Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN GOEAC 2024/05/14 (2022-2024)Committee on Governmental Operations and External Affairs 32"d Session Hawaii County Building 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, Hawaii May 14, 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 (came in later) Ms. Ashley L. Kierkiewicz, Member Ms. Heather L. Kimball, Member Ms. Rebecca Villegas, Member STATEMENTS The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, FROM THE Statements from the Public on Agenda Items. PUBLIC ON AGENDA ITEMS: (There were none.) CHR. EVANS: Mr. Clerk, first Communication. COMMUNI- The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, CATIONS: Communications. Comm. 10.7: HAWAPI STATE ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES' (HSAC) OCTOBER 26, NOVEMBER 21, AND DECEMBER 18,2023; JANUARY 17 AND FEBRUARY 29,2024, EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES From Council Member Heather Kimball, dated April 19, 2024. Motion to Close File: Ms. Kimball moved to close file on Comm. 10.7. Seconded by Mr. Inaba. GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 CHR. EVANS: Members any discussion? Member Kimball. MS. KIMBALL: Thank you. Just wanted to acknowledge that we are behind on reporting the minutes from the HSAC Executive Committee. A confluence of factors, changing of positions, some problems with the website, and also just delays in my own office. So, apologies for the delay. We will try to be more timely in the future. Thank you. CHR. EVANS: Thank you. Mr. Clerk, note, Member Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder has arrived. Okay, members, any further discussion? Seeing none, all in favor? Any opposed. Vote on Comm. 10.7: The motion to close file on Comm. 10.7 was carried by Filed 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. Cormn. 848: NOMINATION OF CHELSEA L. AHERN TO THE TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION From Mayor Mitchell D. Roth, dated April 24, 2024, requesting the Council's review and confirmation. Vote on Comm. 848: Mr. Inaba moved to recommend confirmation of the (Approved) nomination of Ms. Chelsea L. Ahern to the Transportation Commission. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Galimba, Inaba, Kagiwada, Kaneah'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. Page 2 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 Comm. 849: NOMINATION OF KEALOHANUI BROWNING TO THE BANYAN DRIVE HAWAIJ REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY From Mayor Mitchell D. Roth, dated April 24, 2024, requesting the Council's review and confirmation. Vote on Comm. 849: Ms. Lee Loy moved to recommend confirmation of the (Approved) nomination of Ms. Kcalohanui Browning to the Banyan Drive Hawaii Redevelopment Agency. Seconded by Ms. Galimba 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. 850: NOMINATION OF ARTHUR BUCKMAN TO THE POLICE COMMISSION From Mayor Mitchell D. Roth, dated April 24, 2024, requesting the Council's review and confinnation. Requires Council Confirmation by: June 7, 2024 (Section 134(k), Hawaii County Charter) Motion to Close File: Mr. Inaba moved to close file on Comm. 850. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy. (Note: At this time, Deputy Managing Director Bobby Command, came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. COMMAND: Thank you, Chair Evans. I am pleased to nominate Arthur Buckman of District 5 to the Police Commission. Arthur has been a resident of Hawaii for 38 years, during which time he has actively engaged in various volunteer activities to protect the environment and enhance community well-being. With more than three decades of experience in various fields, including education, environmental advocacy, and community organizing, Arthur possess knowledge and skills that would greatly benefit the Police Commission. , Page 3 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 Arthur's diverse background and deep understanding of the community's needs make him well-equipped to contribute meaningfully to the commission's efforts to promote public safety and foster trust between law enforcement and the community. If confirmed, he will serve a term ending December 31, 2028. Your favorable confirmation is requested. Mahalo from Mayor Mitch Roth. CHR. EVANS: Thank you. Mr. Buckman are you on Zoom, in Kona, or here in Hilo? MR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: Mr. Command, was Mr. Buckman informed he was to be here today? MR. COMMAND: Yes, he was. MR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: Chair, I'll reach out to the nominee. Or actually, I prefer the Administration reach out to the nominee. He's not here in the chambers, Mr. Command. So, at this point, motion to postpone? MR. HENRICKS: The motion to postpone would be out of order. There is a time requirement to either reject or confirm a nominee. CHR. EVANS: What is our time requirement? MR. HENRICKS: June 7th . CHR. EVANS: One of the options would be to forward it to Council if he shows up. I know we've done that before, where he shows up and we can make a decision then. We've done that. MR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: I concur with that. So, just as the representative for the district, I think I'd like to move this forward to Council, and we'll see what happens from there. CHR. EVANS: Okay, members any other discussion? Member Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: I don't have a position either way. Maybe just to have the Administration reach out to Mr. Buckman to confirm that he can make the Council Meeting. I'm willing to push it up. Bobby, is that something you can do for us, and confirm back to the Clerk? MR. COMMAND: Yes. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you. Thank you, Chair, I yield. CHR. EVANS: Okay, thank you. Member Villegas. Page 4 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 MS. VILLEGAS: So, my question then comes for process and protocol. Does his nomination go up with a positive or negative recommendation based on this motion? CHR. EVANS: The motions stands that it's forwarding with a favorable. MR. HENRICKS: Thus, it depends how you vote. MS. VILLEGAS: Got yah, thank you. CHR. EVANS: Okay. Member Inaba. MR. INABA: I'll be voting "no" until we have the nominee before us. We don't even know why he's not here today. So, I'm happy to move it forward, but "no" for myself. CHR. EVANS: Okay, thank you. Member Kagiwada. MS. KAGIWADA: Just a clarification, if we vote it "no" with an unfavorable recommendation, we can still vote in favorable once it gets to Council, correct? Thank you. I'll be voting "no" as well for now. CHR. EVANS: So, seeing nothing, we need a roll call vote. Vote on Comm. 850: The motion to recommend confirmation of the nomination (Failed) of Mr. Arthur Buckman to the Police Commission failed by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Committee Members Kierkiewicz, Lee Loy, and Chair Evans —3. Noes: Committee Members Galimba, Inaba, Kagiwada, Kdneali'i-Kleinfelder, Kimball, and Villegas — 6. Absent: None. Excused: None. MS. EVANS: Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Next. Page 5 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 Comm. 851: NOMINATION OF JASMINE V. CRUSAT TO THE LIQUOR COMMISSION From Mayor Mitchell D. Roth, dated April 24, 2024, requesting the Council's review and confirmation. Requires Council Confirmation by: June 7, 2024 (Section 13-4(k), Hawaii County Charter) Motion to Close File: Mr. Inaba moved to close file on Comm. 851. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy. CHR. EVANS: Bobby Command, please. MR. COMMAND: Thank you, Chair Evans. I'm pleased to nominate Jasmine Crusat to District 8 of the Liquor Commission. Jasmine is a native of the West side of Hawaii Island and a proud alumnus of Makua Lani Christian Academy. She currently works as a city manager for Diamond Parking Services, LLC in Kailua-Kona, a position she has held since 2003. In addition, she is a licensed real estate agent with Coast Properties Ltd. Jasmine is an active volunteer, having served on various organizations including the Kailua Village Design Commission, the West Hawaii Veteran's Cemetery, Boy Scout Troop 84, Hawai'i County Adopt a Highway program, and the Kona Adventist Christina School. If confirmed, she will serve a term ending December 31, 2028. Your favorable confin-nation is requested. Mahalo, Mayor Mitch Roth. CHR. EVANS: Thank you. Ms. Crusat, is she in Kona? She's not here in Hilo. MR. COMMAND: There's no one here. CHR. EVANS: Okay. Member Inaba. MR INABA: I'm just wondering, it's odd that we have two people not here. So, when was the last communication you had with our nominees to remind them to be here today? CHR. EVANS: So, Bobby, did you hear that question? MR. COMMDAND: Yes. As a matter of policy, they're all sent emails asking to show up for the Committee meetings. MR. INABA: Did we receive confirmation that they were planning to attend? Page 6 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 MR. COMMAND: I can't tell you that. I don't know for sure. But I can find out and get that information to you. MR. INABA: Was that Ms. Bartolome that sent that notification and would be in charge of having people be here? MR. COMMAND: Sorry, I didn't hear you and I didn't understand your question. MR. INABA: Is Ms. Bartolome the County contact person who advises nominees to be here and confirms their attendance? MR. COMMAND: Yes, she is. MR. INABA: Well, same thing with the last one. I'm confused why they're not here. When we get to meet them at Council, we'll you know, take up the matter then? But cannot go in support without being able to meet and talk story with some of these folks. Thank you, Chair, I yield. CHR. EVANS: Member Villegas. MS. VILLEGAS: Yeah, I concur with my colleague, Council Member Inaba, and I won't be supporting the movement of a positive recommendation. I also want to put it out there to Ms. Bartolome or to you, Mr. Command, there are a number of things on the application that were just skipped. It's how it shows up on our application that we're looking at here. There's a couple more questions and also not included is the resume. And if that could be included before our next meeting, that would be helpful, because otherwise, what you shared just verbally is the most information we have about her at all, going into this. So, thank you. I just humbly ask for that. I won't be supporting a positive recommendation today. MR. COMMAND: Understood. I'll make sure that happens. CHR. EVANS: Member Kierkiewicz. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thanks Chair. I'll be voting in favor of moving this forward to Council. I want to give folks who are not here the benefit of the doubt, that you know, they had it on their calendar, and there's some sort of extenuating circumstance as to why they are not here. I don't think it's their fault, and maybe they tried to communicate with Ms. Bartolome. But because she's out, we're not getting the message. So, look forward to meeting Jasimine at Council. Page 7 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 CHR. EVANS: Okay. Seeing no more comments, Mr. Clerk, roll call. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Chair, I just got a text saying that Jasmine was trying to log into Zoom but was having technical difficulties getting in. So, I just want to note that I was provided that communication. She tried to appear. Point of Order: MS. KIMBALL: We can make a motion to reconsider. MR. HENRICKS: Would you like to revisit this, Madame Chair? I don't believe that you announced the results of the vote. Does anybody object to the Chair ruling that the vote was not disposed oV Then we shall just take up the matter again, and then you can call for the vote again when you're ready. CHR. EVANS: Okay, thank you. We're going to take up the matter again. And that's the nomination of Jasmine Crusat to the Liquor Commission. Ms. Crusat are you on Zoom? Okay, Mr. Clerk, I'm going to take just a short recess. Thank you. Recess: At 1:52 p.m., the Chair called for a recess. Reconvene: The meeting reconvened at 1:55 p.m. (Note: At this time, the nominee Jasmine Crusat, came forward to address the members of the Committee.) CHR. EVANS: Alright. So, welcome Jasmine Crusat. Thank you for being on Zoom. You want to offer some comments? MS. CRUSAT: Hi. I'm just glad to be a part of the community, and wherever I can help out is great. CHR. EVANS: Thank you. Okay, Member Inaba. MR. INABA: Good afternoon, Ms. Crusat. We have your application before us today, and there are areas that are skipped here in the application. I'm wondering if you can share a little bit more about yourself and your interest in serving on the Liquor Commission. MS. CRUSAT: Sure. So, I believe what happened was I previously submitted an application, and then I was asked if I'd be interested in a different commission. So, I was serving on the Kailua Village Design Commission, and I was a hold -over, and I just ended that, maybe last year. So, I decided to get back, you know, try to get back into the community as far as helping. Page 8 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 Basically, I submitted an application for the Department of Transportation, and I guess the need was for the Liquor Commission, which I was interested in as well. So, I had to reapply. I had to put in another application in order to submit. MR. INABA: I understand. And then you are currently employed by DPS (Daimond Parking Services), is that right? MS. CRUSAT: Yes, that's correct. MR. INABA: Okay. We did take up your nomination, and then we brought it back here so we could have some discussion with you, hoping that prior to our next hearing at Council, if you could provide us your resume and a little bit more information since a lot was skipped, and I'm assuming you probably filled that all out in your initial application to the Department of Transportation. So, actually wondering if the Administration has a copy of that, instead of having the applicant, you know, have to provide everything all over again. If you folks might consider sharing the original application if she did provide all of that information. But just one question. Do you have any potential conflicts of interest serving on the Liquor Commission. I know you have had a role on the Kailua Village Business Design Commission. So, are there any conflicts that you might want to disclose at this time? MS. CRUSAT: There is no potential conflict. No. MR. INABA: Alright, got it. I will be in support today and hope that we have the complete information for our Council hearing. Thank you for joining us via Zoom. MS. CRUSAT: Thank you. CHR. EVANS: Thank you. Member Kagiwada. MS. KAGIWADA: Thank you, Ms. Crusat for joining us and for putting your name forward and being a community member who really wants to help. Appreciate that. I'm sure you understand that this commission is different than some of our commissions in that it is a working commission, and not just an advisory commission. So, my understanding that is it the job of the commission is to look at licenses to serve alcohol for businesses in our community. And just checking, would you have any issue with granting licenses to businesses in our community that serve alcohol? Page 9 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 MS. CRUSAT: I think, you know, as far as the knowledge and the general rules, I think that there are some instances that would not warrant a liquor license. And I think, you know, with that information being said, if there was ever a reason to not grant one, it'll be based upon that, not my own personal decision. MS. KAGIWADA: Okay, so you're saying dependent on the grantee providing the accurate information and it being legal and everything, you would not have a problem granting a license. MS. CRUSAT: Correct. MS. KAGIWADA: Okay, thank you so much. I really appreciate you stepping up. I'll be supporting you going on to the full Council. Thank you. CHR. EVANS: Ms. Villegas. MS. VILLEGAS: Yes. Aloha, Jasmine. What does DPS stand for? MS. CRUSAT: It's Diamond Parking Services. MS. VILLEGAS: Okay. While being representative of District 7, there have been a lot of community uprising with the now, paid parking protocols in a lot of the different parking lots of establishments that serve alcohol. Do you see any potential conflicts with you working for Diamond Parking Services and their paid parking contracts with the property management companies for a lot of businesses that do serve spirits and alcohol? MS. CRUSAT: I don't see a problem with it at all. You know, I've done a lot of projects with Department of Transportation. With Highways Division, we do State parks as well. I've never had a conflict of interest as far as, you know, that goes. And as far as the alcohol establishments, I mean it's not like, you know, I'm out there patronizing one and not patronizing the other for any reason. As far as the paid parking goes, paid parking is completely separate, and yes, there is a lot of controversy as far as paid parking right now. But that is not within our company, that's with another company that just came here. So, yeah, as far as the community goes, I don't see a problem with it at all. MS. VILLEGAS: Okay, thank you. I appreciate that answer. And I can also appreciate why you would be looking at the Department of Transportation. Sounds like that was kind of right up your alley but thank you for your willingness to serve on the Liquor Commission instead and for reaching out and joining us here today via Zoom. But your video camera is off, just so you know. MS. CRUSAT: Oh, yes, my reception is a little bad right now. Page 10 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 MS. VILLEGAS: Okay, alright, thank you. I yield. CHR. EVANS: Member Kdneali'i-Kleinfelder. MR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: Aloha, Jasmine. How are you? MS. CRUSAT: I'm good. How are you? MR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: Doing good, thank you. I'm just clarifying, the Department of Transportation, like DOT, Hawaii State Department of Transportation or the Transportation Commission? Which one are you referring to? MS. CRUSAT: For the board, you're talking about? MR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: Yes. MS. CRUSAT: It was just for the Department of Transportation, as far as the interest goes. That's where was my first selection. But the Liquor Commission is also one of the interests as my interests go, because I used to hold the blue card as well. MR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: Okay, so the Transportation Commission in Hawaii County? MS. CRUSAT: Yes, but whatever I can do to give back to the community, I am all for it. MR. K-ANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: Okay, because we have Department of Transportation, being like the State DOT. And then we have our Transportation Commission. I'm just trying to figure out which one you're applying for and which one we're talking about. So, thank you. Okay, thank you for being here. I did vote "no" earlier, but you weren't present, but given our ability to talk to you and see you in person and hear some of your thoughts and answers, that was helpful. Appreciate it. MS. CRUSAT: I appreciate it. CHR. EVANS: Okay, Member Kimball. Page 11 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 MS. KIMBALL: Thank you. Just wanted to note that our Liquor Commission Director is here. I don't know if you have had a chance to talk to the applicant, or if you're here to comment on her application. Okay, that's all. I think that the previous discussion and questions were sufficient for my decision making. Thank you. CHR. EVANS: Thank you. Member Galimba. MS. GALIMBA: Thank you. I think we're going to get your resume later for the next time. But I just kind of wanted to ask you on this application that we have for education, you have MCA. What does that stand for? MS. CRUSAT: On this application? MS. GALIMBA: It says MCA. MS. CRUSAT: Oh, Makua Lani Christian Academy. MS. GALIMBA: Oh, okay. MS. CRUSAT: I don't know if it was abbreviated like that. MS. GALIMBA: Thanks. CHR. EVANS: Member Galimba, any more questions? MS. GALIMBA: Yes, I just wanted to ask. You know, the Liquor Commission meetings have been around the island. Will you be able to travel to make those meetings in person? MS. CRUSAT: Yes. I actually prefer it in person. MS. GALIMBA: Okay, thanks very much, I yield. CHR. EVANS: Member Inaba. MR. INABA: Thank you. For this application, did you resubmit it yourself? MS. CRUSAT: For the commission application? MR. INABA: For this Liquor Commission. You said you didn't know that Makua Lani Christian Academy was abbreviated. Page 12 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 MS. CRUSAT: So basically, when I was asked to do the application, when I first initially did the application, everything was typed out and written. Then the second application, when the office emailed it to me, we were having some problems as far as selecting some info. I think it was because I was doing it on my phone, and it automatically populated some of the information on there. MR. INABA: Okay. But you did submit the application yourself? MS. CRUSAT: Yes. MR. INABA: Okay, got it. Okay, Deputy Managing Director, are you able to get us that information prior to the next hearing? MR. COMMAND: Yes, I confirmed with Pornaika'i Bartolome that we have Ms. Crusat's application for the Transportation Commission, which has all the information on it. We'll distribute it to you as soon as possible. MR. INABA: Thank you. Chair, I yield. CHR. EVANS: Thank you. Any other questions or comments? Seeing none, we'll take a roll call, Mr. Clerk. Vote on Comm. 8 5 1: The motion to recommend confirmation of the nomination (Approved) of Ms. Jasmine Y. Crusat to the Liquor Commission was carried by the following roll call 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. Comm. 852: NOMINATION OF LYAN K. YOUNGS TO THE SALARY COMMISSION From Mayor Mitchell D. Roth, dated April 24, 2024, requesting the Council's review and confirmation. Requires Council Confirmation by: June 7, 2024 (Section 13-4(k), Hawaii County Charter) Page 13 GOEAC-32 Vote on Comm. 852: (Approved) May 14, 2024 Mr. Kdneali'i-Kleinfelder moved to recommend confirmation of the nomination of Ms. Lyan K. Youngs to the Salary Commission. Seconded by Mr. Inaba and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Galimba, Inaba, Kagiwada, Kaneali'i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewiez, 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. 854: NOMINATION OF DAISY MITCHELL TO THE KONA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN ACTION COMMITTEE From Mayor Mitchell D. Roth, dated April 26, 2024, requesting the Council's review and confirmation. Requires Council Confirmation by: June 9, 2024 (Section 13-4(k), Hawai'i County Charter) Vote on Comm. 854: Mr. Inaba moved to recommend confirmation of the (Approved) nomination of Ms. Daisy Mitchell to the Kona Community Development Plan Action Committee. Seconded by Ms. Villegas 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. Page 14 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 Comm. 855: NOMINATION OF MEL YOKOYAMA, JR. TO THE KA'U COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN ACTION COMMITTEE From Mayor Mitchell D. Roth, dated April 26, 2024, requesting the Council's review and confirmation. Requires Council Confirmation by: June 9, 2024 (Section 134(k), Hawaii County Charter) Motion to Close File: Ms. Galimba moved to close file on Comm. 855. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy. CHR. EVANS: Back to you, Bobby in Kona. MR. COMMAND: Thank you, Chair Evans. I am pleased to nominate Mel Yokoyama, Jr. of Pahala to the Ka'fi Community Development Plan (CDP), Action Committee. Mel, a native of Pahala, graduated from Ka'Ti High School before earning both his Bachelor of Science in Business Administration and his Master of Science in System Engineering from the Naval Postgraduate School, he is an esteemed founder and chairman of Malama Ka'ii Foundation, a nonprofit Native Hawaiian Organization. With over 28 years of active -duty service in the Naval Aviation and Acquisition Professional communities, Mel retired as a Captain, showcasing his dedication and leadership as a Navy Veteran. If confirmed, he will serve a term ending December 31, 2026. Your favorable confirmation is requested. Mahalo, Mayor Mitch Roth. CHR. EVANS: Mr. Yokoyama, did you want to offer comments? (Note: At this time, the nominee Mel Yokoyama, Jr., came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. YOKOYAMA: Aloha. Thanks again for taking the time. This was 36 years in the making for me, and I'll explain why. But you know, thank you for just having the opportunity to give back to Kau, my home town. When I left Ka'a in 1988, about 36 years ago. You know, I penned an article, and I think I put in my letter, it was three months before I went to boot camp and joined the Navy and went out, whatever the Navy does. But that was, you know, a different era, 1988, right? So, I had the mentality of a 17-year-old. Page 15 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 Now that I'm a little more older, with some experience behind me, I think I can give back and offer some perspectives. You know, I'm a product of Ka`u. I went through preschool there, elementary school, Pahala, Ka`u High School. My cousins are back here. I've got family, uncles, aunts. I mean, Ka`u is not just a place to call home. But it's a deep connection, not just to the land, but to the people and to the culture. And so, I'm hoping I can bring this back and offer my new perspectives. You know, as a kid, but now also as a more senior adult. So, thank you for the opportunity. CHR. EVANS: Thank you. Member Galimba. MS. GALIMBA: Thank you, Chair. Yes, I just wanted to thank you, Mr. Yokoyama for stepping up and being willing to serve as a volunteer on our Ka`u CDP. I think you'll bring valuable perspectives and can really contribute to that group. I guess my only question really is, you seem like you're a very busy guy with a very impressive resume, by the way; very busy still. So, just wanted to kind of check in and make sure you can commit to being there at the meetings which right now are quarterly, but I think they're thinking about doing them a little more frequently. There is option for Zoom, but of course, there's nothing like actually being in the room, especially, out there in Ka`u with the community. MR. YOKOYAMA: Thanks for the question, Member Galimba. So, it really boils down to me as to why I'm doing this? When I retired after about almost 30 years, you know, I joined a company, Cisco Systems. My wife was happy, my kids were happy. Everything was paid for college. My daughter was getting married next week, and I knew that was paid off, you know, money was okay. But my dad, sorry, if I get a little emotional; my dad died five months ago in Pahala. And here's the reason why, dialysis. So, you know, he was in his 70's; he didn't have a car, but he had to go to Hilo. He had to wake up at 3:00 o'clock in the morning and leave at 4:00 o'clock to get to Hilo to do his dialysis. With my nonprofit, I have enough funds, and I have a company that has a mobile dialysis center to do this. So, I had everything all lined up, but what I found was just to try and understand how it works, you know, to get just any sort of dialysis center or even a mobile dialysis seat in Pahala is taking me over a year. I spoke to Mayor Roth about this a lot, and he said, "Hey, if you want to help fix it, there's something you can do." Page 16 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 So, the answer to your question about being busy, everything else is secondary, you know, to this. So, my nonprofit is all about supporting Ka`u from medical care to education. But going back to the question about, you know, next generation. So, when I was 17, that was a much different world in 1988. You know, today, there are about eight billion people and about 70 percent are online. You know, back in 1988, there was way less than one percent of the entire world online. So, that opens up new opportunities, but importantly is the people. You have Generation "X" I think; you have the millennials; you have Generation "Z" and Generation Alpha. These are the future generations. You know, they grew up in the internet environment. I should know, my kids are 21 and 24. But they're digital natives. So, when you look at Ka`u, there's an opportunity here I see, and again, I'm very passionate of bringing in, how can we leverage the natural beauty, and not just the land, but the culture and the people into the 21st century? I think there's plenty of talent there. So, sorry, I'm very driven for this. So, time ties in with this. Thank you. MS. GALIMBA: Thanks very much, and I yield. CHR. EVANS: Member Kimball. MS. KIMBALL: Hi, thank you for being here and what a tremendously interesting resume. A lot of background, and I must say, you're very well spoken. I just had a quick question. I saw Council Member Inaba leave. So, I suspect he may be checking on this. Your mailing address is the San Diego address? MR. YOKOYAMA: Yeah, that's where my company is located. MS. KIMBALL: Okay, but I just want to confirm because your resume also indicates San Diego, but you actually reside physically in Pahala? MR. YOKOYAMA: My home is in Pahala where I grew up with my parents. Only my mom is there now, but yes. MS. KIMBALL: Okay. And I think he may be checking on a new requirement to actually be a registered voter which I see is indicate, "No," okay. Alright, I'm going to check on that myself I think it's okay, but I just wanted to highlight that real quick. Otherwise, a hundred percent support your application. We've just got to cross all the "T's" and dot all the "I's" as I'm sure you understand. Thank you, I yield Chair. Page 17 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 Point of Order: CHR. EVANS: Member Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: Thanks Ms. Evans. I think too, like my colleague, Ms. Kimball, what an impressive resume. Thank you for taking the time to send us your letters and introducing yourself. That's always really helpful. You know, I really didn't have any questions and really do stand in strong support of your nomination. But what I really wanted to suggest, you know, as you navigate the Ka`u Action Committee. There's a lot of opportunities, and because of your resume with the DOD (Department of Defense), we've actually launched something with the REPI (Readiness and Environmental Protection Integration) program that's actually doing a lot of research for us here in. Hilo. And we all know the REPI program, you know, attached to DOD, they really want to be good neighbors. So, as you look for opportunities as you mentioned, to kind of blend community, culture in this special space of Pahala, there's partnerships that you actually really stand at the frontline for kind of connecting those dots for community and look into granting opportunities and funding opportunities through the REPI program that I think would help, you know, the community of Pahala achieve some of the goals that actually in the Action Plan. I think oftentimes we architect a plan or a policy. But we don't have recourses or funding to make those things happen, and I'm really excited to see you use your skillsets and your connections to see how you can make those plans actionable. Like I said, I didn't have any questions, but really in strong support on where you could take the plan, the community and make some really amazing things happen for Pahala. MR. YOKOYAMA: Thank you and thank you for that. And you know, kind of a sidenote, I was at Hilo Hospital before I came here, and I was talking to one of the security guards from Pahala. He is a computer whiz, but because of job opportunities, you know, he has to do security guard work, which is fine. It's a good way to make a living. But I think there's more. The Kona CDP plan has people, places and rural lifestyle. You know keeping that rural lifestyle as sort of like a boundary and working on people, and of course, the places. That's where the County comes in with the policy and rules, and with the land use. But I think having the community voice for the people, you know, that's important. So, thank you for that. Like I said, there's all this talent that's not being utilized in Ka`u. Page 18 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 MS. LEE LOY: Thank you for being here. Thank you, Chair, I yield. CHR. EVANS: Okay. Member Villegas. MS. VILLEGAS: Yes. Aloha, thank you for being here. I just have a quick question to clarify. So, do you live in the home at this Pdhala residence? MR. YOKOYAMA: No, my mom and my family does. But that's my house. MS. VILLEGAS: Okay, so you live in San Diego. But it's your house. That's a challenge for me. I think it's really important you live in the place if you're representing on a commission. MR. YOKOYAMA: Sidenote, I spend more than six months out here. In fact, probably more like eight months here. I'm never in San Diego. Because of my company, I'm always in Albania and other places in Eastern Europe because of Ukraine. But when it comes to —I know what you're getting at is primary residence in voting, that's my own personal opinion. But I think for the Action Plan Committee, I think it's getting the best people with the same, you know, emphasis of what they want to do. If I have to, I'll put my primary residence in Pdhala, if it has to happen, no problem. Because that's my house. MS. VILLEGAS: Okay. And congratulations, what a generational gift and a blessing to have that. I looked up your foundation, Malama Ka'ii, and we are in a time of a lot of controversy surrounding potential development there. What do you see your role, you know if approved, in serving on this commission to be? MR. YOKOYAMA: The CDP lays out a great plan, you know, with the Vision Statement and the three values: people, places, and the rural lifestyle of Ka'a. You know for me, it's to keep Ka'a, Ka'5. You know, that's I guess the logo and mantra. You have to keep the people there to maintain that sort of lifestyle and culture. So, to answer your first question of how do we keep people in Ka'W And you know, that's jobs. And who do you want to keep in Ka'5? The next generation of the current people there. Keep the culture. Alright so that's one, is of course, jobs. But I think, you know, the second is tourism. Well, let's look 36 years from now, when I used to drive over that hill; when I come across Highway 11, 1 see the coastline of Ka'Ci, my heart just starts going crazy. But 36 years from now, don't want to go over the hill and see a bunch of —I mean no issues with these Page 19 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 hotels, condominiums and all these resorts, that if the community wants it. But I think the question is, what does the community want? Is it resorts, is it condominiums? It's jobs, and it doesn't have to be tourism. Like the Council Member said, DOD. I think it's between DOD and tourism. They go back and forth, right, and construction, the top three. So, I think, you know, I can definitely bring in some DOD business. At least my intent, for my company, my nonprofit. Now, is that why I'm joining this, now. But it keep the people in Ka'11 I mean look at Pbhakuloa Army Training Range. That's a big job market for the people in Ka'5. Because initially, it's just janitorial blue-collar work, and we've got plenty of resources. But that keeps them in Pdhala. As we train the next generation to get into more the 21" century digital native, you know, sort of workforce. I have companies coming in that want to help out and donate their time and their resources to train and certify Pdhala residents. So, that's why. But it has to align with the Action Plan. CHR. EVANS: Okay, thank you. So, Member Villegas, another question? MS. VILLEGAS: Yeah. I listened to a lot of the conversations with kupuna around the island. They're a huge concern with expanding our reliance on the Department of Defense and the military occupation in Hawaii. What we learned during COVID with reliance on tourism, and there's a lot of contention in Ka'5 about the expansion of the existing development and exceptions and potential, you know, corruption quite frankly. Corruption and streamlining things. And if we keep doing what we've done in the name of jobs, we're going to be in the same place as we are, only worse. And I have issues. I appreciate your honesty. You don't live here full-time. This isn't your mailing address. That's not the intention for somebody to serve on an Action Committee, and it is a very large time and energy contribution. So, I won't be supporting your nomination here today. I am sorry for that, but there are just too many things that aren't adding up here. But I appreciate your love for Ka'ii and your service to that area and community. But right now, things are a little too hot, and there's a tipping point, and there's a vulnerability. And who we approve of and place on these commissions carries a lot of power and influence. And who the people on these boards and commissions are influenced by also brings a lot of power and influence. And so, for me today, there's just a few too many red flags. But thank you for your willingness, and we'll see where this goes. Page 20 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 MR. YOKOYAMA: Thank you for the honesty, especially with our kupunas. They're the connection between yesterday and tomorrow. Thanks. MS. VILLEGAS: Thank you. CHR. EVANS: Thank you. Member Kimball followed by Kaneali`i- Kleinfelder. MS. KIMBALL: I wanted to follow-up on the previous question because the Action Committees are guided by Chapter 16 of the Code, which says that you have to have your principal residence in the district that you would represent. So, we have to go to Chapter 19 for the definition of principal home. So, it's "the place where an individual has true, fixed, permanent home and principal establishment, and to which place the individual has, whenever absent, the intention of returning." Just to paraphrase, there's four elements to having a property considered your principal home. You have no other home exemption or principal home in another jurisdiction. You maintain the principal home within the County. In this case, it would also be in the district. You physically occupy the home within the County, and you filed State income tax returns with those identified as your primary residence. We can accept principal residence by showing that you occupied the residence for more than 200 calendar days of the year; registered to vote in the County; being stationed in the County under miliary orders or possess any of the following: Hawaii Driver's License, Hawaii State identification card, Residence Alien Card, Completed copy of the Voters Registration Application, or a tax return with the last four digits of the social security. So, that's in bold. Can you provide any of this documentation to show that this is your principal home within the district, because otherwise we just can't approve it because of legal requirements. MR. YOKOYAMA: Sure. No, I get it. But I got a phone call. I mean I applied, but I got a phone call that said apply, So, I said, okay. You know what I'm saying. So, I guess the question really is, I understand the rules, but the rules —is it regulation or policy? MS. KIMBALL: Unfortunately, this is in the Code. So, it would apply as law, and I fully support your nomination. I feel like you'd be a really good fit. The Council Member from the district obviously feels the same way. So, it's heartbreaking but it's actually in the law, and that presents a problem. Page 21 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 MR. YOKOYAMA: I appreciate that, and I guess I should have read the law. But again, they called me. But no matter what, with my nonprofit, Malama Ka`u, it is going to support the CDP. So, even if I'm on the Action Plan Committee or not, I'm still going to support it. So, in this position, I'm definitely going to help you out. Because with my nonprofit, it's a Native Hawaiian organization, and I have a bunch of companies that you know, I get 51 percent of their profits and that goes to Pahala or Ka`u. So, thank you very much, and you know, my hearts in it. I understand the rules and the laws, and I get it. But I think it's —I'm going to do the right thing. So, whatever it is. Point of Order: CHR. EVANS: So, I'd like to go to Point of Order, unless you want to ask a question or offer a comment. MR. INABA: I just have one comment. We've had I think ten nominations today. To the Administration, we've told you guys before, stop bringing so many people on one meeting. And looking at this, it's shameful that we do this to people who want to serve our community. Enough already. And Chair, I'm requesting that maybe in the future, if they attempt to put these many nominations on the same meeting, we at least hold off half. But we've asked not to have this many, and it shows when we have so many problems with the vetting. So, sincere apologies that you had to come here today just to find out that you're not eligible. We apologize on behalf of the County. Thank you, Chair, I yield. CHR. EVANS: Thank you. And I just wanted to also say, I apologize that the eligibility wasn't vetted better. But also having a very active Action Committee in my district, they divide the actions amongst sub -committees. They have health and wellness; they have parks, they have public access, they have culture. They have all kinds of sub -committees. So, I would encourage you, you can get very involved, probably in your Action Committee and really have a voice. So, I encourage you to consider that. MR. YOKOYAMA: I'm not looking for credibility or my name on something, I just want to help out my town. CHR. EVANS: Thank you. Member Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: My apologies that you're here and you can't actually be on the committee. You're a very interesting person. It's just been a pleasure listening to the conversation today. I have one question, if you can. Naval Aviation and Acquisition Professional, and then the word communities came after that. I'm just trying to figure out what that speaks to. Page 22 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 MR. YOKOYAMA: Yeah, so, it's Navy term. Community means like a specialty. So, when I joined the Navy, you know, I saw Top Gun and I'm like, I'm going to fly. I had no idea what that meant, right, but I don't like people telling me, "no." So, I said, okay I'm going to prove you wrong. So, I became a jet pilot for the Navy. So, I have 200 landings on an aircraft carrier; you know, I've flown in combat, Afghanistan, Iraq, and all those places. But I just want to point out that the people in Ka'ii, I mean I'm just a product of Pahala, right? So, if I can fly off carriers, and you know, fly around the world for 20 years, and then become an Acquisition. So, an Acquisition is buying stuff for the Navy. My last job, I had about 6,000 engineers and scientists, while in the military, around the world. But what it showed me is that, hey, you don't have to come from the mainland to have this sort of capabilities and experience. You can come from a place called Pdhala and go out there and do things. So, my calling now is to help and give back. Like I said from the beginning, it was my dad that started this because of his dialysis. And I'm going to see this through. So, no matter what. Thanks. MR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: Thank you for being here. Thank you for your service. And yeah, I like your devotion to your community, and I'm going to be supporting you today. Point of Order: CHR. EVANS: So, Point of Order. Mr. Clerk, is it a withdrawal from the Member who introduced it? MR. HENRICKS: No, that wouldn't suffice. Because the Mayor nominated and there is a time requirement, the Mayor would need to withdraw or the Council would need to vote down, or Mr. Yokoyama, Jr., would then automatically become a member. And it doesn't appear that he's qualified. I'm not saying you're not; it just doesn't appear that it's the case. I would point out, though, that the Code calls for a primary residence, not a principal residence. There might be semantics. But no, the Council cannot withdraw this nomination. It would require the Mayor to do so. CHR. EVANS: So, what would be the action, take the vote? And the vote is either favorable or non -favorable, I mean the motion is favorable. MR. HENRICKS: Correct. A deferral will not produce any beneficial effects on the process or for Mr. Yokoyama, Jr. You can't postpone it. CHR. EVANS: I would recommend the nominee as well as Managing Director Command if the intention is to withdraw rather than proceed with an unfavorable recommendation. Page 23 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 CHR. EVANS: So, Bobby Command, did you hear that? MR. COMMAND: Yes. I'd like to take it back to Corporation Counsel and talk to them. And if it's appropriate, we will withdraw the nomination. CHR. EVANS: So, what I'm hearing is we take the vote. And then, when we get it to Council, by then it may have been withdrawn or can be withdrawn before it makes it to Council. MR. HENRICKS: That has been the past practice. When it has been appropriate, the Administration has made a timely withdrawal through a letter, then that has been accepted as official to avoid seating of the nominee. CHR. EVANS: Okay. So, members, we have a motion on the floor. All in favor? Vote on Comm. 855: The motion to recommend confirmation of the nomination (Approved) of Mr. Mel Yokoyama, Jr. to the Ka'fi Community Development Plan Action Committee was carried by the following roll call vote: ME-IM60 Motion to Close File: Vote on Comm. 856: (Filed) Ayes: Committee Members Galimba, Kdneali'i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, and Chair Evans — 5. Noes: Committee Members Inaba, Kagiwada, and Villegas — 3. Absent: Committee Member Lee Loy — 1. Excused: None. APPOINTMENT OF SAGE HUSTON TO THE YOUTH COMMISSION From Council Member Jennifer Kagiwada, dated April 25, 2024. Ms. Kagiwada moved to close file on Comm. 856. Seconded by Mr. Inaba. The motion to close file on Comm. 856 was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Inaba, Kagiwada, Kdneali'i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, and Chair Evans — 6. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Members Galimba, Lee Loy, and Villegas — 3. Excused: None. Page 24 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 ORDER OF The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business, RESOLUTIONS: Order of Resolutions. Res. 514-24: AUTHORIZES THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE OF HAWAI'l, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION PURSUANT TO HAWAPI REVISED STATUTES 46-7, TO PROVIDE MEALS FOR THE COUNTY OF HAWAIJ SENIOR NUTRITION PROGRAM Reference: Comm. 871 Intr. by: Ms. Evans (B/R) Motion to Approve: Mr. Inaba moved to recommend adoption of Res. 514-24. Seconded by Ms. Kagiwada. CHR. EVANS: We have someone from Parks and Recreation, County of Hawai'i Nutrition Program. (Note: At this time, Elderly Activities Division Director Roann Okamura, came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MS. OKAMURA: Good afternoon, Madame Chair and County Council. Roann Okarnura, Elderly Activities Division Director. I want to thank you for taking on this resolution. As the Director for the Elderly Activities Division, it's my job to be the steward to grasp as much funding as I can for the seniors of our island. Especially, those who have food insecurities. So, this program that we have, all the funding for the food is from the Older Americans Act, which is one of the oldest Act in Congress. So, these monies will never go away. So, our position is to make sure we're good stewards to make sure that we continue to get the trickle down to our island. CHR. EVANS: Thank you. Members, any questions? Member Kdneali'i- Kleinfelder. MR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: I thought for a second, you were here for one of our commissions. And I said, I think she works for the County, or I hope she's not leaving the County. MS. OKAMURA: My job is a passion, yeah? MR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: This is neat. I'll be supporting this today. Thank you for being here and thank you for your patience. CHR. EVANS: Member Kierkiewicz. Page 25 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chair. Roann, thank you so much for being patient and all of the hard work that you do for our kupuna. MS. OKAMURA: This is really good to be here today, to see the whole process that you folks have to go through. So, thank you to you guys too. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Oh, we're so glad you found it fascinating, great. So, how many participants does the Senior Nutrition Program reach around our island? MS. OKAMURA: This particular program, we touch about 900 seniors. It's primarily for the congregate setting. So, I call the congregate setting, the CUSP (Comprehensive Unit -based Safety Program) because any day, one of those participants can become frail elderly, where they would be the recipients of the Meals On Wheels program when they become homebound. So, it is a program that is a need within the community. A lot of them had the opportunity to have meals in the district that they live in. So, it allows them to age in place in their home. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Is it a daily meal? MS. OKAMURA: Yes. Monday through Friday, and it's a half -day program. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: So, there's a little bit of socialization. MS. OKAMURA: It's, primarily socialization. The meal, not too good, just to let you know. I mean, you know, it's not a five-star restaurant meal, but it is a dietetic meal. So, that's the draw to get them to come in to socialize, which makes them, you know, a healthier senior versus just staying home being isolated. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: How many communities are you currently operating in? MS. OKAMURA: All nine Council districts. We do have a congregate site within the district. Some more than others. We have 15 sites around the island right now. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: That is amazing. Keep up the great work, and hopefully we can visit you folks one day and talk story with kupuna. And maybe try out one of those meals. MS. OKAMURA: Yeah, just drop in. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Okay, sounds good. Thanks. MS. OKAMURA: That'll be awesome. They'll be happy to see you guys. Page 26 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Okay, wonderful. I yield. CHR. EVANS: Okay, Member Kdneali'i-Kleinfelder. MR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: A question. Office of Aging, Elderly Activities, different? MS. OKAMURA: Okay, just to make it real clear, Office of Aging is the connector between the Federal funds and State funds for our County programs. So, ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) is within the County. And HCOA (Hawai'i County Office of Aging) is the ones that provide the funding source. I do write for grants as well. More for transportation rather than meals, and you know, things like that. So, without them we wouldn't exist. And without our existence you're going to see a catastrophic event where the seniors are going to become frail quicker. It's going to cost the taxpayers a lot more money because then you'll need a higher level of care. And I don't know if you're aware of it, but it costs about $18,000 to house a senior in a nursing home today. We spend just about $20 a month on a senior participating in our program. MR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: So, my question then, because every time I ask Mr. Farr (Horace) what do you need? He say's nothing. But then I listen to different divisions doing things to help our elderly, and they say, we have a meal but it's decent, but it's not great, it's not five-star. We do one —you know, we have this service. Can you increase your services with more funding? MS. OKAMURA: The reason why DOE (Department of Education) has the contract, is because it does go out for procurement for bid. And unfortunately, the meals that we would love. You know, to dream about, usually cost about $20 a meal. DOE charges us $6.25 right now. So, they're the lowest bidder, and that's why we get the meals from them. Our Meals On Wheels program is a little better. Kona has really awesome meals, because there's not many vendors out there that do put in the procurement process. So, it is based on that, and unfortunately, you know, we're just being fair to the vendors out there. MR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: Who writes the bid on behalf of the County? MS. OKAMURA: It's a standard bid that's a State plate, because this service is offered on all the islands. Then above Horace Farr, HCOA, is the Executive Office of Aging, and they govern how the procurement goes for all of their Page 27 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 programs. And they have to give Horace the green light in order for him to filter the money down to our programs. MR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: Okay, thank you. CHR. EVANS: Thank you. Members, any other comments, questions? Seeing none, all in favor? Any opposed? Vote on Res. 514-24: The motion to recommend adoption of Res. 514-24 was (Approved) 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. Res. 519-24: AUTHORIZES THE CONTINUED EMPLOYMENT OF LEONG KUNIHIRO BROOKE AND KIM, AS SPECIAL COUNSEL TO REPRESENT THE COUNTY OF HAWAPI, DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES, WORKERS' COMPENSATION DIVISION Extends the retention of Special Counsel Services with additional compensation of $300,000 and total compensation not to exceed $600,000. Reference: Comm. 876 Intr. by: Ms. Evans (B/R) Motion to Approve: Mr. Inaba moved to recommend adoption of Res. 519-24. Seconded by Ms. Galimba. MR. INABA: I believe we have Deputy Corporation Counsel and Director Tokihiro here. If we could just get an overview please? CHR. EVANS: Okay, please. (Note: At this time, Deputy Corporation Counsel Diana Mellon -Lacey, came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MS. MELLON-LACEY: Good afternoon, Council Members. Deputy Corporation Counsel Diana Mellon -Lacey. This resolution has been drafted to continue the employment of Leong Kunihiro Brooke and Kim, who are currently under a contract that is a three-year contract that expires in 2025. However, due to the number and kinds of claims that have occurred, the allocation of $300,000 that was allocated for this contract has been used. Page 28 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 So, we are seeking an additional $300,000 to support their invaluable work to the Human Resources Department. CHR. EVANS: Thank you. Member Inaba. MR. INABA: Thank you. Director Tokihiro, do you have anything else to add on behalf of your department? (Note: At this time, Human Resources Director Sommer Tokihiro, came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MS. TOKIHIRO: No, I'm happy to answer any questions, but nothing additional. MR. INABA: Okay, thank you so much, Chair. I'll be in support. I yield. CHR. EVANS: Member Galimba. MS. GALIMBA: Thank you, Chair. Hi there. Yeah, so, this is a substantial amount of money, and I just wondered if it had been looked into other avenues to do the same kind of services with other sorts of organizations. And I speak here as a former board member of HAMEC (Hawai`i Advisory Council on Emergency Management), and I know that they offer, you know, a lot of services for self -insuring organizations that perhaps could be gotten at a more competitive rate. Has there been any, sort of, thought about taking this contract out. Obviously, we're probably still under contract, but I would perhaps be suggesting that the next opening of the contract, that we look at other avenues for doing the same kind of work, since I think there was perhaps changes in the marketplace that would allow for different kinds of arrangements. And I think there also are more different resources that a company that specializes in workers' compensation but are more than just the law part might offer to our employees. I guess that's a thought. And if you wanted to respond, you could. MS. TOKIHIRO: So, employer defense in workers' compensation, well workers' compensation law specifically is a very unique area, and so that's why we, you know, contract with a special counsel. Because even our Corporation Counsel has not been able to have an attorney that has that specialty. So, we're always open to looking at other ways to resolve things without having to utilize legal defense. But those services are invaluable, and we've seen a great reduction, not only in the number of claims, but even claim's costs. So, when the last contract was approved in 2022, to present, if you compared claim cost per year, we're actually down 49 percent compared to what we were spending in 2022. Page 29 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 So, the $300,000 is a significant amount of money, but on average, they represent about one in three claims for us. Then so, that would be, you know, like 33 percent of the claims have that representation, and they're the most difficult claims, the most challenging, but those services from the Special Counsel have really provided great benefits. So, right now, we have about 83 claims that they are assisting us with. So, if you were to write down the monthly cost of the Special Counsel services, it's about $18,000 a month. But then to be able to save $4 million. It's been a very great investment for the County and also, you know, just keeping the claims down and making sure that the County is only accepting liability for things that we're supposed to. MS. GALIMBA: Thanks. Who does the rest of the workers' compensation administration? So, these guys just do the legal part. Do you have another firm that takes care of that or is that in-house? MS. TOKIHIRO: So, the County handles claims on a hybrid model. Every jurisdiction handles them differently. At the County of Hawaii, we internally adjust all departments, except for the Department of Parks and Recreation and the Police Department. Claims from those two departments are handled by a contracted third -party administrator which is currently AIMS (Acclamation Insurance Management Services) in Honolulu. So, it's about 50150 split, half of the claims. We have about 250 open claims right now. Half of them are being adjusted internally by County staff. The other half from those two departments are being adjusted by AIMS. MS. GALIMBA: The increase is based on the number of claims that we're having, is that correct? MS. TOKIHIRO: The increase is based on the need to authorize additional funds to be spent in the contract. So, the Special Counsel invoices us on a monthly basis, you know, based on time and expense for services on each claim. So, because of the nature of the claims that they're assisting us with over the last 16 months, we've exhausted the funds that were in the contract. So, we're just needing to extend the contract to allow more funds to be spent in the current contract. MS. MELLON-LACEY: So, it doesn't necessarily mean that, you know, all $300,000 would necessarily be spent. And I also understand that we had some claims that were quite old that have been resolved, and that also led to some increased costs. Am I saying that correctly? MS. TOKIHIRO: Correct. In an open session, I couldn't provide the details. But yes, there's been older claims or claims involving multiple injuries or individuals Page 30 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 with multiple claims, varying levels of complexity. So, more effort has been put into resolving those. MS. GALIMBA: That's all for me for now. I yield. Thank you so much. CHR. EVANS: Member Villegas. MS. VILLEGAS: Thanks for being here. Just a quick question. So, when I look through the resolution, I was just kind of trying to add it up. I see $300,000, November 3, 2015; $50,000, February 19, 2020; then another $200,000 in 2020; then another $60,000; then another $50,000; then another $300,000. So, I was just trying to add it up. So, you know, I love your —I believe you made a comparison that it saved us $4 million. So, according to my math here, we spent $1.260 million? Is that right? MS. TOKIHIRO: So, the initial contract was in 2015, and then that did have several extensions. In 2022, we went back through the professional services procurement, and then through the evaluation of the firms that were on the list. Again, this firm ended up, you know, being the best qualified. So, that was the new contract. So, yes, from 2015, 1 sorry, can't totally confirm that total. But having saved, you know, $4 million during this last contract period since November 2022, significant. MS. VILLEGAS: Okay. So, what we're asking for today, I want to make sure, is another $300,000 to be allocated to this contract. Then I see that it shall not exceed $600,000. MS. TOKIHIRO: So, that would be the total contract. So, we're requesting the additional $300,000 now in addition to the $300,000 that was put in in 2022. So, the total contract will not exceed this $600,000. MS. VILLEGAS: Okay, got yah. So, then the prior contract that went from 2015 through September 2022 was a separate one, which was $355,550, $160,000? MS. TOKIHIRO: Correct. MS. VILLEGAS: Okay. Yeah, it's one of those things where you've got to spend money in order to save money in the grand scheme. So, I'll be supporting this today, and you know, hopefully, anyone that gets hurt working for the County gets all of the medical support that they need and operates with the utmost integrity and honesty when navigating through any recovery or getting better. So, thanks for your diligence with this. I used to do HR for Kona Brew, and it's a real challenge. So, thank you for this. I'll be in support. Page 31 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 MS. TOKIHIRO: Thank you. CHR. EVANS: Member Kdneali'i-Kleinfelder. MR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. I may have missed it. Is there a timeframe, they can expend more than $300,000 or $600,000, or is it just open for the length of the contract, which seems to a year over here. MS. MELLON-LACEY: That would be for the remaining time of the contract, which is until 2025. MR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: So, not to exceed $600,000. MS. MELLON-LACEY: Right. Because $300,000 has already been expended in this contract. So, another $300,00 would take the total to $600,000. It doesn't mean it has to be spent, but it would just make that allocation a favorable for the contract. MR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: Okay. Then the ones that were previous to this, in the "Whereas" clauses? MS. MELLON-LACEY: Under previous contract. MR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: Those were $300,000 as an additional, is what this total is here, this $50,000, February 19, 2020. MS. MELLON-LACEY: The most recent contract began in 2022. So, the $300,000 that has been spent has been since November 2022. So, the other expenditures were under agreements, but with the same firm. MS. TOKIHIRO: Those prior amounts were extensions of the contract that started in 2015. MR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: Okay. Sorry, maybe I'm missing it, but was there a cap, and this was additional? We pay a yearly or annual cost, or this is just an open-ended agreement —will not spend more than "X" amount? MS. TOKIHIRO: Correct, because it's based on time and expense for the work that they put in on a given claim. So, it's not like a flat monthly fee. We pay invoices based on the work that we're billed for on a monthly basis. So, when we're asking to have these funds allocated, it's so that they're available to pay those invoices because it's pretty difficult for us to predict exactly what the expense will be. Page 32 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 So, there was a 2015 contract that the amounts got extended several times. And then that's why in 2022, we went back through the professional services procurement to establish a new contract to make sure that we're evaluating other firms on the list to see if there is another qualified firm. MR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: Okay. Then if I remember right, there is a large amount of outstanding cases a few years ago, and now that you've actually been able to sort of addressing the outstanding cases, do you foresee the need for these services going forward in eternity, or you're catching up and we're getting ready to go back to normal or this will be the normal? MS. TOKIHIRO: So, prior to being the Director of Human Resources, I was the HR Manager for the Workers' Compensation Division. So, started that position in April 2019. There were approximately 500 open claims at that point. To now having the number of open claims at about 250. You know, claims will never be zero, but having that number at about 250, we've been able to consistently maintain that over the last couple of years. So, I do anticipate that we're going to need to continue to utilize the Special Counsel for Workers' Compensation. It's just the nature of the law, and then just making sure that we're, you know, able to appropriately handle all the claims. But we definitely have made significant progress as far as resolving the older claims and some of the costlier ones. So, I think that and I'm always hopeful that we're going to continue to see reductions in cost, and that's the goal. But I do believe that the County will always need to utilize legal counsel to advise on workers' compensation matters. MR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: Okay. Thank you. Yeah, I couldn't remember the number, but I knew it was a lot higher than $280,000. MS. TOKIHIRO: So, to bring it down to 50 percent, and then you know, find that level that can be maintained is good. So, we anticipate keeping that. MR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: Good job. Thank you. CHR. EVANS: Thank you members. Seeing no other red lights. We have a motion on the floor, all in favor? Any opposed? Page 33 GOEAC-32 Vote on Res. 519-24: The motion to recommend adoption of Res. 519-24 was (Approved) 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. May 14, 2024 BILLS FOR The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, ORDINANCES: Bills for Ordinances. Bill 138: AMENDS CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE 7, OF THE HAWAI'l 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, April 2, and May 1, 2024 (Note: There is a motion by Ms. Evans, seconded by Mr. Inaba, to recommend passage of Bill 138, on first reading.) (Note: Comm. 760.4, Comm. 760.5, Comm. 760.6, and Comm. 760.7 from Council Member Cindy Evans dated May 14, 2024, transmitting proposed amendments to Bill 138, were circulated.) Relinquish Chair: At this time, the Chair relinquished the chair to Vice Chair Lee Loy. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Thanks, Chair Evans. The time now is 3:36 p.m., and I have assumed the Chair of the committee. Ms. Evans, this is your piece of legislation, please lead the discussion. Page 34 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 MS. EVANS: Thank you. I'm going to be offering an amendment today, and actually, you have it in front of you, two communications, which is, one is including Short -Tenn Vacation Rental (STVR) registrations, and the other one is not. Because we need to, I think have that discussion with the Planning Department. And we have with us today our Deputy Jeff Darrow from the Planning Department. Please come forward. So, Member Inaba and I had really good conversations, several with the department. And I think before we have the discussion, maybe we should offer the amendment. But I'll turn it over to Member Inaba. Motion to Amend: Ms. Evans moved to amend Bill 138, with the contents of contents of Comm. 760.6. Seconded by Mr. Inaba. ACTING CHR, LEE LOY: Ms. Evans, on the amendment. MS. EVANS: Thank you very much. So, after we had conversations with the department, we determined what we felt was reasonably feasible, that they could provide that it wouldn't be at such a heavy lift. However, there was discussion about registration of Short -Tenn Vacation Rentals and how the numbers of that may or may not be problem, but we felt it was extremely important that we as the Council weigh in what we felt about that. But having said that, you will see that we have removed some of the things we wanted to be reported. So, we ended up deleting, I think, six things that we wanted reported. We've actually deleted it, and we've got it down to a much narrow report, that I'm thinking that it's really feasible for the department to do. I can turn this over to Member Inaba, unless you want me to give it to Deputy Darrow. MR. INABA: Sure, and just kind of going over the things that were deleted. So, we had two meetings with the Planning Department for what's currently be, One, we don't have a tracking mechanism when all conditions are completed. Ordinances are reviewed when you request a building permit, or those types of things come before the County. So, we've removed that because it's just not possible right now with the data that we have, and the systems that we have to know when the changes on ordinances are expired without completion of all conditions. In addition, at our previous committee hearing, we talked about not skewing these reports. To only report favorable actions by the department or by the Director. So, both approvals and denials are being included here. Page 35 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 Then just from the Planning Department side, on the second page, things like the property size, that's also something that is difficult for the department based on the current systems to report on. And just extra things like the address, which we could pull up based on the TMK (Tax Map Key) which would be provided in the report. In addition, the names of the property owners, which is available to us on the Real Property Tax website. Then, any conditions that were satisfied at the time of expiration at the end, just removing things. So, really boiling it down, and want to give Deputy Darrow an opportunity to chime in if we are missing anything. Actually, I guess I'll take the opportunity. So, like we said, the Planning Department does also make decisions on the Short -Term Vacation Rental permits, and that would increase the potential number of reporting should this pass like by a couple thousand. So, we have two amendments here on whether we do or do not want to include those actions taken by the Director. So, what we're talking about right now in Comm. 760.6 is not including just so that we cannot have information overload. MS. EVANS: No, the one that we have includes the Short -Term. MR. INABA: Oh, excuse me. Sorry, so right now we are including that and want to hear from our colleagues afterwards. But just give Deputy Darrow an opportunity if he has any further comment at this time beyond the discussions we had at our meetings. (Note: At this time, Deputy Planning Director Jeff Darrow, came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. DARROW: Thank you, Chair and Members of the County Council. Aloha, Jeff Darrow with the Planning Department. I may not have the updated communication. Although, I just received this when I was walking out the door from Blake (Watson). And this one identifies the most recent change in the bill regarding approved or denied. So, we've taken out the information that said, "Except for registration of Short -Term Vacation Rentals." And we really didn't address it in Comm. 760.6. Not to say it doesn't include it, but it doesn't specifically reference it as well. First I'd like to say we really appreciate the collaboration between Council Member Inaba and Council Member Evans being able to work through some of the areas in this bill that would help us to be able to provide the information more readily. We are operating under a new system now, EPIC, the Electronic Processing Information Center system. We're trying to be able to work out where we can Page 36 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 create reports and be able to generate those pretty easily and provide the information readily to the Council and to the public. So, that's something we're learning, not something we've been able to actively work on. Up to this point, we actually need to be trained in how to create these reports. But some of the information we were aware that there was as not information requested that would be put into EPIC. So that's where the collaboration really helped to be able to finetune that. Again, you know, in our discussions together we did speak that the information regarding STVR's would increase the amount of information pretty extensively. I think, if I'm incorrect, it was something in the realm of 7,000 additional applications that we'd be providing. So, that will be extensive. And when it comes to STVR's, mainly if they're in a permitted area, normally they're approved. It's an application that comes in. Non -conforming use certificates have been approved previously. If things change in the near future with the TAR (Transient Accommodation Rentals) bill, there will be opportunity for non -conforming use certificates again for a period of time. But the times that —I don't know if we actually call it denial, we usually will reject the application because they're not in a permitted zoning or that particular thing. But again, if that's the Council's wish, we can provide that information. MR. INABA: Thank you, Deputy. So, with that, I essentially want to hear from Members of the Council. I myself would lean towards not, including you know, the Short -Term Vacation Rentals especially with legislation going on that could potentially provide reports specific to any of those permits or applications that are approved with the specific language that ends up getting approved. But we have what's on the floor right now, which is everything. So, thank you to the Planning Department and look forward to your thoughts. I yield. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Mr. Inaba. Ms. Evans, your light is still on. MS. EVANS: Yes. Just to reiterate again, the difference between Comm. 760.6 and Comm. 760.7. If this does not pass, we have the next one we could consider. But this one right now would include the Short -Term Vacation Rentals. And not knowing what legislation may or may not be approved with the ones that are still in process, you know, how important is it for us to know what has been applied for and what's been approve or denied? I think that's kind of the bigger discussion, and do we as a Council really want to know, you know, what you as the Planning Department have done when it comes to Short -Term Vacation Rentals? To me that's the bigger question. Page 37 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 I think, Member Inaba, I've felt that it was important that we as the Council Members really have that discussion if we really want to have that information. Is it important to us or not? Thank you, I yield. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Ms. Evans. I saw Ms. Kagiwada, and then Ms. Kimball. Ms. Kagiwada, you have the floor. MS. KAGIWADA: Thank you. Just real quickly, I feel that I would like the information. But I don't think it's in this format. I feel like this is already going to be a pretty hefty report probably, and we don't need complexity there. Hopefully, once we sort out everything going around the Short -Term Vacation Rentals or Transient Accommodation Rentals, then we can ask for a more succinct report on that particular issue that is separate and maybe doesn't necessarily include the same items here. So, I would like that information, but I understand that since we're in influx there, it might not be appropriate for this particular report. So, I would go with, I guess, it's not supporting this amendment, yes. Thank you. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Ms. Kagiwada. Ms. Kimball. MS. KIMBALL: I just wanted to check something. I didn't find it, but I will say, I concur with Council Member Inaba and Council Member Kagiwada that I think excluding STVR's at this point makes sense given that there's likely to be something that provides that in a more concise way at a later point. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Anyone else? Ms. Galimba. MS. GALIMBA: Thanks. I'm glad that there was discussion on ways to get this information to us in a way that is amenable to the department. And I may have missed this, but I was just wondering if there was also discussion on the format of the report. Such that, I don't know like how many items approximately, this all would encompass and potentially may be somewhat difficult to take in if it's just sort of less —was there discussion around that sort of having a format that's meaningful and not too cumbersome? ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Mr. Inaba, you want to answer that? MR. INABA: We didn't have specifics that we wanted to include for the format. Essentially, it's the information, and then discretion given to the department and working with the Council to make sure that it is provided in a way that's helpful. So, similar to how the Office of Housing and Community Development has altered the way that they provide information on affordable housing units and Page 38 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 develop in the process. There's been some slight tweaks, so that discretion is with the department. MS. GALIMBA: Thanks. I guess, just to ask you, is that going to be basically Excel spreadsheets? MR. DARROW: The goal is to be able to provide the information as mentioned previously through a report that's generated through our EPIC system. I haven't seen how the format of that report comes out. What we can try to do is generate a report, a simple report, and provide the Council with that formatting, just so that they can see what that type of report looks like. Then, maybe from there we can see if we can come up with some, if it's sufficient, or if we need to come up with a little better format. MS. GALIMBA: Okay, thanks very much. I yield. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Ms. Galimba. Anyone else? Ms. Evans. MS. EVANS: From the discussion, I believe I could withdraw this communication and then offer up the next one. Withdraw Motion Ms. Evans withdrew her motion to amend Bill 138 to Amend: with the contents of Comm. 760.6. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Please, Mr. Clerk, Communication 760.6 has been withdrawn. Ms. Evans, the floor is yours. Motion to Amend: Ms. Evans moved to amend Bill 138, with the contents of contents of Comm. 760.7. Seconded by Mr. Inaba. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Ms. Evans. MS. EVANS: Thank you. This is an amendment. The only difference between this and the previous one is removing the registration of Short -Tenn Vacation Rentals. So, the report shall contain the Tax Map Keys for each property, the property zoning district, time of application. Then it goes on in the case of variances, for which the variance is sought. In the case of nonsignificant zoning change applications, the new zoning district resulting from the nonsignificant zoning change; the date of expiration for the approval of the application, if applicable; or if the director has not set a date of expiration. The report shall so indicate the conditions imposed by the director as a condition of approval of the application, if applicable. Page 39 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 This is again about the Planning Director who has the sole authority, and basically, it doesn't come in front of the Council, bottom line. Thank you, I yield. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Ms. Evans. Mr. Inaba. MR. INABA: Yeah, so based on the previous discussion, just ask for your support on this amendment, having collaborated with the Planning Department. And like it was mentioned, some of this information is available online and in various places. It's bringing into one location and to one report that we'll get twice a year based on the six -months prior. And we are granting 30 days after the close of each period, for the department to put that information together and provide it to us. I'm happy to take any questions. Mahalo. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Mr. Inaba. Ms. Villegas. MS. VILLEGAS: Thank you guys for bringing this forward. I think this is something that we have desired for a long time. But gives us one place to go to when a document chooses what's been happening. I just had one question in Section (b)(3) "Any application, except for registration of a Short -Term Vacation Rental, has been approved or denied under the sole authority of the Planning Director or by operation of applicable law." Does it need to be, "that has been approved or denied?" ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: For the maker. MS. VILLEGAS: Sorry, maybe I'm not understanding the question or the sentence, "that has been approved or denied." MR. INABA: I'm not an expert in any means with grammar, but in reading it with the introduction section, "Each report shall include any property for which" I don't think the word, "that" is necessary. MS. VILLEGAS: Got yah, thanks for helping me. I just glitched at that one. Good to go, thank you. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Chair. What is the definition of Planning Director in this section, specifically, or is there a definition of Planning Director? To the maker, Corporation Counsel, or Jeff Darrow. Anybody. MR. INABA: I'm not sure how to answer that. I mean, just throughout the Code, the Planning Director is defined as the Director of the Planning Department. Page 40 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 MR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: Good. Exactly my point. So, in the event that the Planning Director did not act on something, or could not act on something, which has happened, would those items have to be reported back in this report? Or, it could specifically say that the Planning Director did not take action. The Deputy Director took action, or the associated staff took action from the Planning Department. I'm just stating this because when we started this journey with our new Planning Director, there was a number of things that came up, and in that discussion, we realized there were some potential conflicts of interest. And as such, he would not be able to take action on certain items. And had to submit an entire list of potential conflicts. MR. DARROW: If I could use kind of a relative example. So, Council Member Evans today was Chair. She introduced the bill but could not remain Chair at that point. The Chair was changed at that point. Similar things happen in the Planning Department. When there's a conflict with the Director, the Deputy Director will assume the responsibility of Planning Director. MR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: Okay. Thank you, Jeff. So, to the maker, do we need to specify that this would be open to any action taken by the Planning Department, or the Planning Director is suitable. I'm just asking the question to clarify so that you get the information that you're looking for. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Go ahead, Mr. Inaba. Sorry, I knew the answer in my head. So, go ahead. MR. INABA: I'm going to maybe defer to Corporation Counsel on that the intention is that it would be, any action by the Director or their designee, in the case that they couldn't act due to a conflict or a vacancy in the office. But, you know, Corporation Counsel. (Note: At this time, Corporation Counsel Elizabeth Strance, came forward to address the members of the Committee) MS. STRANCE: Thanks. Good afternoon, Elizabeth Strance, Corporation Counsel. I need to look at the context, but the Planning Code is set up interestingly, where in some areas it states the department shall do this, and other places, the Director. So, for example, the General Plan tasked the Planning Director with all of this work, yet he has the whole department helping him. So, I wouldn't take the word, "Planning Director" too literally. Because it's not a personal task, it's the departmental responsibility that's being set out where the Planning Director is being assigned with the responsibility to make sure it gets done. So, I wouldn't worry too much about that. Page 41 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 But I had noticed in other areas in different research I've done that in some areas, it's the Planning Department, and some areas, it's the Planning Director. But there doesn't necessarily seem to be a real rhyme or reason to it. But I think it is sufficient that the language provide an expectation that a complete report be provided. MR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: Okay, thank you, Ms. Strance. Yeah, I think about different codes that I've seen come and go, and there's always a definition of director or department meaning such and such. So, it's good to know what exactly that teen means in this specific report, given what we're looking for. MR. DARROW: If I could provide comment as well? When the report appears to request actions that have been done by —I mean, it's ultimately the Planning Director that, whatever action is done, is done by the director, whether the staff did the investigation. They did the letter; they did the reporting. Everything funnels through the director, and his name is on the final decision letter. Sometimes as mentioned, if there's a conflict or there are designees that can sign on behalf of the director, it's still the director. So, he's the one responsible for those decisions. MR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: Okay. Thank you, that's helpful. I yield, Chair. Thank you. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you. Anyone else. Seeing none, Jeff, I just have a couple of questions. And just, you know me, I like to try and walk it out, right? So, we hit June, wait, from January to June. So, we hit June, and we know that you get a variance in. It's kind of in process, right? They have 10 days to respond; 45 days to respond. Where does, in your head, and I'm not asking for it to be written in, I'm just trying to walk out that situation, and then, what the business decision of the department and/or the director will be. So, an application comes in June 15. It's a variance application. It actually is given 20 days, right? So, a director's decision approval or denial has not been given. Where would something like that fall? MR. DARROW: In the next report. CTING CHR. LEE LOY: In the next report. And that's fine with me. MR. DARROW: It would be the date; I mean that's what I'm thinking. It would be the date of the decision. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Perfect. But even in the interim we would still be able to see that that variance was approved or denied., you know. Because there's ways to still search the website and find that information. Page 42 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 MR. DARROW: Correct. Additionally, as mentioned, I think in the first hearing on this matter, the Planning Department does provide the public with notice of applications that do come in. Mainly variances, subdivisions, plan approvals, those types of actions. So, people when they see that report, know that those applications have come in. And then we can provide the action in the report to the Council. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Great. And then, you know, under the nonsignificant zoning changes, and I feel this way. There's also de minimis types of nonsignificant zoning changes, and I'm assuming nonsignificant means nonsignificant, and it does swoop in our de minimis. Just looking for some guidance on the Planning Department's kind of take on those areas. MR. DARROW: Well, it is another application we deal with. It's very minimal de minimis, including nonsignificant zone changes. I was trying to think when the last time, I can't even recall. It's been years. So, there are those applications that come in, and I believe it's like six inches that, if you're off on your setback, you can request this de minimis. But it's again, another application that if you made it you made it, if you don't you don't. It's pretty clear as to what the requirements are. But if the Council feels that that's something they want to include that can be added in. Thank you. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Thanks. And then finally, it takes effect upon approval. So, here we are in the strokes, May, June. Point of Order: MS. KIMBALL: We're still on the amendment, if you want to bring that up. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Oh, you're right. It's the next part. You're right, you're right. But with that, I actually do support that, and thank you for the responses. Any other comments? Seeing none, there's a motion to amend Bill 138 with the contents of Communication 760.7. All those in favor, please say "aye." Vote on Motion The motion to amend Bill 138 with the contents of to Amend: Comm. 760.7, was carried by the following voice vote: (Approved) Ayes: Committee Members Evans, Galimba, Inaba, Kagiwada, Kaneali'i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewiez, Kimball, Villegas, and Acting Chair Lee Loy — 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. Back to Bill 138, as amended, go ahead, Ms. Kimball. Page 43 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 MS. KIMBALL: That was one of the things I noted that given the timing of this and when it's likely to pass, there's going to probably be a report due 30 days after. And I think that's probably a big ask so I'm wondering if we can either set the date of that first report out to December, or delay the effective date, so that that report comes out a little bit later. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Mr. Inaba. MR. INABA: I think Council Member Evans and I would be completely in support of that to allow Planning to put together something that is meaningful and worthwhile of our time. Thank you. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you. Anyone else? Seeing none because we're still in committee. Absolutely, I think I could support something effective July 1, because then that would give them the six months, and then that next report in January of 2025. I'll miss it. Alright, anything else? Mr. Inaba. MR. INABA: No, just ask for your support and if we can move this on to Council and we will have an amendment to make the effective date July 1". Thank you. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Alright, seeing no more comments, the motion on the floor is to forward Bill 138, as amended, to Council. All those in favor, please say, "aye." Vote on Bill 138: The motion to recommend passage of Bill 138, as (Draft 2) amended to Draft 2, on first reading was carried by (Approved) the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Evans, Galimba, Inaba, Kagiwada, Kdneali'i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Villegas, and Acting Chair Lee Loy — 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. Point of Personal MS. KIMBALL: I just want to make note that we are less than an hour away Privilege: from the Public Hearing, and we will have to recess this committee meeting to take it. So, in terms of commenting on the next two items. Thank you. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Sure. We're on Bill 145. Page 44 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 Bill 145: INITIATES AN AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE VI, CHAPTER 7, SECTIONS 6-7.3 AND 6-7.4; AND ARTICLE XVI OF THE HAWAIl COUNTY CHARTER (2022 EDITION), RELATING TO THE WINDWARD AND LEEWARD PLANNING COMMISSIONS Adds a requirement that at least one member of each commission have experience or expertise in Native Hawaiian traditional and customary practices, Native Hawaiian law, or traditional Hawaiian land usage; land use planning, policies, and principles; land development and construction; or environmental science, environmental protection, or land conservation, and that each category be represented by a different member. Reference: Comm. 796 Intr. by: Ms. Evans Postponed: April 16 and May 1, 2024 (Note: There is a motion by Ms. Evans, seconded by Ms. Villegas, to recommend passage of Bill 145, on first reading.) (Note: Comm. 796.92, from Council Member Cindy Evans, dated May 13, 2024, transmitting proposed amendment to Bill 145, was circulated.) ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Ms. Evans, we have an active motion. Point of Personal MS. EVANS: Thank you. Sorry, I do have an amendment, but at this time, for Privilege: Personal Privilege, take a short recess? ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Sure, we could do a recess, or maybe we could table this matter and take the next matter? MS. EVANS: Yes, please. Vote on Motion to Ms. Evans moved to table Bill 145. Seconded by Table: Ms. Galimba and carried by the following voice vote: (Approved) Ayes: Committee Members Evans, Galimba, Kagiwada, Kdneali'i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Villegas, and Acting Chair Lee Loy — 8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Inaba — 1. Excused: None. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Everybody is asking for a five-minute recess. This meeting is in recess. Page 45 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 Recess: At 4: 10 p.m., the Acting Chair called for a recess. Reconvene: The meeting reconvened at 4:19 p.m. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: This meeting is out of recess. I think, just to level -set, we tabled Bill 145. So, I would need a motion to remove Bill 145 from the table. Vote on Motion to Ms. Evans moved to remove Bill 145 from the table. Remove from Table: Seconded by Mr. Inaba and carried by the following (Approved) voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Evans, Inaba, Kagiwada, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, and Acting Chair Lee Loy — 6. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Members Galimba, K5neali'i-Kleinfelder, and Villegas — 3. Excused: None. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Ms. Evans. MS. EVANS: So, thank you Members. Last time we met we had a really nice conversation about what were the experience and expertise that we would want on the Planning Commission. Again, reminding us that this bill is about amending our Charter to have certain expertise of members that would sit or be appointed and confirmed by us on the Leeward and Windward Planning Commissions. Based on the discussion, I've collapsed it from four members of seven down to three members of seven. And I want to offer up an amendment. Motion to Amend: Ms. Evans moved to amend Bill 145, with the contents of contents of Comm. 796.9. Seconded by Ms. Kimball. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Ms. Evans, on the amendment. MS. EVANS: Thank you. So, what you will find on the second page is again, I have changed it from four to three members. So, there's three members, and one of each of those members would have to have an expertise in one of the following areas. The first one is Native Hawaiian traditional and customary practices, Native Hawaiian law or traditional Hawaiian land usage. Then based on our discussion last time about trying to be more in alignment with OSCER (Office of Sustainability, Climate, Equity and Resilience) and kind of where we're headed with that. Page 46 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 So, the second one would be climate resilience, natural resource management or agricultural sustainability. Then the last one would be Environmental science, environmental protection or land conservation. So, I again, have looked at, you know, since I've been here on the Council and some of the appointments we have made, I think it would really be good to try to make sure we have some expertise and experience representing on the Planning Commissions. So, asking for your favorable support. Thank you, I yield. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Ms. Evans. Anyone else? Ms. Kimball. MS. KIMBALL: I like what you're doing here. I had concerns, you know, about having requirements for four of the members to have these requirements. So, I think that it's wise to just have it be there. And I appreciate you taking out the word "substantial." So, in support of the amendment. My question would be, and maybe this is a Corporation Counsel question. If for some reason or another you had —well, actually, I'm going to support the amendment. I'll save my questions for the main motion, because that is more appropriate then. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Ms. Kagiwada. MS. KAGIWADA: Thank you, Chair. I'm feeling similarly. I like what you've done here. I still have some concerns about the main motion, so, I'll get back to that. But understand what you're trying to do here and appreciate the amendment So, I'll support the amendment. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Ms. Kagiwada. Anyone else? Seeing no more discussion, we have a motion on the floor to amend Bill 145 with the contents of Communication 796.9. All those in favor, please say, "aye." Vote on Motion The motion to amend Bill 145 with the contents of to Amend: Comm. 796.9, was carried by the following voice vote: (Approved Ayes: Committee Members Evans, Inaba, Kagiwada, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, and Acting Chair Lee Loy — 6. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Members Galimba, Kdneali'i-Kleinfelder, and Villegas — 3. Excused: None. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Ms. Evans, back to the main motion, Bill 145, as amended. Page 47 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 MS. EVANS: Thank you. Again, yes. Thanks for pointing it out. I did strike the word "substantial." And again, it's seven members and asking that three of the seven members, that we have representation with type of knowledge and experience or expertise. And I wrote it, I believe in such a way to give a broad enough —a wide enough net, I think, that we can definitely find people that can meet those requirements. Thank you. I yield. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Ms. Evans. Ms. Kimball. MS. KIMBALL: Thank you. I'm just looking at Section 3 of the bill which talks about transitional provisions. And I'm not sure of the appropriate language. But you've got the language that should a vacancy occur, the qualifications of the sitting members will be taken into account. The only thing I'm concerned about is if the commissions can meet or not if they don't have all three sitting at a given time. So, you have a scenario where your person with Native Hawaiian law and Native Hawaiian practices decides to leave the commission, and then there would have to be a new appointment. can the commission continue to meet until somebody is appointment to the commission with that expertise? You see what I'm saying? I'm not clear legally. If they had quorum, but they didn't have this person, would they still be legally able to meet? I'm not sure if that's a Corporation Counsel question. I think we might want to have a provision in there that allows a little flexibility in that scenario where we might have a vacancy with somebody having that expertise. I hope I'm being clear in what my question is. I yield, Chair. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Ms. Kimball. Anyone else? Did you want to invite Ms. Strance up for some direction on that, Ms. Kimball? MS. KIMBALL: Yes, I would. Thank you. (Note: At this time, Corporation Counsel Elizabeth Strance, came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MS. STRANCE: Elizabeth Strance, Corporation Counsel. It feels a little bit like a word puzzle. So, I'd want to think it through whether you could have one without the other. So, I'd like some time to walk through a scenario. So, you know, we have a vacancy on the commission in your district after the effective date of this Charter amendment, and there's no expertise on the commission. There would be the requirement that at least one person from the commission or from your district have one of these qualifications. If you're asking, after the effective date, and those would keep rolling. I think those would have to keep roiling in as commission members roll out. So, I'd have Page 48 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 to kind of think through or sit down with you to walk through the scenario that you're concerned about happening, and whether it could. And if it could then there would be a need to draft for it. MS. KIMBALL: Okay. Thank you. I mean I'm looking at the other section where you know, there's a seven -member commission, and some of them represent districts; particular districts, some are at -large. If we're missing a particular district, the board can still meet. So, I'm wondering if this behaves in the same way, if there's a vacancy with a particular expertise and skillset, the board can still meet. It's just that the next appointee would have to have that skillset, right? MS. STRANCE: That's what I'm assuming. Because the bill doesn't affect sitting members, as new members come on, they will have to be filled with people with this expertise. So, what might happen is there would be delays in filling vacancies while there's a search for a person who meets the qualifications. So, that's the one I envision. I haven't really thought through the one that you're talking about. And like I said, I would want to kind of think it through more and whether it could happen. MS. KIMBALL: I'll just conclude by saying, you know, I'm supportive at this point of getting this moving along. But I'd like to maybe have a little bit more clarity around this before I make the final decision. But I'm okay with moving this out of Committee now. MS. EVANS: May I offer a comment? ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Sure, go ahead, Ms. Evans. MS. EVANS: I think it says taking into consideration, the qualifications of sitting members, which is (3)(b). I think you may already have sitting members qualified. So, it's not saying you have to roll in people with the new expertise. You're rolling in people to fill the void. You're trying to achieve three categories. So, if you're sitting members who already have three categories, you don't have to have that as one rolls out. I guess what I'm saying is that the point of this is to make sure that three of seven have these types of backgrounds. And you may already have it even if someone, you know, resigns or they're termed out. You may already have that. The point being is that you want it. So, I think we take care of that in (3)(b), that last sentence. But I think it'll be worth you reviewing and then taking in this conversation. MS. STRANCE. Yes, thanks. I think my concern would be the Council hasn't appointed any member with those qualifications. So, it doesn't describe who Page 49 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 would make the decision that those sitting members meet those qualifications, and there might be a way to affect that. For example, if somebody is coming up for appointment, well I guess there would have to be a vote for this body to say, oh yes, that this certain member meets that qualification. But because these are appointees confirmed by this body, this body would have to determine that a person with those qualifications. MS. EVANS: So, this is the transition period. Because once you get over it, you probably have it. MS. STRANCE: Understood. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Alright, thanks, Ms. Evans. Anyone else? Mr. Inaba. MR. INABA: In support. Thank you for the changes via the amendments. And I think, you know, just good discussion regarding how it would play out with quorum. I think we would just follow the quorum rules, which are, you know like, the majority being there. I would hope we can just not get too in the weeds regarding the specific commission. But, yeah, in support. Thank you, Council Member Evans. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Anyone else? Ms. Villegas. MS. VILLEGAS: I'll be supporting this legislation moving out of Committee with a positive recommendation and thank you for your vigilance in making amendments that ensure for the alignment. I really appreciate these things being outlined very specifically. This is one thing we have never seen is the pool of applications that have been submitted for people. So, that's something I'm curious about. If the concerns are actually viable about eligible candidates having applications in and what the system really is on choosing the people to bring forward and nominate for our Planning Commissions. It is, in my mind, the most powerful commission we have in our County. It behooves us to create whatever policies we can to ensure that they are the most highly qualified candidates representing their communities. And given the privilege and the opportunity to vote on issues that will impact our island, our home, our future generations for eternity, really, in how things move forward. So, I'll be supporting this wholeheartedly. Thank you, Council Member Evans. I yield. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Anyone else? Ms. Kierkiewicz. Page 50 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chair. Thanks for the changes that you have put forward. You know, I do share in some of the concerns my colleagues have raised about the ability for the commissions to meet. I will be supporting to move this out of Committee because there is an extensive process, three readings at Council. But I haven't made up my mind on how exactly I'll be voting for this bill at those readings, only because I hesitate to mandate this very specific expertise in our Charter. And I think that these bodies really evolve over time to meet the needs and priorities of our community. So, I'd hate for the Council to have to introduce, on a frequent basis, more Charter amendments, right, to adapt to the needs and concerns of our community. So, I'll be supporting it moving it out of Committee, but I just want to think this through with community members a bit more. Some have reached out to just express concern over how difficult it is for folks to even get through the process right now. And we have seen time after time, our commissions not being able to meet because of quorum issues. So, I just worry about this added layer of expectation that we are placing on volunteers. So, thanks for your work on this. yield. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Ms. Kierkiewicz. Anyone else? Ms. Kagiwada, go ahead. MS. KAGIWADA: Thank you. Deputy Director Darrow, can you come forward? I'm just wondering, are there any other ways? For instance, maybe in your rules or something where we could insert this language? I don't know, are there any other places where we could do it. Because I do hear what my colleges said about, you know, being somewhat flexible. But also, changing times and coming back over and over again. This is a much more higher bar, more cumbersome, takes longer, all that stuff. So, I really support the intention and the ideas of doing this. I'm just wondering, are there any other ways that we could kind of make sure that this happens in practice? (Note: At this time, Deputy Planning Director Jeff Darrow, came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. DARROW: This is the Windward and Leeward Planning Commissions. They're defined by the Charter, as far as how many members; the locations. There could be a change in the Planning Commission rules regarding it similar to the Cultural Resource Commission rules. That's what established those given expertise for members within the Cultural Resource Commission. So, it could be considered possibly through a rule change or maybe even a Code change. We would have to look at where it would be more appropriate to do it. Page 51 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 But I do hear the concerns that are being raised. I would like to just mention as example, there was a period of time on our Cultural Resources Commission that a particular expertise was very difficult to fill. And that was, believe it or not, the architectural requirement. And it was either that they were too busy or could not commit to that level of commitment and time, or just weren't interested. I'm not sure what happened, but we could not fill that particular aspect of it. It did create problems because we would have the commission filled, but we couldn't get that. That was the last one that was needed. So again, the same thing could possibly happen where you have maybe six members, yet you're missing this particular expertise. So, the question is, do you approve that volunteer commissioner, or do you not based on the requirement in the Charter to have the expertise of these three fields? MS. KAGIWADA: In that case, were they unable to meet until that position was filled? MR. DARROW: No, they were still able to meet. It's just that they couldn't get a commissioner for that last expertise. MS. KAGIWADA: Okay. Thank you. To the maker, I'm just wondering if you've considered any other potential routes of doing this, or since the Planning Commissions come from the Charter, is that where you went automatically? MS. EVANS: What I did is I looked to see how other jurisdictions make sure there is representation on the Planning Commission. And I believe that the way I wrote it is so broad that if we can't find these people in our community, I'd be shocked. But I want to make sure that when we're looking for people to be on the Planning Commission, we do have people with some knowledge of Native Hawaiian traditional and customary practices, Native Hawaiian law, you know, that we have people that are familiar with climate resilience or natural resources. But I did a lot of "or's." Because I understood, you just can't say, it's got to be one thing. So, I tried to really broaden it to make sure that, you know, we're looking at people that are much more, in my opinion connected to the `aina and what's going on with our land and our culture. And just want to make sure they're represented. And want to make sure we put the effort in to find people with that. Because that's why I tried to make it so broad. You know, I kind of thought I achieved it, but if you think I could do a better job, I'm open to language changes, but I wouldn't want to have it go through rule -making. MS. KAGIWADA: Chair, may I follow-up? Page 52 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Sure, go ahead. MS. KAGIWADA: Thank you. Sorry, I guess I didn't express the question correctly. I get that, and I support the effort of those areas of expertise to be on the Planning Commissions. What I was asking is, if going through as a Charter amendment was the only thing you considered, or did you consider going either through a rules' change, a Code change or something else that was maybe not as cumbersome to do in the first place, but also to possibly, you know, change or amend if it doesn't work out. Did you look at any other possible ways of getting the same results, which is having these areas of expertise on these commissions? Did you consider any of those? MS. EVANS: Yeah, I think the option is there. I felt it was important for the public to weigh in on this. I guess that's where I stood. You know, I think the public if they really want that representation. This is an opportunity for the public to say, this is what I want on my commission. Yeah, I think we could go to Code, which would then be up to us to vote on. If we went to rule -making, it tends to be driven by the department going through public hearings, and then going through the Mayor. So, that's a different set of people kind of driving in that decision and driving that discussion. So, it depends on who you want. I think you have three potential options, like you're saying. But who's driving the decision? And this one is being driven by the public. So, I guess it just depends on where you land on who should be making this decision. MS. KAGIWADA: Okay, thank you. Chair, I yield. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Anyone else? Go ahead, Ms. Galimba. MS. GALIMBA: This is on the main motion? Yeah. You know, I just think that it's going from problematic point of view, it's just going to make it extremely difficult to fill positions. So, I basically can't really support it. I mean I support the idea of having all of this knowledge on it. But in this manner of requiring individual members, and they have this particular knowledge, the way that it's written now, I think it's just going to cause a lot of problems for our County in general. So, I can't support it. Thanks. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Anyone else? I'm going to go ahead and weigh in then. For all the reasons that my colleagues support or expressed, I don't like this going in the Charter, and I feel that there's some bias and some inequity that's being created when we start to carve out specialty areas. Page 53 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 Because I would love to see someone who had economic development experience; someone who had families with special needs experience. That's what our community is made up of; it's many people having all kinds of talents. But the minute we set the bar and give privilege to a few or a class, it doesn't sit well with me. I struggle with this one, because as a Native Hawaiian, there's more than one way to be Hawaiian. Because I can have all of those tradition and customary practices, but I can support economic development or be a small business owner. And so, for me, this one, it's not sitting well in my piko. I just don't like the way we're lacing out certain qualifications to make certain people less than or more than. So, I cannot support anything that gives privilege or class to a specific segment, talent, expertise, technical experience. I still think we can invite that in when we screen these applicants, but I've watched a lot of bias come into this conversation too, that is you don't think, or talk, or look like; you don't get to sit on this commission. And that's not the road I want to walk down at all. So, with all due respect, I'm not going to be supporting this. I think there's other ways to do it. I don't see any future amendment that I could swallow or have palatable when we start giving privilege to certain people. And in this situation, you're giving it to Native Hawaiians. I get it, which is why I'm struggling with it. But to have it in the Charter, it's not the place for me. And if that's the case, then let's give everybody a shot, and give everybody privilege, right? But that's not going to happen. Because then we're going to have to prioritize each person. So, with that, those are my thoughts, I'm sorry to the maker. I'm not going to be supporting this. But we can go to a roll call vote. Mr. Clerk. Vote on Bill 145: The motion to recommend passage of Bill 145, as (Draft 2) amended to Draft 2, on first reading was carried by (Approved) the following roll call vote: Ayes: Committee Members Evans, Inaba, Kagiwada, Kaneali'i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, and Villegas — 7. Noes: Committee Members Galimba, and Acting Chair Lee Loy — 2. Absent: None. Excused: None. ACTING CHR. LEE LOY: Thank you, Mr. Clerk. I think we have one more matter on the agenda. And at this time, I'd like to turn it back over to our Chair, Ms. Evans. The time now is 4:48 p.m. Page 54 GOEAC-32 Relinquish Chair: Recess: Reconvene: May 14, 2024 At this time, the Acting Chair relinquished the chair to Chair Evans. CHR. EVANS: Thank you. Thank you for being here. Mr. Clerk, Bill 160. And with the time sensitivity, just to point out. MR. HENRICKS: My recommendation would be not to begin anything at this point. We're going to need to set up for the Public Hearing that starts in 11 minutes. So, would you like to recess this meeting until the adjournment of the Real Property Tax hearing? That's a possibility. CHR. EVANS: Okay. So, we're in recess until the adjournment of the Real Property Tax hearing. Thank you. So, we are in recess. At 4:49 p.m., the Chair called for a recess. The meeting reconvened at 5:49 p.m. CHR. EVANS: We're reconvening. We have been in recess, and we're back to Bill 160. Bill 160: INITIATES AN AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE III, ARTICLE VI, AND ARTICLE XVI OF THE CHARTER OF THE COUNTY OF HAWAI`I (2022 EDITION), RELATING TO THE CORPORATION COUNSEL Moves provisions for the Office of the Corporation Counsel currently in Article VI and under the supervision of the Managing Director into Article III, Legislative Branch, and provides the County Council the sole authority to appoint and remove the Corporation Counsel. Reference: Comm.857 Intr. by: Mr. Inaba and Ms. Kierkiewicz Motion to Approve: Mr. Inaba moved to recommend passage of Bill 160 on first reading. Seconded by Ms. Kierkiewicz. CHR. EVANS: Member Inaba. MR. INABA: Thank you. Yes, the summary read in by the Clerk was pretty comprehensive. What we are essentially doing here is moving the appointing power from the Office of the Mayor to this body. The language being used comes from the Office of the County Auditor's process, which also has a six -year appointment, which is overseen by the Council. And essentially, it's to give voice to more folks to get a Corporation Counsel that isn't initially nominated by one person, by the Mayor and then confirmed by the Page 55 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 Council. But having that comprehensive process that brings in everyone's voices throughout the entire process. Then, I guess I'll state it for the record, you know, this is not a bill reflecting the current Corporation Counsel, who we love. But it is something that Council Member Kierkiewicz and I felt we should introduce to give the Council this opportunity and to put it up to the voters ultimately to see how the initiation of appointment for Corporation Counsel happens. Section 5 of the bill speaks to those who are currently in office for Corporation Counsel and Assistant Corporation Counsel. Essentially, every six years an appointment or reappointment would need to occur. So, we would have the opportunity or the next Council essentially, would have the opportunity to hire a Corporation Counsel and begin that search process. Similar to what has happened for the County Auditor position. Other than that, all of the qualifications and processes remain the same. Things have just been combined into one section, which would be Section 3-19. So, happy and wanting to hear from our colleagues, and turn it over to Council Member Kierkiewicz to add anything further. CHR. EVANS: Member Kierkiewicz. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chair. Really appreciate the opportunity to co -introduce this with Council Member Inaba. I've actually had the pleasure of serving with a couple different Corporation Counsels. And you know, in my opinion, it always feels as if the Corporation Counsel is beholden to the Executive Branch. So, by introducing this particular structure of hiring, the Corporation Counsel by this legislative body, I think it would just provide for a more balanced government structure and would also help to depoliticize the process. So often, these appointments have political influence and consideration. So, as much as possible, we're trying to remove that from the situation and ensure that any selections are really based off of qualifications, experience, commitment to serving the County's best interests. Not to say that previous Corporation Counsels haven't. But I think they would have to demonstrate that a bit more clearly to this body. As Council Member Inaba alluded to we would be running this process very similar to what I believe to be a very successful process. When we develop an Ad Hoc committee to hire our County Auditor, Tyler Benner, it was a very comprehensive national search for someone with a lot of vetting and due diligence Page 56 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 happening by the Ad Hoc committee. And then the introduction of candidates for this body to ultimately interview and to make a public decision around. So, I just think that it would provide for more of a broader perspective on the selection process of our chief legal advisor. Happy to answer any questions you folks might have. Thank you. CHR. EVANS: Members? I have a question, but members do you have any questions or comments? Member Kimball. MS. KIMBALL: Thank you. Thank you for bringing this forward so that we can have the dialogue about this. I actually had some pretty grave concerns when I saw this come through. I always ask myself when we look at a piece of legislation, you know, is it necessary; is it within our jurisdiction? Can we do it, and are there any unintended consequences? My question to you as the drafters is like, what problem are you trying to solve here? Because I have some concerns that the problems, and this was sort of elaborated in the presentation, are things that there are other protections in place for such as, a political appointment, or political leanings or bias from the Corporation Counsel? They have particular codes of conduct they professionally adhere to being attorneys, that I think should prevent a legal opinion to be different depending on who put you in the position. And then there's always mechanisms if we felt that that was happening for us to take action on that. I do recognize that the proposal is something similar to the auditor, which I think you're correct, Council Member Kierkiewicz, was a great process. I think the auditor is directly tied to the Council's responsibilities, which include oversight. And oversight in particular of the budget. Corporation Counsel, I think, has a lot of duties beyond just their support for us. There's all the contract monitoring, and you know, the agreements that they work on with the Administration. I feel like there might be —it's not the same as appointing the auditor and I think that the Corporation Counsel position. And I worry that there's maybe a little bit of issue. You know, we had this discussion when we talked about how we were going to appoint the OSCER Administrator where you have separation of power issues. I'd like to ask Corporation Counsel. That was the first thing I thought of, that there's going to be separation of duties related to that. So, that's kind of my other concern. Is it beyond the scope of the Council to have the authority to cover all of these duties? I think it's very different from the auditor, which is clearly tied to our responsibility. Page 57 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 So, yeah, I guess with that, that's where I'd start this. I feel like I'd like to understand more deeply what may be the problem is that we're trying to solve with this. Because I think there are potentially other ways to solve it. Such as, actually getting somebody as a legal advisor in our LRB (Legislative Research Branch) or in the Council staff, which has been a vacancy for a while, as opposed to modifying this whole process. But if I can Chair, I'd like to invite Ms. Strance to come up and say anything in particular. Like I said, I'm interested in —my immediate reaction was like, this seems like a separation of powers issue. But I'd like to get your opinion. (Note: At this time, Corporation Counsel Elizabeth Strance, came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MS. STRANCE: Good afternoon, Elizabeth Strance, Corporation Counsel. Thank you. I think just as a starting point, sometimes there's a misnomer that we're not all part of the same team. You know, the County of Hawaii is a municipal corporation that has many different functions, this body included. The Office of the Corporation Counsel is charged by Council to be the chief legal advisor of the entire County, not any specific branch, no specific person, and that there are rules of professional responsibility and ethics applicable to all lawyers regarding representation of organizations. In response to this, we just want to set this up like the County Auditor. In terms of the separation of powers assessment, the County Auditor supports Charter functions of this body. So, under the County Charter, this body is charged with policy -making, that's Section 3-1 of the Charter; adoption of a pay plan, Section 3-13; adoption of a General Plan, Section 3-15; mandatory program review, Section 3-16, and adoption of the operation budgets and the CIP (Capital Improvement Projects) budgets. The rule of the County Auditor is in support of your responsibilities under the Charter in that regard. The auditor audits programs, audits the finances of different programs and departments, and provides both you and the Mayor with reports. But it's in support of these other broader functions. The Corporation Counsel is very different in that regard, because it's charged with responsibility to the entire County. And to give you some sense of our work, just as to our Counseling and Drafting Division, which is the division that most often provides advice to you, between July of 2023 and April of 2024, it opened 5,370 work requests. Of those 338 were related to requests made by this body or members of this body. Page 58 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 So, in terms of there being an impression that we do more work for the Executive Branch, that's exactly true. Most of our work requests come from that. And that's because this is one body with nine people, and there are over 20 different departments and a lot more boards and commissions. The concern that I have with this bill is that it doesn't allow for both branches of government to weigh in on the Corporation Counsel. Corporation Counsel is already uniquely set up in the County Charter. Like other departments heads, it's a nomination and confirmation process. But unlike any other department head, the Mayor cannot fire the County Council or the Corporation Counsel without approval of this body. And that gives a lot of freedom to the Corporation Counsel to act independently, because it's not beholden to the appointor. So, that's very different than the other department heads. So, I would just urge this body to look at what lane has been established for it under the County Charter; what the role of the Corporation Counsel is and look at whether placing sole authority in this body to hire and fire the Corporation Counsel really makes sense. I guess the final piece is, with the relatively small amount of more proportionally, that our department does for the County Council, I question whether this body is really in a position to supervise the performance of the Corporation Counsel in a manner that would give it the ability to make informed choices about hiring and firing. So, I would just urge this Council to look at those factors. To adopt something like this would be unprecedented, at least in this State. All of the other Corporation Counsels are within the Executive Branch of government. The State Attorney General's Office isn't the Executive Branch of government. I haven't done extensive research. But I'm again looking for other examples where the Office of the Corporation Counsel is tasked with service of the entire County rests within the legislative branch or that the legislative branch has sole authority to hire and fire. That becomes important when we as lawyers are looking for resources to help guide us for what our responsibilities might be in the context of municipal government. And if there aren't other examples that kind of chart our charge with placement in another branch of government, I question whether or how able we'll be able to follow that other guidance. So, I guess for all those reasons, it would be very difficult for me to support this legislation. I haven't found any legal authority that says you can't. So, I'm not here to say it's illegal. But I am here to tell you that from the work that we do, it would be very awkward fit. Page 59 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 MS. KIMBALL: Thank you for that. I think, you know, again when I read this my first reaction was like, if we're getting advice from anybody who's an attorney, that advice should be consistent regardless because they have a code of ethics and provisional standards that they follow. I think about it like, my husband being an architect, he's going to follow the same code and give the same client advice regardless of who the client is when we're talking about interpretation of the Building Code. There's this underlying thing that's standard. So, again, I'd be curious to know from the makers, like what problems they're trying to solve, and if there's maybe a better approach. This seems pretty heavy-handed. I also just want to snake a quick comment because this came up in the previous conversation, just about —I do want to make sure that it's understood that, like our Council hearings and the Code amendment process is also an important part for the public to weigh in. I keep hearing with these Charter amendments, "Oh, it's a way to put in front of the public." I want to make sure that we're not saying that this is the only way to put things in front of the public. Our public hearings are also,a way to put things before the public. This isn't the only avenue to get feedback on that. Thanks Chair, for the latitude. I yield. CHR. EVANS: Member Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you. My thoughts. I actually like this fresh approach; like parts of it, don't like parts of it. I did like the idea of the Council having the process that we adopted with the auditor. But I was also looking for whom from the Administration would also sit on that panel. So, it's not just the Council's decision that it's an administrative decision. So, I like the idea of the process and the selection being from both the Administrative Branch and the Legislative Branch. That's not what this bill says. But I was trying to think, well what fresh approach are we trying to achieve? From Day -One, I've always felt very strongly that the Council should have someone in our Legislative Research Branch to help advise on some of the pieces of legislation. And not to contradict Corporation Counsel, but at least push in a little harder on some of views or understandings that we may have or be ignorant to. I think finally, there's some work that could happen around this. But ultimately, at the end of the day, whatever individual is advising, we have to have people to sit in these chairs that's going to take their advice. And I've sat through far too many incidences, not only this Council, but litigation where they've been advised by their attorney, they're not taking that advice. And we're in litigation because the client chose to ignore the advice of legal counsel. Page 60 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 So, there's a piece in all of that, that not only is it about the appointed individual and the subject matter expertise that they have. But the clients that they're advising will listen to the advice of Council. And I don't know how to achieve that in legislation like this. Because we're all independent thinkers. We all bring our own thoughts into a situation or experiences. And regardless of whatever good legal advice, an individual Council Member is left to make a choice independent of their own thought process. So, I can support pieces of this. I think the biggest solve, if we're trying to minimize liabilities, it's everybody who's in that process that has to participate and be able to make a good business decision based on good sound legal advice. Those are my thoughts to the makers. I yield. CHR. EVANS: Member Villegas. MS. VILLEGAS: I want to thank the makers for bringing this forward. It was actually something I believe I talked to you about, Judge Strance at the beginning of this new Administration. And it was something that came out of history with the prior Administration and Corporation Counsel for that prior Administration. When you're ask a Corp. Counsel if something is legal, and they say, "Well, it may not be legal, but it's just the way we do it." Those have been some of my concerns and things that had brought it to my attention, that wow, that's not really the answer I wanted to get from legal advice. We do seem to be in a new era of so many of our departments and capacities coming into the 2 Is' century, for which I'm very grateful. But we did talk about this a little bit, Judge Strance. And your advice was that it wasn't going to be in alignment, and it might cause more harm. But I'm really grateful to the makers for bringing this forward. Because as we've navigated even this term, and so long ago, hired outside counsel, because Corporation Counsel is understaffed and overburdened already with what's going on. That brings to my attention the potential for this to be a role that could alleviate some of that burden to the current Corporation Counsel; also, when we talk about the law, and lawyers, and ethical codes of conduct; and the should-be's, unfortunately, the should-be's are not always are. And with humans and with the law, I mean, that's what legal counsel does is find ways to explain things away or explain things into being. So, I really like the concept of Council having a devoted Corporation Counsel. The practicality of being able to select and then manage, and those kinds of things. I have faith that those things could be worked out. I'm willing to put this to the people because I have concerns of us ending up going backwards somehow and ending up with people put in positions, once again, that are kind of just told, Page 61 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 "Oh, you know, don't worry about that, this is just the way we do it." And that was really disenchanting for me. I spent the last couple of weeks talking to a lot of classrooms of young people in high school and middle school who are struggling with severe disenchantment with government in general. So, trying to remove any opportunities for that kind of disenchantment. I'm deeply grateful that I haven't had that experience. But I just know that this was a potential Charter amendment that had been resonating with me for a while, but anyway it didn't seem like I could probably get if off the ground. So, thank you to you two for finding the terminology and digging in. And sounds like we still have some space to navigate in it. I appreciate the idea of the cross pollination of selection being with Administration and Council. I just think it behooves more exploration in looking into this option and opportunity. And I meant to do some research because this option was actually brought to me by a couple of my constituents, who were also having the frustrations. I'm not remembering now, but that there are municipalities that do operate under this kind of setup. So, it would be great to find them and see what that template is, because I imagine that they have had to navigate all these challenges and to see where there have been successes or challenges and what worked best. But I will be supporting this moving forward and the continued exploration as an opportunity. And in my mind, it would be to provide support to the already strange Office of Corporation Counsel and all that you guys already manage for us. So, that would be my intentionality. I yield. MS. STRANCE: Chair, could I offer an observation on a couple of the statements? CHR. EVANS: Yes, please. MS. STRANCE: So, you folks are describing several different things. So, one way if this body wants more of its own legal advice, both the County of Maui and City and County of Honolulu, had a Council Services branch or an office, it might be that that's the model that you folks are interested in, because you feel like you want more legal service for the policy and other work that you do. In looking at our County Charter, a lot keeps getting added on to the County Clerk without a specific office. So, the County Clerk's Office really covers a lot. So, at least in two jurisdictions, and probably the State Legislature have a Legislative Reference Bureaus or things like that that specifically allow for the appointment of counsel. So, that would be one model to address some of it. Page 62 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 In response, Council Member Lee Loy to some of your concerns, the transfer of the legal office into the legislative branch doesn't change the distinction between legislative and administrative responsibilities. So, the suggestion that somehow this body could put pressure on the Corporation Counsel's Office to take action, it doesn't have the authority to unilaterally take direction. So, we don't file lawsuits on our own and we normally respond to work requests. So, requests for legal services. Candidly, I encourage our deputies, and I try to do the same with you folks. If I see something that might require you to say something. But the idea of our office is really to give kind of a first pass like a threshold of what's legal and what's not. And if the response is that it might not be legal, but that's the way it's always been done before, that means it is out of our area. So, that takes it someplace else whether it's a policy decision or something else. But we do have our own lane. Then finally, there may be other models of appointment beyond the appoint and confirm, and I'd be happy to look into some of those for you. I think the County of Maui may have adopted recently that has something that's like a separate commission, so it's not a legislative commission, and it's not an executive position. I don't know enough about that, but that seems to be an effort to do things a little bit differently. So, there are other models of appointment, but I'm not sure if that means it should change the structure of County government. Point of Order: MR. INABA: Chair, just Point of Order. I mean, this bill is affecting the Office of Corporation Counsel. So, I just want to ask Corporation Counsel, who can we seek legal advice from, because it's affecting your own position? And I want to make sure, you know, if this body does want to get a separate legal opinion, what are our options? MS. STRANCE: The County Charter has a provision for the appointment of Special Counsel. I haven't researched it. I've seen some prior opinions from our office that states that that also authorizes the County Council to get an additional legal opinion. MR. INABA: Okay. So, Special Counsel would be our option for any external legal opinion. Because your opinion as Corporation Counsel is the legal opinion of the County. And I think that's kind of where we find ourselves in a position of struggle because even if we do have, you know, a County or a staff attorney, ultimately, the Corporation Counsel represents the County in all legal affairs. So, in this case, because it affects you directly, I want to make sure we understand our options as a Council. So, that would be Special Counsel. MS. STRANCE: Yes. So far, I haven't given a legal opinion this afternoon. I provided some insight. But if this body feels like it needs outside counsel to help Page 63 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 it develop an alternate way to appoint Corporation Counsel, then I would suggest that you go through the Special Counsel route. MR. INABA: I'm not going to ask you for your legal opinion, because I think that's a conflict. But you're saying right now that you haven't provided any legal opinions. So, they're not based on whether it's legal or illegal in this bill. MS. STRANCE: I haven't stated one way or another whether this bill is legal or illegal. I haven't done that research. MR. INABA: Okay. I just want to be clear on that. I'm going to yield. If there are other questions, then we can respond at one time. Thank you. CHR. EVANS: Member Kimball followed by Member Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. MS. KIMBALL: You know, kind of building off of what Council Member Lee Loy said about this, I'm willing to look at Section 6-5.2 about the approval process. My greater concern is where it lives. And I really do feel like it's because of the responsibility that Corporation Counsel has to represent all of us as a corporation. It's more appropriate in the Executive Branch, especially since advising us on our policy matters is a small subset of all of the contracts and representing us in court cases. So, I'm willing to consider taking some of the language that you've got here in terms of the process of an appointment and look at how that might be incorporated into the existing appointment process. But, you know, I think again, there's still opportunities to look at having like, I think you mentioned City and County of Honolulu and Maui do have legal staff in the legislative branch, and we have the capacity for that. I'll even throw out there, we have a Deputy Clerk position that's vacant that we could require to be an attorney. You know, that's another possible option. That came up on the top of my head. Jon don't roll your eyes or anything, but I really want to be cautious here. I do hear some insinuations that I feel like are not necessarily backed up by fact. And I really want to caution the body to do right around that. We have to be very careful to imply motives or intentions without any information that backs that up. I understand the place that it comes from, but I would caution on something like this to be careful about that. I yield, Chair. CHR. EVANS: Member Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. You know, I've asked you for help today and you helped me. But I didn't realize this bill was coming up. And I would expect that your head would have been wrapped around this. I'm saying that because you were more than helpful. I mean, you took the time to speak to Page 64 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 me. But I would say that this is probably a more pressing concern of yours. So, that's just a note and appreciation for you, if that's helpful? I appreciate your comments. I think you have a good heart and you're coming from a good place with those comments. So, I'm just going to ask a few questions and then kind of go from there. The move from Section 6 to Section 3, what does that accomplish? MS. STRANCE: It moves it from the Executive Branch to the Legislative Branch. MR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: Then, are there issues created by putting the Corporation Counsel under the Legislative Branch given that we make decisions on numerous things. Legal challenges, Special Counsel, the things that we spoke about today, even. Are there inherent issues built into this? Because we then oversee you, but we decide on those items that come in front of the Council that are legal in that we're your boss, in a way? MS. STRANCE: I'm not sure I understand your question. MR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: When we have to pass a resolution for Special Counsel; when we have to approve of an agreement to allow Corporation Counsel to have a ceiling of ")C' amount of dollars to go to protect us from a lawsuit? If you're under our Legislative Branch and we're approving those, do we create a conflict? MS. STRANCE: I haven't thought about that particular issue. The awkwardness is that the direction of a lawsuit is administrative in nature and executive in nature. So, the disconnect of placing it in Legislative Branch is awkward because in a lawsuit, for example, a police officer shoots someone in the line of duty, and the County gets suited. At that point, we represent the County in the lawsuit, and all of our contacts and our relationships in the workup of the lawsuit involve working with people in the Executive Branch of government, the Police Department. There might be issues about the way our budget is set up in the Finance Department; the lines in the Claims budget is in the Finance Department, that's an Executive Branch. You know, most of our advising is to departments and divisions within departments. So, our relationship with those departments are built in that department. When I look at the County Auditor, for example, they're kind of off on their own. They operate on their own, because they provide this very specific function. And there's been discussion over time about whether that should be in the Finance Department or its own department. There's been discussion about that in the Page 65 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 Charter, but there's a model for it. But that department's interaction with the Executive Branch and other departments is very different. Whether there's a legal conflict, I would have to look at that. The way that the separation of powers works now is the Executive Branch authorizes the work and those researchers are involved in a lot of the work. When it impacts the budget, we come to this body for approval. When it comes to a Special Counsel relationship, it requires money. And if it operates over a specified period of time, there's Charter provisions that require us to get Council approval. So, some of those checks and balances start to just migrate to one department. Whether that raises legal conflicts or not, I would have to research it. MR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: I would like to know because it would be an interesting place to put ourselves in if we actually could not be the overseer for Corporation Counsel due to issues like that. There's probably a much better way to say what I said. But that's kind of how I see it right now. To the makers, the six -year appointment, I think is interesting. What was the idea behind six years? That's just in line with what the auditor is now. CHR. EVANS: Yes, please, Member Kierkiewicz. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chair. It was designed to overlap Administrations and to guard against just drifts in the leadership that come every four years with the election of a new Mayor. So, again, we would want the Office of the Corporation Counsel to represent the County with the Big C's interests and not necessary be aligned with whoever is Mayor at the time. MR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: Okay, thank you. Then, just an overall question, Betsy, the requirement for Corporation Counsel is to be an attorney, licensed to practice and in good standing. That makes sense, fair enough. And shall be licensed to practice law for a period of not less than five years preceding the appointment; and have at least three years of experience in responsible Administrative capacity. I've never questioned that section. In your opinion, given the nature of what Corporation Counsel takes on, provides comment on; provides opinion for to protect this entire County from, do you feel that could be strengthened without limiting our pool of applicants? MS. STRANCE: Candidly, I think the five years is not very much. I feel like I take a law school bar exam most days that I come into the office, given the breadth of legal issues that are presented. I suppose the five years is there because there might be a combination of experience and supervisory experience, because Page 66 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 you're managing a department. But you know, I look at where I was at five years of practice, and the breadth of legal issues that faces County and it's not a lot. MR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: I'd have to agree. I would tend to think that your predecessor and you probably have more. How many years have you practiced law? MS. STRANCE: I'm old enough to need a calculator to calculate. I was licensed to practice in Hawaii in 1988. MR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: Okay. I don't know about Mr. Kamelamela. I don't know his background enough. But if the makers are serious about this, you know, I'm in the middle. It's an interesting place to be, but I've never really thought about how minimal the qualifications were in this section for even our current law, and I think that can be strengthened regardless. Because from what I've seen, if I practiced five years of law, I would expect it to protect this County from anything and everything, and I don't think that's enough. MS. STRANCE: Well, part of doing the job is having a good team of deputies and you know. So, this job can't be done by any one person. So, I think the ability to pull together a team is probably the most important feature. MR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: Okay, thank you, Betsy. I yield, thank you. CHR. EVANS: So those who haven't commented? Member Galimba. Member Kagiwada? MS. KAGIWADA: Alright. Thank you. A lot to think about here. Thank you to the makers for bringing this forward to get us thinking on it. I think you stated that of the over 5,000 work requests, that you've had only 300 and something requested by this body. So, that means 4,600 and something from the Administrative side; from the departments, the Major, all those guys, right? MS. STRANCE: It's an estimate, because we don't track our work requests that way. I asked for that. I don't know if it includes work requests from like the Clerk's Office or the County Auditor's Office. But it's generally accurate. MS. KAGIWADA: Okay. But that was an interesting statistic that I hadn't really thought about. But, yeah, interesting. And then, your last comment about, it's not one person, it's the whole Corporation Counsel Office that really provides these, you know, critical services for the County made me think that six years, I mean I know you're constantly and still trying to always get new attorneys and staffing up. And I just worry about the six years kind of being this more turmoil in a shorter period of time of time where people will have to constantly be staffing up again from the beginning potentially. Page 67 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 So, I like the discussion around County Council having a legal person that we can really rely on that's in our midst that can really speak to things that we're working on. I love that idea, and I hope we'll give serious thought to that. And I guess, I'm also waiting to hear from the makers what it is that they're trying to address with this. So, I'll leave it at that for now, and look forward to more information and continuing this discussion. Thank you. CHR. EVANS: Member Galimba. MS. GALIMBA: Thank you. So, I think my initial reaction to this proposal was concern. Because I do definitely see this function as administrative. And you know, I'm not a big believer in that sort of separation of powers model. So, there needs to be a really good reason to change it, which I was open to definitely hearing from the makers on that. And as I was thinking about it more, I was thinking well you know, there is definitely, something to be said for having sort of a larger group of folks making this decision, the nine versus, you know, whatever the selection committee is, maybe Administration. But then, coming back around to just being worried about concern about that the Legislative body, it would be a very strange kind of management of this department. So, as many of my colleagues have said, I think we're definitely open to looking at a different model of appointment and deliberation around that. I think that there is definitely merit to that, and sort of merit to changing the optics a little bit of, you know, the Mayor appoints the Corporation Counsel. So, you know, there's maybe some questions around that. So, perhaps some changes around the appointment model could help to alleviate that particular piece of perception. So, definitely open to that. But I think this is a bit for me overall at this point, too drastic, and I will leave it at that. CHR. EVANS: Member Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: Thanks. I think for the makers and as this bill is written, I think there seems to be some thought process around having Administration and Council on this selection panel. But I did want to speak to the legal staffer in LRB, and really in my head, that wasn't to challenge the opinions of Corporation Counsel. It was really to help maybe to reduce the workload. So, you know, items that are of interest to us, we're looking for response. Because we have deadlines. So, acknowledging that you have, you know, the better part of 4,500 other things to get to. Of course, everything is the most important one, it's ours. And we're just backed up against the deadlines. So, we're pushing hard to get a response. So that it can make the agenda. Page 68 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 So, the idea of having legal staff in LRB to help us polish off policy, I think is a solve that I think we're all looking for. And I just wanted to clarify that. And if there was an opportunity where some staffer in LRB that was our legal counsel, could even help shape up some of the four corners of arguments when we're looking at policy writing, I think that would be incredibly helpful, not only to us, but also to other deputies within the department, so that that approach is very focused, or we can identify immediately, well this is where you guys went wrong on the policy writing. I just wanted to clarify that, Judge Strance, because you know, it's not lost on me that you are sitting before a lot of talent and expertise. But we get here, because 15 people sign a signature page, and we pay $250, and we put our names on a ballot. We don't need any education. We don't have to have expertise in any area. That's what we use when we go out and ask people to put us in these seats. But then we come here and sit in these chairs, people who are well accomplished with a lot of education and really are —I'll say it, some ignorance as to what it takes for you to get here. So, anything I think we could do to help provide that legal expertise in a manner like LRB, I think would be valuable to us. But exploring this process on what would feel more like a collaboration rather than a tennis match, may have put somebody we ask questions. Again, back to that 15 signatures and $250. I think it would feel more collaborative if we did it that way. But thank you, Judge Strance. I really have continued to appreciate your guidance and expertise in navigating a lot of feelings that people have here. But have always provided a bright line of information and basis of the law. So, thank you very much. Thank you, Chair, I yield. CHR. EVANS: Member Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: There's one portion of this bill which actually does, I think, more than anyone realizes. And I always think of Mr. Chung when I see this one section that you guys put in, "The Council may, by two-thirds vote of its entire membership, my remove the Corporation Counsel from office at any time for cause." That in itself does many things. It provides the Corporation Counsel with the idea that the County Council can remove them. So, it's not administrative. It creates that nice blend of accountability and responsibility to each other, that it's a working relationship, and it lends itself to everything else that this bill is asking for. So, I would put that out to the makers. That was something Aaron (Chung) impressed and pressed the supermajority removal of Department Head versus a Mayoral removal. That in itself can do a lot to create the accountability that I think this bill is asking for in Corporation Page 69 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 Counsel and to the legislative body. Just wanted to offer that to this body in my humble opinion. Thank you. CHR. EVANS: I have a couple questions. Is there anyone else? Okay. I guess I come from a different school of thought. My experience working with attorney generals is, I've always been of the impression they're there to protect the citizens of the State, at least at the State level, that their job is to protect the citizens. So, they can push back against governors and legislators when they say they've gone too far. But I've always, since I've got here in this position, have always felt that the Legislative Branch should have their own attorney, and that their attorney is here when we're trying to develop policy and we want to get input in where we're headed and what's going on, that we're working with them to advise us. It's the Attorney General of the State who was advising the departments and the Governor, because in the end, they could advise the Governor to veto our bills and what we're trying to do. I mean, if we're trying to pass policy and the Attorney General advises the Governor, this is not right, constitutionally, it's not correct. You know, there's a problem with it. That it's not drafted correctly; it's got problems; they advise the Governor to veto it. Plus, they're always working with the department heads to make sure that they're giving that correct advice so that they can reach back into the Legislature and say, the department and everything is saying, "We don't think what you're doing is the right direction." So, to me, the check and balance was you know, at the State Legislature, we had our own attorneys. And the attorneys were always advising, and they were advising the Chairs. You know, they're advising on language and trying to give their best advice. And the Attorney General was advising the Executive Branch, and they would push back and say, no we don't. So, we would get testimony that would come through the Attorney General, through the department heads, back to the Legislature, saying, this is why we don't agree with what you're doing, and this is the law, or whatever. To me that was more of a check and balance. For me personally, I would love to see us get someone working in the Legislative Branch. They would be there really working on our policy -making and giving us their opinion. Then the departments and the Mayor weighing in with their testimony. And you sitting here, but you'd be weighing saying, we don't agree with the direction of the Legislative Branch. So, to me, there's that check and balance. I personally liked it. I'd like to see more of that. I mean, that would be the route I would want to go. Page 70 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 But if you advance this bill; if you want to look at selection, and qualifications, and removal, and stuff like that, there could be room for kind of moving that forward to having that discussion. But, I'd sure like to see us having our own in-house counsel. And that's from my personal experience. So, that's my school of thought on where I came from and what I experienced. So, I yield. I'm still the Chair. Okay, Member Inaba. MR. INABA: Just to respond generally to some of the conversation that's come up. What are we trying to solve for? It's not a pressing issue or something that's blatantly wrong. What we're trying to do is give more input to the whole process of selection our Corporation Counsel. Essentially, right now, we get who the Mayor says, and that person will stay there unless the Mayor says that he or she wants that person gone and we confirm them. But there's no way for the Council to remove a Corporation Counsel without first having initiation by the Mayor. Another thing is that we all change out every two years. We have a two-year term. You know, if Corporation Counsel isn't working out, after December 2nd of this year, there will be a new Council. So, there is opportunity for change throughout those six years. But the six years, like Council Member Kierkiewicz said, allows for a consistency that extends potentially pass Council Member and the Administration. And that's something that the intention is to reduce the politics that potentially could be played into the process of selection. And I'll go back to that idea. We've all talked about this idea of a staff attorney and in our creation of this bill, we tried to figure out how that could work too. But it always comes back to the Corporation Counsel is the Chief Legal Advisor. So, if we've come to a point where we get a legal opinion, that a bill is good from a Council staff attorney, if we had one, and we get to the point where the Corporation Counsel disagrees, we have to go with the opinion of the Corporation Counsel. They are the legal advisor of the County. So, it just allows for change. We want consistency as well past those, you know, every four-year change. So, it almost gives more consistency, but like Council Member Kdneali`i-Kleinfelder pointed out, it does just allow for that two-thirds majority, and it's hopefully to encourage accountability from the Office of Corporation Counsel to continue serving the public and the County's best interests. That was an attempt to answer all of the questions that kind of came up. But Council Member Kierkiewicz, if I missed things? MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Chair Evans, if I might? CHR. EVANS: Yes, please, Member Kierkiewicz. Page 71 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. I think there's a natural conflict and tension between the Legislative Branch and the Executive Branch. Let's just get that out of the way. And I think we struggle with the fact that, you know, we appoint a Corporation Counsel who represents the County's interests, the Mayor's interests, and then also happens to be our attorney. And there might be conflicts in a lot of those viewpoints. So, I think all of us, collectively, would like our own Corporation Counsel. I don't necessarily think living in LRB or making that a requirement of our Deputy Clerk is the answer. I think they need to be part of a larger office ecosystem. So, naturally, within Corporation Counsel. So, maybe the idea is that, you know, we are directing through a Charter amendment, a Corporation Counsel for this body. I also don't think that we are married to the idea of having this function rest within the Legislative Branch. When we take a look at Maui's Charter, the Office of Corporation Counsel is its own standalone department, and there are sections within it that serve the Administrative Branch and the Council. So, I think what we want is just a bit more of a balanced approach in appointing and holding accountable, our Chief Legal Advisor. So, what I'm hearing very clearly is folks would like to see changes to how Corporation Counsel is appointed. There, being more collaboration between the Administration and the Legislative Branch. There is hesitation with putting it all within Council's purview, so would like some feedback on whether or not folks would be open to having a department being a standalone department similar to what Maui County has. Of course, we are going to go with the most extreme level here. Because whenever the Council can wrestle more power and control for the Legislative Branch, that is something we're always going to be advocating for. So, appreciate everyone's feedback, and I think the consensus really is, what we have in the Charter is just not working, and we'd like to see bit more change, and a little bit more power that it given to the Legislative Branch in selecting who is our Corporation Counsel. CHR. EVANS: Member Inaba. MR. INABA: I just wanted to add one more thing. The topic of qualifications came up. As we know, positions across our County leadership are hard to fill. That's why we didn't add any more, you know, qualifications for the position. We kept it as it is because maybe five years isn't a lot, but five years is what we require generally across all of our department heads. And we do want to make sure we are able to capture, you know, a good net of folks who could be eligible to serve in this role. Thank you. Page 72 GOEAC-32 May 14, 2024 CHR. EVANS: Member Kimball, MS. KIMBALL: Thank you. Thanks for the continued dialogue on this. I am intrigued by the idea of standalone, want a sense from Corporation Counsel about —and I know that it was just sprung on you, but what about that model? MS. STRANCE: I would need to look at it, because our Charter sets up two branches of government, Legislative and Executive. But I don't know that Maui has an outside branch. So, I'll look at what they've done and report back. MS. KIMBALL: But my real concern, again, to reiterate is the moving of this from Executive to Legislative. And just to be clear with some of the other, you know, context, I mean this would be similar to moving the Attorney General into the Legislative Branch given your example, which I think is too much, like personally. So, you know, looking at the process of appointment; looking at the term and how the accountability happens, willing to explore that. It's just this whole movement, and I appreciate the sentiment of starting from the extremes and working to the middle on this. But you know, I think maybe there's a possibility that there's a deputy that is assigned or an assistant that is actually somebody that we hire that reports to the Corporation Counsel but lives in our office. I do have to suggest that we don't always listen to Corporation Counsel, we choose to for good reason, but I think even in the situation where we had an attorney to advise us on legislative drafting, if we brought it to the hearing and it was questioned by Corporation Counsel, we still have the authority to say, well, our attorney said it was okay and run with that. So, looking forward to the next iteration of it. Not obviously, going to support it moving forward at this point, but appreciate the dialogue, and I think there's opportunity for development of something that is a good compromise. I yield, Chair. MS. STRANCE: I'm going to get a "tape" of this hearing where you guys admit that you have to follow Corporation Counsel's advice. Sorry, just take note, that'll I'll fight back at the right time. CHR. EVANS: Member Inaba. MR. INABA: Thank you. I think, Council Member Kierkiewicz and I have a lot to off of and to bring us maybe some obviously substantial amendments. But you know some options that we can discuss at the next hearing. With that, if there's no further comment or suggestion, I'll make a motion to postpone Bill 160 to our June 0' Committee meeting. Page 73 GOEAC-32 Vote on Motion to Postpone: Recess: Reconvene: Withdraw Motion to Postpone: Vote on Bill 160: (Failed) May 14, 2024 Mr. Inaba moved to postpone Bill 160 to June 4, 2024. Seconded by Ms. Kierkiewicz. CHR. EVANS: We have a motion to postpone Bill 160 to the Jund 4 1h Committee hearing. It's been offered by Member Inaba and seconded by Member Kierkiewicz. All in favor? MR. HENRICKS: Before you call the vote, may I ask for a recess, Madame Chair? Two minutes? CHR. EVANS: We're in recess. At 7:00 p.m., the Chair called for a recess. The meeting reconvened at 7:02 p.m. CHR. EVANS: Okay, we're reconvening. We're coming out of recess, and back to Member Inaba. MR. INABA: Yes, looking at our timeline with Charter amendments and sending things to the State, we are approaching our deadline. And I would ask that we be able to move this forward to Council, and we can provide the amendments then. But if we hold it over three weeks, essentially, we're killing it because we won't be able to move it through the process. So, I'm going to withdraw my motion to postpone. Mr. Inaba withdrew his motion to postpone. CHR. EVANS: Okay, so we have a withdrawal on the motion to postpone. And we have now, a motion to move forward to Council with a favorable recommendation. That's the current motion. So, all in favor? The motion to recommend passage of Bill 160, on first reading failed by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Committee Members Inaba, Kagiwada, Kierkiewicz, and Villegas — 4. Noes: Committee Members Galimba, Kdneali'i-Kleinfelder, Kimball, and Chair Evans — 4. Absent: Committee Member Lee Loy — 1. Excused: None. (Note: Ms. Galimba voted "kanalua" then "no.") Page 74 GOEAC-32 ADJOURN- MENT: Approved: May 14, 2024 MR. HENRICKS: The motion fails. Therefore, Bill 160 forwards to Council with an unfavorable recommendation. Seeing no more business on this agenda, Chair Evans adjourned at 7:04 p.m. Ms. Cindy Ev ns� hair Committee o qGernmental Operations and External ffairs CE/dt 12-Y-/2- (Date) Page 75