HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN FC 2024/09/03 (2022-2024)Committee on Finance
43rl Session
Hawai'i County Building
25 Aupuni Street
Hilo, Hawaii 96720
September 3, 2024
CALL TO The regular meeting of the Committee on Finance was called to order at
ORDER: 2:31 p.m., in the Council Chambers, Hilo, by Mr. Kdneali'i-Kleinfelder,
Chair.
I-melawwo
Present: Mr. Matt Kdneali'i-Kleinfelder, Chair
Ms. Cindy Evans, Vice Chair
Mr. Holeka Goro Inaba, Member (came in later)
Ms. Jenn Kagiwada, Member
Ms. Ashley L. Kierkiewicz, Member
Ms. Heather L. Kimball, Member
Ms. Rebecca Villegas, Member
Absent & Excused: Ms. Michelle M. Galimba, Member
Ms. Susan L. K. Lee Loy, 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.)
COMMUNI- The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business,
CATIONS: Communications.
Comm. 12.38: REPORT OF FUND TRANSFERS AUTHORIZED: JUNE 16 — 30,2024 AND
JULY 16 — 31, 2024
From Controller Kay Oshiro, dated August 9, 2024.
Vote on Comm. 12.38
(Filed)
Ms. Kimball moved to close file on Comm. 12.38.
Seconded by Mr. Inaba and was carried by the
following voice vote:
Ayes: Committee Members Evans, Inaba,
Kagiwada, Kierkiewicz, Kimball,
Villegas, and Chair Kdneali'i-Kleinfelder — 7.
Noes: None.
Absent: Committee Members Galimba and Lee Loy — 2.
Excused: None.
FC-42
September 3, 2024
Comm. 139.4: THIRD QUARTER CLAIMS REPORT: JANUARY I — MARCH 31, 2024
From Claims Investigator/Adjustor Clifford D. Victorine III, dated
August 13, 2024, transmitting the above report pursuant to Section 2-9 of the
Hawaii County Code.
Vote on Comm. 139.4: Ms. Kimball moved to close file on Comm. 139.4.
(Filed) Seconded by Mr. Inaba and was carried by the
following voice vote:
Ayes: Committee Members Evans, Inaba,
Kagiwada, Kierkiewicz, Kimball,
Villegas, and Chair Kdneali'i-Kleinfelder — 7.
Noes: None.
Absent: Committee Members Galimba and Lee Loy — 2.
Excused: None.
Comm. 139.5: FOURTH QUARTER CLAIMS REPORT: APRIL I — JUNE 30,2024
From Claims Investigator/Adjustor Clifford D. Victorine 111, dated
August 13, 2024, transmitting the above report pursuant to Section 2-9 of the
Hawaii County Code.
Motion to Close File: Ms. Kimball moved to close file on Comm. 139.5.
Seconded by Mr. Inaba.
CHR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: Discussion on the motion? Council
Member Inaba.
MR. INABA: Yeah. Just a quick question for the Hawaiian Telcom item. This is
going back over two years so just wanting to understand a little bit on the timeline
for this one.
CHR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: Please introduce yourself.
MR. INABA: Good afternoon, Mr. Victorine.
(Note: At this time, Claims Investigator/Adjustor Clifford D. Victorine
111, came forward to address the members of the Committee.)
MR. VICTORINE: Good afternoon. Cliff Victorine, Claims Investigator.
Corporation Counsel. To get to that question, it really was on their part. They
had a collection group that was collected on behalf of them and the information
that we needed seems to not be getting back and forth, the correct information
I've asked them for; information for Hawaiian Telcom. They want to have a
check written to Hawaiian Telcom but sent to them. They just sent us information
for them. So, basically, I started jumping in and calling Hawaiian Telcom direct
instead of dealing with the collection agency. And even though it took a little
Page 2
FC-42 September 3, 2024
while to get done, I finally got in touch with the parent company for Hawaiian
Telcom up in Chicago and the head of the, I guess, the security department there
was able to work with me. So, it took a while to get through to get to them, but it
was their side given us the wrong information continuously even though we'd ask
for corrections.
MR. INABA: Thank you. And this was in the amount for, what was that, like a
replacement or what was the resolution in the end if we're allowed to ask that?
MR. VICTORINE: Yeah. That is the basically the replacement value of the pole.
MR. INABA: Okay. Thank you so much, Chair. I yield.
CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Council Member Inaba.
Seeing no further discussion. Thank you for being here today, Mr. Victorine.
Motion is on the floor to close file on Comm. 139.5, all in favor?
Vote on Comm. 139.5: The motion to close file on Comm. 139.5 was carried by
Filed the following voice vote:
Ayes: Committee Members Evans, Inaba,
Kagiwada, Kierkiewicz, Kimball,
Villegas, and Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder — 7.
Noes: None.
Absent: Committee Members Galimba and Lee Loy — 2.
Excused: None.
CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Resolutions, please.
ORDER OF The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business,
RESOLUTIONS: Order of Resolutions.
Res. 593-24: AUTHORIZES THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH
THE STATE OF HAWAI`I DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
Allows for the receipt of $925,000 of federally -derived funds to support opioid
remediation activities.
Reference: Comm.993
Intr. by: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder (B/R)
Motion to Approve: Ms. Villegas moved to recommend adoption of
Res. 593-24. Seconded by Ms. Kagiwada.
CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Council Member Villegas, you want to say
anything?
Page 3
FC-42
September 3, 2024
MS. VILLEGAS: Yes. Wow. It's really great to see this coming to fruition.
This opportunity was brought to Council during my first term in office and at the
time it was, people weren't so sure about it and questioned the viability of there
being responsibility with the opioid manufacturers for this epidemic. And in the
last six years, we have only seen, unfortunately, that grow now with introduction
of fentanyl and the black market use of that drug. But I just want to thank the
administration and all those in the legal team that worked closely with the state
and federal government to ensure that this money comes to our County. We are
in dire need of the resources to help with addiction recovery and a lot of the other
extenuating circumstances, just one of them being houselessness that often comes
out of addiction.
And for the community, I just want to read this because I feel that it is really
powerful, and it gives our community an idea of the resources that will be coming
our way. "In 2021 and 2022, a serious of settlements were finalized to resolve
lawsuits against pharmaceutical companies related to the opioid epidemic. Major
distributors and manufacturers agreed to pay billions of dollars as part of a
national opioid settlement. Participating states and local governments are
expected to receive a total of $26 billion over 18 years. The State of Hawaii
anticipates receiving approximately $78 million with the County of Hawai`i's
direct share estimated at $2.1 million over the same period of 18 years. The
$925,000, is the current balance available to the County of Hawai`i."
I am deeply grateful for your continued work. Director Adams, I'm sure this took
some continued relationship building and advocating for our County to get this
sum, and I look forward to learning how it gets distributed to do the most good for
the most people and to mitigate so many of the devasting challenges that our
people have gone through. So, this is a mahalo. This is an encouragement to our
community, this is gratitude to this Council for voting to participate in this
settlement, and thus we are in line to receive these funds and future funds. With
that, I yield.
CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Council Member Villegas.
Council Member Kagiwada, and then I'll go Evans.
MS. KAGIWADA: Thanks, Chair. I'm wondering if we can get R&D (Research
and Development) up here for a sec. And while they're coming up, I'll also just
add my thanks to working on this settlement, funding money, and distributing it.
along with Council Member Villegas, you know, I represent one of the areas with
one of the biggest homeless populations and also concur that opioid addiction has
a huge part in helping us trying to figure out this puzzle. So, thank you for being
here. So just for clarification, this is the second payout to our County of these
funds. Is it the final payout of the funds or is there more to come?
(Note: At this time, Research and Development Director Douglass Adams
came forward to address the members of the Committee.)
Page 4
FC-42
September 3, 2024
MR. ADAMS: Thank you, Council Member Kagiwada. Doug Adams, Research
and Development. There were two different setups in terms of the funds that are
coming. The initial was funding that the County had as a part of a settlement. So,
money coming to the County for the County's use. This is the state's money that
is now being allocated to the County. Confusing to me too, first time I heard it.
This is not the only amount that is going to be coming but this is by far the largest
amount that will be coming. Over the next 18 years, we anticipate the amounts
being more in the $70,000 to $80,000 a year kind of range.
MS. KAGIWADA: Okay. Thank you. And are you able or maybe your staff
here able to talk a little bit about what the plan is for this funding at this time.
MR. ADAMS: Yeah. So, I should first of all say thanks to Council Member
Villegas for highlighting my role in this, which was absolutely nothing. So,
Yoshi Otake, who is our Community Well-being Specialist in the department and
Tim Hansen, who is obviously Executive Assistant to the Mayor, really worked
this issue at the state level to make sure that we were identified. You know, they
worked with Department of Health, the AG's (Attorney General) office making
sure that this MOA (Memorandum of Agreement) is squared away so that we can
do what we need to do with that. And with that, I will turn it over to Yoshi.
MS. KAGIWADA: Thank you. Just push the button there. There you go. Got it.
(Note: At this time, Research and Development Economic Development
Specialist Yoshi Otake came forward to address the members of the
Committee.)
MR. OTAKE: Yoshi Otake, Economic Development Specialist from Research
and Development. So, Tim and I are working together to actually gather
stakeholders and discuss, you know, the use of the funds. So, we have not
determined the best use of the funds, but that conversation is actually ongoing.
And this is a big chunk of the funds that's available currently, but we're
expecting, you know, less than $100,000 or so annual for the next, at this point,
15 years or so.
MS. KAGIWADA: Okay. And does this have to be allocated and spent in a
certain amount of time?
MR. OTAKE: No. Not necessary. But we are definitely looking into spending
it, you know, as soon as we are ready to.
MS. KAGIWADA: Okay. Thank you. And is there a process for people that
might be interested? Is there an application or is it going to be more the
administration kind of working with the community groups to figure out where
the administration thinks it'll be best used?
Page 5
FC-42
September 3, 2024
MR. OTAKE: I think we're gathering the information right now and then most
likely as a result of this conversation, we'll probably be releasing either an RFP
(Request for Proposal) or whatever that complies with the County and state.
MS. KAGIWADA: Okay. Great.
MR.ADAMS: I would just add, it doesn't necessarily need to bean RFP because
these are not federal funds. These are settlement funds as is our understanding.
RFP's an appropriate way to procure. It's not that it wouldn't necessarily be that,
but there isn't the federal funding requirement that we see when we use federal
funds.
MS. KAGIWADA: Okay. So, there may be some simplified process that you
can use. Okay. Thank you so much for answering my questions. I look forward
to seeing how we can assist our community with these funds that are direly
needed. Thank you both so much. I yield.
CHR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Council Member Evans.
MS. EVANS: What stuck out to me is how little $2.1 (million) of $78 million.
So, my question is, how did they make a decision about that dollar amount? Was
it based on government consensus based on poverty? What were the numbers that
the Department of Health (DOH) used? Because I can tell you, we have a lot of
poverty. We have a huge amount of domestic violence associated with opioids;
we have homeless. There's all kinds of stuff going on the fentanyl taskforce. Just
want to know why so little because to me, I want to get as much as we can get of
$78 million.
MR. ADAMS: Yeah. So, Council Member, the $2.1 million, the decision was
made at a national level. In other words, our state I'm sure was involved in
negotiations with the national settlement folks. The determination of how the
state ended up with $2.1 out of $28 billion is not something we were privy to.
MS. EVANS: No. $78 million went to the state. Our County got $2.1 million.
MR. OTAKE: So, that $2.1 million is an allocation that the County was able to
receive specifically. But for instance, the example from the tax force and that was
$478,000 or so. That was the state allocation. So, the state decided that they
would like to use their funds for the County. So, $2.1 million is funds that we
have more discretion over. But there might be additional funds that the state
might be able to also allocate to each county as well.
MS. EVANS: So, the decision of how to disburse $78 million is a formula.
Potentially, there's a formula that would've divvied up amongst the County and
then Department of Health left a bot of money for them and then they will set
priorities and then basically we could apply potentially for some of that funding?
Page 6
FC-42
September 3, 2024
MR. OTAKE: There was a methodology that they used that I just can tell you
exactly what that methodology was. But I believe that in the long term the state
might be able to allocate additional funds from their own allocation.
MS. EVANS: And the only reason I'm saying this, and don't take it as a
negative. It's a positive in the sense that we as a Council can write our state
legislature, the senate and the representative, and say, go to the Department of
Health, get more money for our County for these different areas. If in fact the
Department of Health has discretionarily held back let's say $50 million, say for
the priorities of x, y, and z, under these categories of x, y, and z, so then we can
tell our state legislature to get "x" amount of that $60 million or $50 million, or
whatever, that we want it to come to this County for these specific reasons. So,
there might be an opportunity for us to get a whole lot more than the $2.1 million,
and that's what I was looking at because $78 million is a lot of money. And I'm
just trying to figure out how do we get more of the pot of that money, right? So,
that's my thought behind my questioning.
MR. ADAMS: We can go back to DOH and find out about whether there is was
any particular type of rhyme or rhythm for their decisions.
MS. EVANS: Let us fight for more. I think we just fight for our fair share. I'm
willing to fight for more. Thank you.
CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: You yield, Council Member Evans?
MS. EVANS: I'm done. Thanks.
CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. Thank you. Council Member
Inaba.
MR. INABA: Thank you. Just wanting to make sure I understand the B-52. So,
it says the first MOA was associated with the state's directed share of the funds.
And then this MOA is associated with the County's directed share of the funds.
They're both around opioids. So, just wondering procedurally why are we
needing more agreements and are we, for every new type of funding source, or do
we not just want to have a continued agreement that kind of covers all matters
related to opioids with the Department of Health because it's the same two
entities.
MR. OTAKE: So, I think there were only going to be two MOA's for the entire
settlement funds for the state. It's just that for the County's share, so there has to
be two MOA's for the County's share and state share. They're both part of the
$78 million.
MR. ADAMS: The other piece of this is that for the County piece, whatever the
first amount of funds that we received that we did the MOA on, the use of those
Page 7
FC-42
September 3, 2024
funds is different in terms of the restrictions than this use. And so, the MOA's
had to be different because of the way the settlement was written and what we
could use the different pots for. And so, that I think is probably as clear an
explanation about why two different MOA's.
MR. OTAKE: Yeah. And I would also add that the first MOA was intended
specifically for taskforce, which is different from this use. We are looking at a
little more general use of funds for opioid remediation activities.
MR. INABA: In both cases though, the funds have come down through the state,
right?
MR. ADAMS: That's correct.
(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. If
the Council wants an explanation for how this settlement fund is set up, I can
provide more information. So, when these lawsuits were filed, the County filed
its own lawsuit and sued a number of opioid manufacturers. At some point, the
state filed its own lawsuit. And then when a nationwide —there's two different
nationwide settlements that were reached and built into those were incentives to
have the state manage the funds so that there won't so many direct recipients of
funds. The formula's for the funds, as Doug said, was set up at the national level.
And when I say incentives, there were financial incentives if the states were able
to get the counties to sign on to having the state manage the fund. And so, we
agreed to participate in that because of the incentives.
Having said that, we also wanted to make sure that the County would be able to
self -direct some of the funds. So, if we had gone to the lawsuit and settled outside
of the formula, then we wouldn't have gotten the same percentage of money, but
it would've come straight to us. So, we agreed to have the state manage the fund.
It's not necessarily the Department of Health. Part of this settlement agreement
set up a taskforce and I think if you wanted a presentation on that, Tim Hansen
might be a good person for it. But that taskforce has done needs assessment
across the state. And so, it identifies needs statewide, some of which would be on
this island. So, residential treatment, for example, isn't identified, but specific
need that isn't just we see as our own need, but the state sees as its need. So,
when you see the term county directed funds, that's that portion that, Council
Member Evans, you think this is kind of small, but the entire state and our County
also benefits from the state directed funds. So, there's kind of two different
expenditure processes. Tim, I believe, is our County Representative on this
statewide board that is made up of a number of professionals across the state that
we negotiated and identified to help identify the needs of the entire state. So,
when you see this, the County directed, that portion that was negotiated that the
Page 8
FC-42
September 3, 2024
County can say, this is how we want to spend it. And then there's the state, and
the County still has a say in how that is spent because we're on the board, but
money will still come directly to the County through that source.
MR. INABA: Got it. Okay. Thank you for that background information. And
then just on the Finance side, we're taking money in via the resolution and the
accompanying bill. Do these line items currently already exist in the budget? No.
Okay. Yeah, so if we can just get some information. We're creating new line
items and then are those types of line items lines where the funds stay in that line
item in previous or in future fiscal years where the funds might not be completely
expended this fiscal year?
(Note: At this time, Managing Director Deanna Sako came forward to
address the members of the Committee.)
MS. SAKO: Correct. Sorry. Tim couldn't be here today, so I'm his replacement
which is not always a good thing. But there are similar opioid line items in the
budget, but that is for the money we received from the state. So, this is now the
County portion, and it will be carried forward until it's spent. But as we get new
appropriations, it will be added to the budget and that line item. But as Yoshi
said, it's going to be more in the 70, 80, 100 thousand dollar range each year.
This is by far going to be our biggest allocation.
MR. INABA: Okay. And that, to be clear, the carry forward remains in that
specific line item.
MS. SAKO: In that specific line item so that everybody can see how it's being
spent, and we'll be tracking it over the 18 years that we'll have the funding.
MR. INABA: Perfect. Thank you. Chair, I yield.
CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Council Member Inaba.
Council Member Villegas.
MS. VILLEGAS: Sure. Just a quick little bit in here that might shed a little more
light. This last paragraph says, "the spending must comply with the Hawaii
MOA strategy, which reflects the national opioid settlement restrictions under
three categories of treatment, prevention, and other initiatives." And while other
initiatives are a pretty broad term, treatment and prevention, I think, are key here
and what I'm interested to hear your team comes up with and best ways to
allocate and spend these resources. And I officially rescind my thank you for Mr.
Adams and give it to you. Thank you for all your work on this. I know this is a
dance, but I am just grateful to see this coming through. And if I remember,
correct me if I'm wrong, Judge Strance, but not all municipalities throughout the
country participated. Like we had to vote as a Council to participate, which gave
us access to being a beneficiary of these funds at some point. And so, that's just
Page 9
FC-42 September 3, 2024
another part I want to point out because that was passed at the time and I'm
deeply grateful for that or we would've missed out on this. So, I yield.
CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Okay, seeing no further
discussion. Thinking back to our meeting, how I asked Rebecca to read this one
in because she fought for this, and she was a voice for our community as well as
for our government to go after these funds. And I remember her arguing with
different levels of our administration at the time because she saw the importance
of this. And it wasn't a unanimous pass. Actually, it was a six, two Council vote.
Council Members Lee Loy and Council Member Tim Richards voting against the
measure to enter into legislation. So, to see it come to this point and to be
accepting $2.1 million over the next decade or more for our County just because
we passed a resolution really does highlight the importance of something unique
that comes along and seeing the importance. And you did, Council Member
Villegas. So, thank you for doing that for us. Thank you. So, good discussion.
Thank you, Mr. Adams. Thank you, Mr. Otake. Thank you very much. We do
have the motion on the floor to forward Resolution 593-24 to Council with a
favorable recommendation. All in favor?
Vote on Res. 593-24: The motion to recommend adoption of Res. 593-24
(Approved) was carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Committee Members Evans, Inaba,
Kagiwada, Kierkiewicz, Kimball,
Villegas, and Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder — 7.
Noes: None.
Absent: Committee Members Galimba and Lee Loy — 2.
Excused: None.
BILLS FOR The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business,
ORDINANCES: Bills for Ordinances.
Bill 196: AMENDS ORDINANCE NO. 24-32, AS AMENDED, THE OPERATING
BUDGET FOR THE COUNTY OF HAWAI`I FOR THE FISCAL YEAR
ENDING JUNE 30 2025
Appropriates revenues in Federal Grants — Opioid Settlement Funds account
($925,000); and appropriates the same to the Opioid Settlement Funds account to
support opioid remediation activities.
Reference: Comm.993
Intr. by: Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder (B/R)
Page 10
FC-42 September 3, 2024
Vote on Bill 196: Ms. Villegas moved to recommend passage of Bill 196 on
(Approved) first reading. Seconded by Mr. Inaba and carried by the
following voice vote:
Ayes: Committee Members Evans, Inaba,
Kagiwada, Kierkiewicz, Kimball,
Villegas, and Chair Kdneali'i-Kleinfelder — 7.
Noes: None.
Absent: Committee Members Galimba and Lee Loy — 2.
Excused: None.
Bill 197: AMENDS ORDINANCE NO. 24-32, AS AMENDED, THE OPERATING
BUDGET FOR THE COUNTY OF HAWAIJ FOR THE FISCAL YEAR
ENDING JUNE 30,2025
Increases revenues in the State Grants — Career Criminal Program account
($55,034); and appropriates the same to the Career Criminal Prosecution Program
account, for a total appropriation of $546,168. Funds would be used to support
nine positions in the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney.
Reference: Comm. 994
Intr. by: Mr. Kdneali'i-Kleinfelder (B/R)
Motion to Approve: Mr. Inaba moved to recommend passage of Bill 197 on
first reading. Seconded by Ms. Kimball.
CHR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: Any discussion? Council Member
Kimball.
MS. KIMBALL: Yeah. I just have a procedural question to Deputy Director.
Does this not have an accompanying resolution; is that not necessary or did we?
MR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: That is a good question, Council Member
Kimball. There is a good answer as well.
(Note: At this time, Finance Deputy Director Aaron Brown came forward
to address the members of the Committee.)
MR. BROWN: It is a good question. 1, unfortunately, do not have that answer at
this second but I can follow up on that for you. I'm not sure if that had come
previously or that is something about timing that maybe the Prosecuting
Attorney's Office was considering. So, I'll look into that for you guys.
MS. KIMBALL: Okay. Great. Yeah, I don't recall that we saw a resolution on
this but look forward to seeing that come forward. Thank you.
Page I I
FC-42 September 3, 2024
CHR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Thank you, Deputy Director.
Okay, with that we have a motion on the floor. All in favor?
Vote on Bill 197: The motion to recommend passage of Bill 197 on first
(Approved) reading was carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Committee Members Evans, Inaba,
Kagiwada, Kierkiewicz, Kimball,
Villegas, and Chair Kdneali'l-Klelnfelder — 7.
Noes: None.
Absent: Committee Members Galimba and Lee Loy — 2.
Excused: None.
ADJOURN- There being no further business on our agenda today, Chair Kdneali'i-Kleinfelder
MENT: adjourned the meeting at 3:03 p.m. Thank you very much.
CHR. KANEALI'l-KLEINFELDER: Thank you.
Approved:
MK/tk
f 0 121Z q
(Date) '
Page 12