evans, Member Ms. Michelle M. Galimba, Member Ms. Ashley L. Kierkiewicz, Member (via videoconference from Hilo; came in later) Ms. Heather L. Kimball, Member (came in later) Ms. Susan L. K. Lee Loy, Member Absent & Excused: Mr. Matt Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Member STATEMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC ON AGENDA ITEMS The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, Statements from the Public on Agenda Items. The following individuals registered to speak and came forward when called by the Chair: Antu Harvey: Nawahine Kaho`opi`i: Cory Harden: Tawn Keeney: Maki Morinoue: (representing Huli PAC) Comm. 820, comment. Comm. 820, comment. Comm. 820, comment. (see Comm. 820.4) Comm. 820, comment. (see Comm. 820.7) Comm. 820, comment. CRCOC-27 COMMUNI- CATIONS: May 1, 2024 Tanya Yamanaka Aynessazian: (representing Hull PAC) Phaethon Keeney: Chuck Flaherty: Hope Alohalani Cermelj: Comm. 820, comment. Comm. 820, comment. (see Comm. 820.6) Comm. 820, comment. (see Comm. 820.3) Comm. 820, in opposition. CHR. VILLEGAS: Go ahead and read in our legislation. The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, Communications. Comm. 820: REQUESTS A DISCUSSION WITH CORPORATION COUNSEL ELIZABETH STRANCE AND PLANNING DIRECTOR ZENDO KERN, REGARDING THE GENERAL PLAN COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW From Council Member Holeka Inaba, dated April 9, 2024. (Note: Comm. 820.1, from Council Member Holeka Goro Inaba dated April 30, 2024, transmitting PowerPoint material to Comm. 820, was circulated.) Motion to Close File: Mr. Inaba moved to close file on Comm. 820. Seconded by Ms. Kimball. CHR. VILLEGAS: With that, I'll go ahead and turn it over to Council Member Inaba to get us started on this discussion. MR. INABA: Thank you. In light of our tight schedule today, I do want to be very clear what the intention of this communication was. It's not necessarily the contents of the current draft plan but more so the process and where we are and what abilities the Council and Commissions have to make changes as requested by the public, in light of the process not maybe having been followed directly as according to the current General Plan (GP). So, in Hilo today starting off, we have the Planning Department giving us just a quick update, and they just sent this over to me yesterday. So, I'm going to just ask those in Hilo, Director, if we can be as concise as possible, especially on the purpose of the Plan and those kinds of things that are generally known so we have time to discuss what we are going to be doing moving forward. You can go ahead. Page 2 CRCOC-27 May 1, 2024 (Note: At this time, Planning Director Zendo Kern and Planning Program Manager April Surprenant came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. KERN: Good morning, Chair, members of the Committee, Zendo Kern, Planning Director. I have with me April Surprenant, our Long -Range Program Manager, whose been here for the duration of the General Plan update. I'm going to run through some brief kind of presentation on what we've gone through and where we are. (Note: At this time, Planning Director Zendo Kern and Planning Program Manager April Surprenant came forward and provided a PowerPoint presentation to the members of the Committee. For viewing of the presentation, see the DVD copy of the proceedings on file in the Clerk's Office, or online at http://hawaiicounty.granicus.com. A copy of the presentation is made part of the record, see Comm. 820.1.) MR. INABA: Thank you, Director Kern, and Ms. Surprenant. So, I brought this communication forward because we're seeing in the current General Plan, that's where the rules for the comprehensive review live. It doesn't live in Code, it doesn't live in the Charter, it lives in the current General Plan, which was approved by ordinance. In that Plan, it requires-10 years after the previous approval of a comprehensive review, the initiation has to happen, which happened in February of 2015. The Plan also requires that a draft be submitted to the Council for approval within three years of that point. So, within 13 years of the approval of the previous comprehensive review. You provided, on one of these slides, the timeline that show that initiation and the different drafts through the years, these different meetings. But I think where we are right now is that there's significant concern from community, especially with the complete replacement of the General Plan. I don't have any issue with that, I think I do agree though, with the sentiments that it hasn't been easy to track where things from the current General Plan are ending up in the new document. In some of these workshops, I don't know that we've been provided the best tools to make sense of that. So, as we continue going through this process, wanting to see if we can incorporate some of the feedback that has been provided regarding process especially; if there seems to be confusion with the way the public is interacting with the draft and the comments are being submitted, if there are ways to address that. Then ultimately, because we have .not been in line with the rules in the current General Plan, I asked Corporation Counsel to see what options the Council has because right now in the General Plan, it states that the Council can't make any significant amendments once the draft comes to us. But it makes me wonder, you Page 3 CRCOC-27 May 1, 2024 know, if there's a recommendation from the Planning Commissions to make a significant change, what powers does the Council have, especially in light of not having followed the process to the T, the last, however long we've been at this comprehensive review. So, first of all, I guess the question of the Planning Department, in hearing some of the concerns from community, especially with the tie over from the current General Plan to the draft, what possible solutions do we have to address that concern? MR. KERN: Thank you, Council Member. So, we did hear that concern and totally reasonable. So, what we created is the justification document that really goes through every single policy and goal on there and where that came from; whether it came from the current General Plan, the CDPs (Community Development Plan), best practices, or potentially Climate Action Plan, and really articulated where all of those came from to really make it as clean and as simple as possible. The concept around rewriting the General Plan is not novel to us, it has been done; Kauai did the same thing. So, we took that feedback and then created that document to really try to articulate further where all of this is coming from. A lot of the information, which is interesting because it doesn't seem like it's resonating with certain members of the public, came from the CDPs. We uplifted a lot of the CDP land -use elements, policies, and concepts into the General Plan, so this is like community planning upon community planning. I hope that answers your question. We also, just real quick, I want to say that we have the online tool, has been really, really amazing, but also understanding that folks don't necessarily have that access to the technology all the time. We have drafts within the Planning Department. We have access to a computer within the Planning Department. We've provided hard copies in all the libraries around the island, and that basically anybody needing additional information, we are here to help process, explain, or run through whatever concerns there may be. MR. INABA: So, when did that document, what are we calling it, the reference guide? MR. KERN: The rationale document. April's looking that up right now. MR. INABA: I guess my concern is that some of these workshops, which I attended, have not provided or walked through some of these tools. So, the fact that they exist but that the public has not necessarily been taught at these twenty - something workshops on how to use these tools, at least at the ones I've been to, is concerning. So, I don't know if in the upcoming workshops, if there's Page 4 CRCOC-27 May 1, 2024 opportunity for that to really make sure that the public who shows up is getting an understanding of how to use these resources that the department has provided. MR. KERN: Council Member, to respond, it was in late February when we released the rationale document and extended the public commenting period during that time, to make sure that was out there, and folks had the opportunity to review it and make additional comments to it. I apologize for your experience at the meetings. We did have tables set up. We had full on stations with computers and folks showing them how to do that. We had a dedicated table to show people how to use the technology and software that we had there, understanding it was a new process. We had a lot of really positive feedback from folks on this. MR. INABA: Yeah, and I think that segways perfectly. So, Corporation Counsel, in light of where we are and the concerns and essentially us not having followed the timeline required in the current General Plan, I want to have a discussion on what ability the Council has to amend the draft when it comes to us, if there's significant concern from the public for certain policies. Especially when previous comprehensive reviews have really brought certain policy changes or certain amendments, and this draft is a complete replacement. What are our options? (Note: At this time, Corporation Counsel Elizabeth Strance came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MS. STRANCE: Good morning, Council Members. So, Chair Inaba, the primary focus of my research has been processed to date and not processed going forward. I think that the concern that you raise comes from provisions at the 2007 amendment to the General Plan, which revised the amendment procedures and appeared to limit the authority of this body to make amendments once the General Plan came to it. For context, the 2005 General Plan was adopted prior to the division of the two County Planning Commissions, prior to the CDP process. When the County amended the County Charter and updated the provisions regarding the Planning Commissions, as you folks know, there are certain land use decisions that you make that require Planning Commission approval and that back and forth. So, you've had discussions before about is this a significant amendment requiring feedback from the Planning Commission? So, the amendments to the Plan in 2007, appear to address that concern in terms of what amendments could be made. So, it appears that there's some limitations on this body's ability to make amendments and if I can just take a minute to place sort of these timeframes in context. Going back through the legislative histories of the General Plans, I wish we could say that you folks are in a unique situation, but you're really not. Each Page 5 CRCOC-27 May 1, 2024 time a General Plan has been enacted, at the time of the enactment, the conversation about how can we do this better and faster comes up. So, when the Plan was adopted in 2005, almost immediately in 2006, the Council tasked the Planning Department to come up with procedures for the next go -around, which it did. Then that Plan envisioned that in 2015, when the new process was going to initiate, the Planning Department would have already come up with proposed amendments, which means that whole period of time during which they were onboarding CDPs, trying to implement the 2005 Plan, also meant that they were almost immediately required to start working or thinking about the 2015 Plan. So, not surprisingly in 2014,.the Planning Department came back to this body, so it was before the General Plan amendments were started and asked for an amendment, which basically said we start the process in 2015—not later than 2015. At the time —so, the bill that was introduced and it came to Council after the Planning Commissions was basically back to the 2005 Plan, which is you just have to start by February 2015. An issue that had been raised at the Planning Commissions was also again raised at the County Council, which is, well, when do we get the Plan? So, there was an amendment proposed that would be the Plan had to come to the Council within one year. The amendment ultimately adopted was that the proposed General Plan would make its way to the County Council within 13 years, so that meant 2018, prior to this administration, prior to most of you. That didn't happen. So, this kind of push-pull between getting it right and getting it done has been an issue at least as far back as 2005. I didn't go back to the 1989 amendments. In the 2005 version, this body had no participation in development of the General Plan until the proposal was submitted to it. So, the whole public process would play out and then a plan would come to it. Under the 2007 amendments, which weren't changed in 2014, the commencement periodso in 2015, a formal announcement by the Planning Department is made, "We're starting the General Plan review." That triggers a couple of things. One, it triggers a stay by this body, to adopt interim General Plan amendments, and it set a period of time that the County Council could propose amendments to the General Plan, that it wanted to be considered during the general review process. That process was followed, and so we've been in this kind of no man's land since I think around 2016. The rules envisioned a fairly clipped pace that the process would go through, and this is where the planning process has got hung up at seems like every time, which is the desire of the County, this body included, to make sure that there's robust public discussion, that the expertise of the Planning Department is employed and a really good, updated process is undertaken. The intention is how long should this body sit still for it? Page 6 CRCOC-27 May 1, 2024 Clearly, in 2014, it was we want this in 13 years, but even during the discussions on that amendment, I believe it was Council Member Ford who well recognized that there were no consequences built into failing to meet that deadline, and Council Members had discussions about what if the deadline wasn't going to be met? So, there was no interest even though it was raised about imposing a consequence in not meeting the deadline. I don't want to say it's an acknowledgment because I think one of the problems with the General Plan adoption by ordinance is most of us when we're thinking about how soon does something have to be done, we look at the County Charter, we look at the County Code and ordinances are technically part of the County Code. They're very difficult to research, and in fact, Council Member Inaba brought to my attention the 24 amendment, which I couldn't find. I was having difficulty finding it, and after I found it, I could figure out how to find it. So, that's kind of where we are. So, between 2018 and to date, you know, every year during budget there are discussions about what's the status of the General Plan. This body met with Mr. Kern, I think in 2022, for an update and asking for when the Plan would be completed and submitted to them. I'm just going to digress real quickly and then I'll get to your point. There are two really big projects for the County Council that are laid out in the County Charter. One, as you know, around budgeting and then the second specifically tasks this body with adoption of a general plan. The Planning Department is also —this is a very important project for the Planning Department because it sets the parameters of its work as well. So, the place where I think you find yourselves is okay. That 2018 deadline was missed, so what's now —there's not a specific consequence of not meeting that plan. So, there's a rule of statutory construction that says that normally, you read statutes along with their plain language, and you give a plain language interpretation. An exception to that is unless it would lead to an absurd result. So, in this case, under the General Plan, this body does not specifically have legislative authority to anything about moving the process forward. But because this body has expressed over time, in particularly around the 2014 amendments, there might be an option for the Council to amend the General Plan provisions to impose a deadline and then what would happen if the deadline isn't met. So, the next step of that if a plain reading interpretation of a statute leads to an absurd result, the statute will be interpreted in a manner that avoids that absurd result. So, my review of the General Plan deadlines and the processes that were set up and where the process went off is at the deadline to submit something to this body. There are deadlines within the Planning Commission, so for example, if the Planning Commissions don't act within 150 days, the bill still comes to you. So, once the document gets sent to the Planning Commission, there's a predictable process for it to come to you. So, if this body were interested in making sure that the timeline that is being outlined by the Planning Department now is met, the Page 7 CRCOC-27 May 1, 2024 legal advice that I would give the county is that this body would have a limited authority to establish a deadline with consequences of what would happen if that deadline wasn't met. So, for example, if a deadline of sending something to the Commissions wasn't met, this body could impose what would happen to get it there. I don't think that this body would have authority to revise what happens once the plan got to the Planning Commission because that process is well defined, and deadlines are not an issue. That would be if this body felt that it needed that kind of deadline to get the Planning process complete, and that it was more important to get a document to it than to give the Planning Department the time that it felt that it needed. So, I know that there's been a discussion about well, should this body be permitted to pass further proposed amendments and I guess my thought on that would be we need to discuss what that would look like because part of the process is not to necessarily slow it down. What plan would you be submitting proposed amendments to? Would you go back to the 2005 plan and make amendments or something else that has never been submitted to it? So, I think the timeliness of this discussion is really important because of the importance of the General Plan. The quandary that you find yourself in is, I wouldn't say predictable, but there's history to suggest it. The general format has always been that the groundwork pretty much gets laid outside the County Council and then a document comes to it to consider. I understand some of the frustration around that with limitations on the amendment process because of the interplay between the Council and the Planning Commissions. I would suggest that is something to discuss further because in my mind as the lead attorney for the County, it would be a very unfortunate result to have a General Plan adoption process that neither the administration, or the Council, or the public had confidence in, in terms of it being a representative document. So, I do think that these delays— CHR. VILLEGAS: I'm Sorry, Judge Strance, could you repeat that last statement? MS. STRANCE: That it would be an unfortunate situation to find yourselves in where there is not confidence in the process in the adoption of a new plan. So, I think this is a timely discussion. There's not a great legal roadmap for it. A lot of this discussion needs a policy resolution and then those proposals can be submitted to us for a legal evaluation. But mostly because this is just not outlined for us, I think your abilities to be creative in trying to address the concerns in a collaborative way would really be the most efficient process. MR. INABA: Okay, so if I'm hearing you correctly, are we saying that we would legislate a potential change to the Council's ability in Code? Because we can't do Page 8 CRCOC-27 May 1, 2024 anything to the procedures because we're in the process of a comprehensive review. So, we can't make interim amendments right now. We can't make interim amendments since 2015, once that public notice went out in February of that year. So clearly, what is our option? MS. STRANCE: There would be a couple. As I indicated earlier, if there's an absurd result in a statutory construction, it would be interpreted in a way that gives meaning to the intention. Whether this body, by resolution, our office could take a resolution and attempt to provide a legal opinion on it. I would suggest that there might be some option to, not withstanding the language of the 2005 ordinance as amended in 2014, to change procedure. I noticed that the Planning Department has amended the Planning Rules during the process. and that process sets out some of the processes during the planning process. It could impose a deadline. I mean there would be a number of options that I think are available to it. The preferred option would be something that is agreed upon and then the parties march forward with it. MR. INABA: So, what you're saying is that the resolution cannot necessarily disagree with what's in the ordinance, then I don't really see the point. That's why I'm kind of getting back to, do we need to put in in Code, that gives us the ability? Because, sorry Chair, I'll wrap up my thoughts. April and her team have done so much, and there's been so much investment by the County since 2015 through all of these different drafts. We've got to get somewhere with it and they provided a lot of resources, but there's still concern from community. If we've gone through these different processes and understanding that the process doesn't happen in a vacuum, right? We have all these examples of the hurricanes, the lava flows, all of this, then I don't see how we can look at our rule for amendment in a vacuum either. That's why we need to figure out how we're going to do it. Would it be helpful that we draft a bill to amend the Code to put in those powers, and with that, I guess trump what is in the ordinance? Because there's so much good stuff in this General Plan draft, there is. And I actually like that it was shortened. The Planning Department did a good job but there are some sections of concern, and we're not guaranteed to have those sections necessarily addressed by the time the document gets to us. So then, what's the point of even coming to us if all we can do is say yes, or no? Then we're stuck with what we have, or we get the entire version of what has been provided to us. That's kind of like the conundrum we find ourselves in. MS. STRANCE: Yeah, I'm talking about deadlines, you're talking about process. Depending upon the process imposed, I think illuminating what types of amendments this body can make and what types it cannot make is a more complicated discussion than I think we're prepared to have today, but I think it's one worth having. Whatever this body would decide would have to be consistent with the Charter and the authority of the Planning Commissions too, and that's Page 9 CRCOC-27 May 1, 2024 another factor. But I do think that, you know, getting clarity about what this body does is important. The other piece of it is that once the General Plan is adopted there's also the interim amendment process that can be undertaken. So, it might be that on some of the really big issues, it would be difficult to make changes to the Plan, but then you would just roll over into the interim amendment process. I think what you're trying to do and balance it and trying to reach is honoring the General Planning process and all that's being described and honoring the authority of this body, and it's not an easy fit. MR. INABA: Okay, I'll wrap up my thoughts. Honoring everyone's contributions to what we have before us and honoring I guess in light of the wispy washiness and the lack of following rules so far, I think we'll be bringing a bill forward that we can discuss in solid words, what we can and cannot amend as part of this process. Because, like I said, Planning just done a lot, and we all want to see an update. We just want to make sure, and I'll say this for the record, I do not support passing it as it is and coming back with interim amendments. I told you this before, that is broken promises, "Oh, we'll pass it as it is and then we'll come back after." No way, Jose. That's not going to happen. So, I'm happy that we're able to just have this discussion today and then maybe we can have a more directed point of discussion based on actual legislation asap. Then we can run that language by the Planning Department as well so that they can kind of see, and we can get a kind of comprehensive review of that and making sure public's voice feels heard. So, thank you, Planning Department, for the presentation and kind of all of this background information. We'll, myself, be getting something to us soon. Thank you, Chair, I yield. MR. HENRICKS: Madam Chair, before we proceed. It clearly appears that we had not properly schedule time for this discussion. We apologize for that. That being said, we do have a very frill committee coming up. We have testifiers, we have nominees for commissions. I would ask that this committee consider either recessing until the Council meeting that convenes at 1:00 adjourns, postponing this item, or voting it through, and then submitting a new communication so we can properly schedule time for further discussion. I'm concerned about getting too far behind, and I apologize for that. CHR. VILLEGAS: I'm open to recommendations from the body on this. Council Member Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: Yeah, you know, I actually had that same thought because I see people who are scheduled to be on our boards and commissions here and in Hilo, and I want to be respectful of their time. Really open to have the conversation if we can schedule more time. I would love to see that. I don't know if it's after our Page 10 •�# May 1, 2024 Council later today or just really a whole other day. But those are my priorities, taking care of our public who are here and then scheduling the right amount of time. Thank you. CHR. VILLEGAS: Thank you, Council Member Lee Loy, I'll take that under advisement. Council Member Kimball. MS. KIMBALL: Yeah, I'd like to continue to have this discussion while it's fresh in our minds. So, I'd suggest tabling until, I'm sorry, recessing this meeting until after Council is completed later today, so we can have the dialogue. CHR. VILLEGAS: Okay. MR. HENRICKS: Before we entertain any more consideration of recessing, I'd just like to check with Director Kern if he's available for discussion later in the afternoon today. I'm assuming his presence would be preferred. MR. KERN: Thank you. My schedule is completely booked, back-to-back for the remainder of the day. I can check with my assistant to try to cancel or reschedule some of the existing appointments. MR. HENRICKS: Thank you, Director Kern. In light of that, if we aren't able to continue this discussion in the afternoon, my recommendation actually would be to vote this through and submit another communication asking for a continuation of this discussion. If this is postponed, any other items that come up for this committee wouldn't be able to add them on to that meeting. It would just be limited to this item, then we'd have to make a fresh meeting. So, it'd be cleaner if we're not going to continue this discussion, day two; vote this item through, submit another communication requesting a continuation discussion. That way, if there are other items for this committee, they can be added to that. Otherwise, if this is postponed, then we would be limited to just this item in this committee. CHR. VILLEGAS: I do want to acknowledge the irony of postponing the postponement with the articulation of a postponement on a piece of legislation that has been postponed for decades. Just real quick (motioning to Ms. Evans). MS. EVANS: I like the recommendation by the Clerk. I prefer that we bring it back and put out a next communication and the public at that time might have more testifiers next time. But also, I've got a lot questions. I know that for me, it would take a little bit of time and mine is about process not about what's in the Plan either. So, I would recommend we reschedule another day. Thank you, I yield. CHR. VILLEGAS: Okay. Council Member Kagiwada. Page 11 CRCOC-27 May 1, 2024 MS. KAGIWADA: Thank you, Chair. I would like to at least have just a real quick touch point, maybe from the other Council Members on this side if we're planning to close it out and start again. Based on the recommendation, I just have like a super short thing that I want to make sure gets out there, but other than that, I'm okay with coming back another day. But if even we could do it at the end of today and maybe, Director, it would be after all your meetings anyway, by the time we get to it. We could have a short continuation later this afternoon just so at least the Council Members can just have a quick say, I think that would be important before moving on pass this. Thank you. CHR. VILLEGAS: Thank you, Council Member Kagiwada. I'd actually like to ask Council Member Inaba as he was the presenter. MR. INABA: Thank you. Like I kind of wrapped up with, I think I'll, instead of another communication, we'll bring back a bill and we can —that'll base our discussions and we can work with the bill, but that's something tangible to work with rather than just more talk. So, I don't plan to bring back another communication, we can communicate around a bill. So, that's my intention, thank you. I do want to close file on this and take the vote. CHR. VILLEGAS: Okay, are you okay with we at least putting it in recess to the end of the day because there are comments and I think some conversation within the Council that we would like to have around this, but we can set it off till later on today. MR. INABA: If that's the will of the body, yes. CHR. VILLEGAS: Okay. I know I would like to make some statements, if for nothing else than to have the statements out there and hopefully, Mr. Kern, you can realign your schedule or perhaps Ms. Surprenant could be here with us. With that then, I am going to put this committee in recess until the adjournment of the Council Meeting. Recess: At 10:15 a.m., the Chair called for a recess. Reconvene: The meeting reconvened at 3:45 p.m. CHR. VILLEGAS: Aloha, ladies and gentlemen, I'd like to call the Communications, Reports, and Council Oversight Committee out of recess, today, which is May 1st, 2024, at 3:45 p.m. At this time, we can continue with conversation and questions from members of the Council. Council Member Kagiwada, please go ahead. MS. KAGIWADA: Thank you, Chair. April, are you on? Somebody from Planning on? Page 12 CRCOC-27 May 1, 2024 MS. KIERKIEWICZ: April just walked in. MS. KAGIWADA: Good afternoon, April. Thank you for being here and thank you for all your work on this very laborious, multi -year project. A couple of questions about the process for me. One, here you have 37 action committee meetings. In lieu of the fact that Hilo does not have a community action group, were there any specific meetings done with the Hilo community around Hilo community issues specifically, like not just general meetings that were held in Hilo but kind of to make up for the fact that there's no action committee there? (Note: At this time, Planning Program Manager April Surprenant came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MS. SURPRENANT: Hi, thank you, April Surprenant with the Planning Department. So, we have met with groups, and we've also received a lot of comments from the Hilo community. I know we've met with Chambers of Commerce, you know, a couple of different Chambers, Rotary Club, other civic organizations of the like. I did not bring my computer and all of my information, so I can try to get those other names and get back to you on that, but we have reached out to the Hilo community. MS. KAGIWADA: Okay. Going forward, are there any other specific Hilo community group meetings planned? Because I don't think I was involved in those, and I would love to be a part of at least one of those. MS. SURPRENANT: Yeah, what we have coming up next shows on one of the slides, which I don't even have those with me right now, are the workshops, and so, we will do a workshop in Hilo and another one in Kona. So, yes. MS. KAGIWADA: Okay, but those are general workshops for everybody in the community, one in Hilo side one in Kona side, but not specifically about issues pertaining to those districts, correct? MS. SURPRENANT: We will try to focus the leeward and windward presentations on leeward and windward -type issues, questions, things that we've heard, things that we've addressed, things like that. So, we will try to address regional -specific as best we can. MS. KAGIWADA: Okay. You were here when we had the testimony earlier today? Okay. I was just wondering, so, one of the things that I heard pretty loud and clear, and I'm just wondering if you have any thoughts or solutions around it, was this issue about going to a new way of doing things using technology and different set lips, and these workshops and stuff is a way to get more voices heard, different voices heard, move us forward, collect a lot of information. But there was some testimony saying that perhaps that's also leaving behind people who are Page 13 CRCOC-27 May 1, 2024 not —do not feel comfortable functioning in that space or are used to a different way of contributing in a community meeting. I'm just wondering if you have any thoughts, with the remaining time and the remaining meetings planned, of anything we can do to try to address that issue. MS. SURPRENANT: Yeah, really appreciate that question. We've never done online meetings before. In the 2019, for example, outreach, we did do some. If I remember correctly, we were able to utilize Council chambers and Council satellite sites, and that was the first time we'd ever done multiple locations at one meeting. But the new technology that we have today, we've really tried to address a lot more needs than just what we've been able to in the past. So, only having in -person meetings certainly leaves a lot of our population out of the ability to contribute. So, we've tried to offer both of those opportunities, online and in person, as well as written. We have thousands of —we also have at least, you know, probably not thousands this go -around, but a lot of comments in writing where people just wrote letters or wrote their issues down. So, we've incorporated all of those into the on -site application. MS. KAGIWADA: Okay. So, I guess my last comment to you, April, is just that in these statistics, and I've got one of the slides in front of me talking about other outreach. It was noted that there were four thousand plus public comments for the 2019 version, but it's only showing 25,000 plus comments in the 2023 version. I'm wondering if that somewhat speaks to the testimony we also heard this morning about feeling like it was a little bit challenging to access through the document and figure out how to navigate it, and find the parts that were of particular interest or important to them, as well as tracking changes from previous versions to this new document. So, I don't know if you have any insight or anything on that, or if you have any ideas. This justification document sounds really good, I hope we can highlight that. Is there anything else we can do, kind of to help people manage, you know, figuring out their way to contribute here that maybe we haven't thought of or haven't been able to do as of yet? MS. SURPRENANT: Understood. Well, we've already tried to —we did hear loud and clear about the table of contents, and we have been dispersing the table of contents in a written form, for example, for people who have let us know about that and we've sent it straight to them. So, we apologize that was not in the paper version of the document. It's electronically available in the website version, so, we do hear that loud and clear. I think the difference between the comments, again, I don't have my information in front of me, but we'd have to look at the time period that we were receiving comments in 2019. 1 think that time was much longer than this period that was open. So, we'd have to compare better apples to apples before making that Page 14 CRCOC-27 May 1, 2024 assumption that it was only because of the website, because I know we received a lot of comments from people that would not have otherwise been able to access the information at an in -person event. MS. KAGIWADA: Okay. Thank you, and look forward to anything, you know, any new or innovative ideas you have going forward with the rest of our time for this project of getting public input and appreciate all your work. Now, I have just a couple of questions or comments with Corporation — MS. KIMBALL: Chair, if I may. Because we only have five more minutes with — MS. KAGIWADA: Yeah, sorry, go to April —anybody has April questions, I'll come back. Thank you, Chair. CHR. VILLEGAS: Council Member Evans, did you have April questions? MS. EVANS: I do, thank you. When you did the landowner meetings, can you part of this is process and it says 28 landowner meetings. How do you define landowner? Was it the Leeward Planning conference with all the cattle ranchers? Did you like ask all the nurseries to come together and talk about nurseries or floral? How did you categorize your landowners? Can you tell a little bit more about that? MS. SURPRENANT: Sure. They were industry based and also large landowners. So, large landowners like DHHL (Department of Hawaiian Home Lands), for example, that do their own master planning efforts and making sure that we're working with them in a collaborative way on their General Plan as we address our General Plan. So, it was a combination of different industries as you've mentioned, cattle ranchers and agriculture, but also the large landowners as well. MS. EVANS: The other thing about, just talking about process, one of the things that really resonated with me when I looked at the Plan is, how do we publish the maps and how the maps —for some reason, I didn't see them by section in the old General Plan. It seemed to be you would maybe have land use and then you'd have map or you'd have fire and map and whatever and map, but people were saying it was really hard to compare the current maps and where things were at with what this new Plan is proposing. How do we, in the process of —some of us is show and tell, I kind of have to see it. So, maps to me are really critical for me to get the sense of where we're at and where we're going and what the map isn't. Just to build on that, I do think that there are areas in South Kohala that if people saw the map, it really shows the proposed zoning if you change it from rural to Page 15 CRCOC-27 May 1, 2024 urban or urban to residential, or whatever is like, "Oh, this is what it was," in terms of zoning and this is the new vision of the zoning and having those two so we can look at it really makes a difference. So how did we give people the opportunity to compare? MS. SURPRENANT: Yes. So, in all of our workshops, whether in person or online, and we also have a tutorial on our website, it shows how to point on a piece of property on the maps on the computer and it just pulls up a little summary of LUPAG (Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide), which is the current 2005 General Plan versus the GP land use, which is the new proposed. So, it just shows before and after right there. So, we try to make that as clear as possible, it sounds like there's still some people who struggled with that. Many of us in the office have helped people one-on-one, we've helped people in groups when we just try to answer their questions at a community group and literally pull it up in front of them and be able to show them. All of our workshops, we had computers all over the rooms to help people so that when they had specific questions, we could look them up and show them specifically what it showed. I haven't gotten to the point of how we're going to present that to you guys and the Planning Commission, so we're working on how to best illustrate very clearly for you and the public in this next round. So, thank you for that question. MS. EVANS: I clearly understand if I check on the TMK (Tax Map Key), it'll show me what it is and what it's proposed to be, but that's not the map because people are looking at a cumulative impact. So, if you're going to take 5,000 acres in South Kohala and now turn it urban, when people see the new map that now it's conservation and you see it as urban in 5,000 acres, it really captures them and they stand back and go, "Whoa, that's a major change." That's different than me clicking on a TMK, seeing that you're going to take one and change it to something else. So, how do you show the bigger picture? I'm concerned that people aren't seeing the bigger picture because when I point out the bigger picture, maybe 4,000 acres going urban where today, it's conservation, they go, "Whoa," and it stops them, and it makes them think about it. So, at a cumulative, the bigger map vision is kind of what I'm talking about. MS. SURPRENANT: Okay, I appreciate that. We will take that into consideration and see what we can do in our next round to try to address that particular concern. Thank you. CHR. VILLEGAS: Thank you, Council Member Evans. Anyone else? Council Member Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: Thanks. I don't have any questions, I just wanted to take the opportunity to thank April, who has demonstrated the highest level of grace and Page 16 CRCOC-27 May 1, 2024 integrity through this entire process. I've had the privilege and honor of working through three different General Plan updates and I know there's a lot of frustration in community about this process, just because it's complex and everybody wants the cheat codes to somehow magically reveal the answer. But this is the process whether we like it or not and having walked through three different General Plan updates, in my time in serving community, this by far has been the most interactive General Plan update that I know of. We have new technology; we have maps that are clearer and get really down to a granular level. So, April, thank you so much for continually showing up as your best self and always striving to how can you help better. I look back at our budget. We've committed half a million dollars over the course of three years, not to mention everybody's time at the Planning Department. This is an incredibly heavy lift, and I just really want to publicly thank you and the team for staying in there because this is an important document for our community. I look forward to helping and assisting however I can, and any other outreach that you folks need to do to touch community and get their input. But thank you, April, I do really appreciate you. CHR. VILLEGAS: Thank you. Council Member Kimball. MS. KIMBALL: Thank you for being here, April. I just have three quick questions. The timeline that we were presented on the slide, the final draft is issued sometime in July 2024, then there's another public outreach period and then it goes to the Planning Commissions and then it comes to the Council. My question is procedurally, the comments that come in that 21-day public comment period and then the amendments suggested by the Planning Commissions, how and when do they get incorporated into the final draft? Is there a final, final draft and really, we mean it this time is the final draft. How does that get incorporated? MS. SURPRENANT: Yeah, great question. So, in the last round, once it's made publicly available on or before July 29`h, comments will start coming in. All of those comments will be collected and put in a report verbatim, and they will be presented as part of the package that goes to Planning Commission. So, we will not be making edits between that final draft and Planning Commission, and then any recommendations that Planning Commission has, just like with a rezone, those are recommendations that then get forwarded to County Council. MS. KIMBALL: Ok so, amendments are not made to the General Plan by the Planning Commissions? I just want to confirm that because I've had a little confusion around that about my reading of the process as it resides in the ordinance, that is the 2005 General Plan. MS. SURPRENANT: Yeah. So, as the 2005 General Plan, Chapter 16 reads, it does not get amended from the Planning Commission. However, there are some Page 17 CRCOC-27 May 1, 2024 processes that were not updated in, I think it's the Planning Department Rules. It does allow, in those rules which hierarchically are below I would say the ordinance of the General Plan, would allow for Planning Commission to send something back to the Planning Director to make some amendments and then bring it back to the Planning Commission. That would extend the process much more if that were to happen. MS. KIMBALL: Okay, thank you for that clarification. I know you have to go, so just one more quick question. In your experience, and I don't recall when you started with the County, probably when you were just out of high school, right? SURPRENANT:1 1 MS. KIMBALL: Oh yeah, so it was when you were right out of high school. So, you were not here during that initial implementation of 2005, but you've had some time living with that General Plan. In your recollection, aside from land use boundary amendments to the General Plan to the LUPAG map, were there ever significant, and by significant, I mean changing an intent and purpose of the General Plan, amendments made by the Council between then and now? MS. SURPRENANT: I would be remiss to answer that question. I do not know off the top of my head, so, that would require some research. MS. KIMBALL: Okay, that'll be a big data point that I'd be curious about. I know we frequently have amendments to the LUPAG map, but I don't know that I've —I mean obviously, I haven't looked at the plan as long as you have, I don't know that I ever recall — MS. SURPRENANT: Yeah, typically, amendments to the LUPAG map happen through an application process. MS. KIMBALL: Right. MS. SURPRENANT: So, a landowner wants to change their entitlements and in order to change their zoning, they have to change the General Plan designation. also just want to say publicly for everyone that the General Plan is not zoning. So, when we say zoning, we mean the Zoning Code, which is at a different level than the land use designations in the General Plan, which are intended to be a guide and at a higher level. MS. KIMBALL: Correct. Yeah. Great, thank you for that clarification. That's all I have, I know you're busy, appreciate your being here so late to respond to us. I yield, Chair. CHR. VILLEGAS: Thank you. Page 18 CRCOC-27 May 1, 2024 MS. EVANS: Corporation Counsel, one question. CHR. VILLEGAS: No, one second. I just have one quick question while I still have April here. If I could, just real fast, April. Where can people get access to all the public comments that were made about, let's see, in 2019, about the General Plan, the 2040 draft? MS. SURPRENANT: Yes. So, all of the comments that we have received through the 2019 are already on our website and we are working to create a report and the comments for this most recent and we're trying to get those up on the website as soon as we can. We just finished entering in some of the written comments that we received so that they're all in one place. So, we're working to get that up as soon as we can. CHR. VILLEGAS: Ok, great. Then I just want to concur and say thank you for always having the highest level of professionalism and graciousness and always to just kind of presenting to us. When I've called you about things, I constantly marvel at your passion and still continued joy for long-term planning, which heavens, would have thought the County would have beat that out of you by now, but you continue to always be really kind and gracious and patient. So, I just want to thank you for that personally and professionally. Have a great rest of your day. MS. SURPRENANT: You're most welcome, it's my pleasure. CHR. VILLEGAS: Alright. Okay, transitioning back to Ms. Evans for Corp. Counsel. MS. EVANS: Yes, thank you. I did have one question. Someone in their testimony today said that there was a statement about the Planning Director giving them the authority to do some administrative —giving him some authority to do administrative decisions or whatever, and that just doesn't seem right that would be in the General Plan. So, if we see things in it that we feel needs to be removed, I'm assuming when it comes to Council, can we go in and start removing some things that we don't like? I do think that Council Member Inaba was thinking about introducing a bill that maybe gets a little more into specifics. I wasn't quite sure where he was headed with that, but I was just curious when that came up, it was like, would that be something that we could remove? (Note: At this time, Corporation Counsel Elizabeth Strance came forward to address the members of the Committee.) Page 19 CRCOC-27 May 1, 2024 MS. STRANGE: Understood. Elizabeth Strance, Corporation Counsel. In 2007, the General Plan was amended by ordinance 07-70. In that ordinance, it talks about the scope of review of the County Council, and that amendment provided that the Council could make modifications, deletions, or additions to the proposed amendment as it deemed necessary within the general intent and subject matter of the proposed amendments in accordance with its rules of procedures. However, any Council change to a proposed amendment, which substantially changes the general intent or subject matter of the proposed amendment, such as newly adding or deleting a goal, policy, or a course of action, or standard, or map amendment which changes a land use designation of a parcel, shall be considered an entirely new proposed amendment. Such a new amendment proposed at this stage shall not be processed as part of the ongoing, comprehensive review, but shall be processed as a new interim amendment, pursuant to Section 16.2. MS. EVANS: So, it's not a change of land use designation, clearly, but it is something that might be in there on one page. In one section, it may be in there but it's not changing the LUPAG map, it wouldn't be changing the land use. So, I'm assuming that would be acceptable. MS. STRANCE: It depends. So, I think the first part of your question is this. Does the Council have unfettered authority to amend the proposed General Plan when it comes to it? The answer is no. That limitation is consistent with the current rules about the back and forth between the Planning Commissions and the Council. In the General Plan, rather than that back and forth, the Council's authority is limited and then reserved for interim amendments. So, I do think that there is some sorting that needs to be done between now and the time that the General Plan comes to you folks, to determine exactly what this amendment says, and what is the scope of authority granted the Council, and which form should the document come to you in order for this body to do as much work as it can. I wouldn't say would like because I think this body would like the right to have unfettered authority to amend and it does. But it doesn't have that authority within the review of the General Plan. So, there was some back and forth between Council Member Inaba and I earlier today about the putting off to interim plan amendments and I completely understand that sentiment. Having said that, the drafters of the 2007 amendments anticipated that there might be some impasses, and rather than delay adoption of the General Plan, it opted to reserve to the interim process, some of those other areas. What's not completely clear to me is how that all looks, especially in light of some of the discussion of the current form of the 2045 Plan being worked on. So, I think starting this conversation now is going to be incredibly helpful and important. MS. EVANS: I actually understand why you would want the comprehensive plan that's gone through the Planning Department and the Planning Commissions and public hearings to get passed. I get that. I guess just a little more clarity. So, it Page 20 CRCOC-27 May 1, 2024 gets passed and then after that we can do some, we as the Council, can actually come in and propose some amendments to the General Plan. MS. STRANCE: During the Council's review of the General Plan, it has limited, but not unfettered authority to amend the document presented to you. MS. EVANS: But if the Council votes it in and it says yes, can we come back three months later and say we want to amend the section? MS. STRANCE: Yes. MS. EVANS: Well, I think that's important because if I felt like I couldn't have any saying in amending it, I might vote no, and if you vote no, what does that even mean if it doesn't pass? That means it would be taken up after December 4th or whatever, and the next Council could take it up, but this Council couldn't work on it anymore. MS. STRANCE: I want to walk back a little bit of what I said because you do have a rule about what can be revisited in the same session. I would like to go back and look at the legislative history as to what is meant by that, because the plain language would appear to indicate it might be an exception to that general rule that you cannot reconsider the same item within the same session, or it might not. So, I hadn't really thought about that before right now, and so, I will check that one out. MS. EVANS: Well, I was just thinking if it gets July 29th to the Planning Commission, by the time it gets to the Council, it's getting really close to the end of our term. I think if we vote no, I'd be kind of curious if it could just —what that would do in terms of kicking it in to having it coming back for the next Council that gets confirmed, you know, elected. I was just curious because it looks like there's a couple of different options. If we feel there's certain things in it that we're not comfortable with, what are —I guess that's the bigger question. If there are things in it we're not comfortable with, we don't believe we should live with, what are options to deal with that? It might be one page, you know, it might be one complete section, but what would our options be? Thank you. MS. STRANCE: Yeah, I think that requires a little bit of sorting between now and then. MS. EVANS: Okay, thank you, I yield. CHR. VILLEGAS: Thank you, Council Member Evans. Any other questions from anyone else? I think that gets us through today. It's an interesting time to be serving on the Council, very intense, very high stakes when it comes to the General Plan and our Planning Commissions and our roles up here. So, thank Page 21 CRCOC-27 May 1, 2024 you, Judge Strance, for trying to answer some of these difficult questions and guide us in the direction that allows us to carry this weight of responsibility as well as the privilege and the opportunity to make changes to the General Plan, because it is such a pivotal document. I am tired myself of hearing, "Well, it's part of the General Plan," "Well, it aligns with the General Plan," as being an excuse for something that is not in alignment with the vision of our community or what our community really needs. So, I am hoping that there will be more alignment with that and a truer reflection of what the community holds dear and what we need, and that there is accountability within it that requires adequate, efficient, and up-to-date infrastructure to support any and all findings or allocations associated with the General Plan. So, I'm trying to hold on to hope, that can be a possibility, and we can get where we need to go without jeopardizing the future of this precious and sacred island that we cherish and call home. So, thank you for your guidance in that capacity and we will continue to forge forward doing the best we can. With that, all those in favor of closing file on Communication 820, please say "aye." Vote on Comm. 820: The motion to close file on Comm. 820 was carried by Filed the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Evans, Galimba, Kagiwada, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Lee Loy, and Chair Villegas — 7. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Members Inaba, and Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder — 2. Excused: None. ADJOURN- There being no further business, at 4:19 p.m. Chair Villegas adjourned the meeting. MENT: CHR. VILLEGAS: Have a great afternoon, everyone. Aloha, and Happy May Day. Approved: Ms. keb&ca Villegas, Chair Communications, Reports, 4 r L_ 11 (Date) Page 22 CRCOC-27 and Council Oversight Committee RV/jm May 1, 2024 Page 23