Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN GOEAC 2025/03/18 (2024-2026) DRAFT Committee on Governmental Operations and External Affairs 6th Session West Hawaii Civic Center 74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Highway, Building A Kailua-Kona, Hawaii March 18, 2025 CALL TO The regular meeting of the Committee on Governmental Operations and ORDER: External Affairs was called to order at 9:01 a.m., in the Council Chambers, Kailua-Kona, by Ms. Jenn Kagiwada, Chair. ROLL CALL: Present: Ms. Jenn Kagiwada, Chair Mr. Matt Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Vice Chair Mr. James E. Hustace, Member Mr. Holeka Goro Inaba,Member Ms. Heather L. Kimball,Member(via videoconference from Hilo) Mr. Dennis "Fresh" Onish , Member Ms. Rebecca Villegas, Member Absent& Excused: Ms. Michelle M. Galimba, Member Ms, Ashley L. Kierkiewicz, 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: The following individuals registered to speak and came forward when called by the Chair: Armando J. Rodriguez: Res. 74-25 (Comm. 125), comment. Victoria Magana Ledesma: Res. 74-25 (Comm. 125), comment. Shawn Maile Na Koa: Res. 74-25 (Comm. 125), in opposition. Cory Harden: Res. 74-25 (Comm. 125), comment. Sandy Ma: Res. 74-25 (Comm. 125), comment. GOEAC-6 March 18,2025 Phil Barnes: Res. 74-25 (Comm. 125), in opposition. Rose Bautista: Res. 74-25 (Comm. 125), comment. Ruth Robinson: Res. 74-25 (Comm. 125), in opposition. Liza Ryan Gill: Res. 74-25 (Comm. 125), comment. Patti Cook: Res. 74-25 (Comm. 125), in opposition. CHR. KAGIWADA: Thank you for all the testifiers this morning. Alright, we're going to go ahead and take Resolution 74-25 first, and then,we'll take our next item. So, if you could please read in thdt'item, Mr. Clerk. Change Order As directed by the Chair and with no objection from the Council Members, of Business: the following item was taken out of order: ORDER OF The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, RESOLUTIONS: Order of Resolutions. Res. 74-25: AUTHORIZES THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENTS WITH FEDERAL AND STATE PARTNERS TO SUPPORT THEIR CONTINUED COOPERATION WITH THE HAWAI`I POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR THE SAFETY OF THE COUNTY OF HAWAI`I Authorizes the Police Department to enter into two agreements with the Department of Homeland Security relating to immigration and customs enforcement and one agreement with the Federal Bureau of Investigations relating to the Safe Streets Task Force. Reference: Comm. 125 Intr. by: Council Member Kagiwada(B/R) Postponed: February 18, 2025 (Note: There is a motion by Council Member Inaba, seconded by Council Member Galimba, to adopt Res. 74-25.) and Comm. 125.1: From Council Member Jennifer Kagiwada, dated February 13, 2025, transmitting two Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) between the Hawaii Police Department and the United States Department of Homeland Security and Homeland Security Investigations for Council's consideration and action. Page 2 GOEAC-6 March 18,2025 and Comm. 125.2: From Council Member Jennifer Kagiwada, dated February 13, 2025, transmitting a Memorandum of Understanding between the Hawaii Police Department and the Federal Bureau of Investigation Honolulu Safe Streets Task Force for Council's consideration and action. CHR. KAGIWADA: Thank you, Mr. Clerk. I want to invite our Chief of Police and our Assistant Chief to please come up. And while they're coming up, I just want to reiterate that some of the testifiers said thank you for your service. I know it's been a very challenging week. I think I can speak for everybody up here that we are very much thinking of the family of the officer and hoping that they are getting all the care and support they need to heal'from the incident. So, I would like you folks to go ahead. And Chief if you want to talk about this, I mean, I do want to mention one'more time, a process just for the public, which is, this is submitted by me by request. And that means that only Council Members submit items for our agenda. So, when somebody from the Administration or department needs something put forward, usually the person who is chairing that committee will put it forward for them by request ,So, I want to make this very clear this is coming from our Hawaii Police Department. And so, I want to give you a chance to talk aboutthis resolution. Thank you. Go ahead Chief. (Note: At this time, Hawaii Police'Dei partment Chief Moszkowicz and Assistant Chief Sherry Bird, came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. NMOSZKOWICZ: Thank you very much, Council Member. First of all, thank you for the thoughts and comments about the incident that happened over the weekend. Just by very briefly; a 30-second version, I've talked to the officer a couple times.` e's in very good spirits. He's expected to make a full recovery and return to work eventually, whatever that might look like. So, thank you very much to you and the other testifiers and members of the community for the outpouring of support and for the understanding when we have to disrupt things that are going on in terms of the manhunt for Mr. Lucrisia. Anyway, so, thank you again for the opportunity to testify, you know, about these MOUs and about the resolution requesting the Mayor be authorized to sign them. As a starting point, I think it's important to understand that the Hawaii Police Department has authority to do things because of the documents that are in place. So, give you some examples: The Police Department has the right to arrest people because the Hawaii Revised Statutes has a section that describes how that should take effect. Page 3 GOEAC-6 March 18,2025 We have the right to enforce State Criminal Laws because we're established as a Police Department in a specific way, and that authority comes again directly from the Hawaii Revised Statutes. We also have the authority to enforce the County Code because the County Charter and the County Code imparts into the Police Department, and me and the people that work for the Police Department who have sworn the authority to conduct that enforcement. Sorry, got a little ahead of myself on my explanation; also, I apologize for my remaining cold symptoms, which you know, my cough is going to come back any minute. So, I think it's important to recognize that because we don't have any authority that's not expressively given to us somehow. ,So, I definitely appreciate the concerns of a lot of the testifiers, that you know, one of the terms used was a 287(g) designation, right? There's been other mention about the police and how community members, and advocates, and testifiers; and me, don't want,the Police Department to be involved in immigration enforcement. That's not our role. And you know, to the last couple testifiers, I'm seriously scribbling notes of all the things that I agreed with. You know, we're not trained for that;we don't have staff for that. That's not our role. We have no authority to do that. Another thing we have no authority to do, and all that immigration enforcement that's been conducted by ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement), and Homeland Security, and FBI(Federal Bureau of Investigation), and all the Federal partners; and agencies with the 287(g) designations, which we do not have is under Title 8 of U.S. Code. So, Title 8 is a section that talks about immigration enforcemeut�,and the right to do civil immigration enforcement, criminal immigration enforcement;'conduct deportations. That's all contained within Title 8. Police departments by default, have no U.S. Code Title 8 authority. We do not have any U.S:Code Title 8 authority. But what's useful for us as a police department specifically, in terms of focusing on the most dangerous in our community. The people that are bringing drugs into our community. What's useful for us is authority under other titles in the U.S. Code. So, again, as a default, a regular Hawaii Police Department officer. Any officer who has no additional designation cannot enforce Federal law. We can enforce County law. Because of the Charter and the County Code we can enforce State law and because of the Hawaii State Constitution and the Hawaii Revised Statutes. We're not entitled to enforce any type of Federal law including Title 8. What has developed over time is the relationship between certain fellow law enforcement agencies and local State law enforcement agencies where these Federal Page 4 GOEAC-6 March 18,2025 law enforcement agencies have the authority, if everyone agrees, to allow law enforcement people in other agencies. For example, let's start with the FBI. So, the FBI has the authority under their scope of authority to let us, the Hawaii Police Department enforce certain Federal laws. And the mechanism to do that is to create a MOU and to designate certain specific officers. Those specific officers get additional background clearance by the Federal partners. They receive additional training by the Federal partner to conduct enforcement on specific federal laws. Then they receive a designation as TFO or Taskforce Officers. So, these Federal Taskforces is where the whole idea is that we're working together. The Police Department, the State Department of Law Enforcement, and the other counties; the Federal Partners all working together on targeting these large stale problems. The most violent people in the community. The people that are importing drugs into the community. The people who are conducting human trafficking in the community. There are very few really powerful State laws against those things. There are amazing powerful Federal laws that allow us to conduct investigations; use federal investigatve tools; make arrests and prosecute offenders under the Federal system. And that prosecution in thatprocess allows those offenders to receive actual real tangible long-term penalties that`keep,them out of our communities for an extended period of time at the expesne of the Federal Government. So, if ATaskforce officer makes an arrest for a robery that involved some sort of interstate commerce, for instance.. That case is prosecuted by a Unites States attorney,and that'defendent is sentenced.. That person is going to be sent to Federal prison and will serve the time there., So, from a State perspective, we save prosecution'resources; we save prison resources. And we do have with a very small investment, asmall number of officers who have this authority to work with the taskforce. So, to two of the three MOUs, the first one again. We'll talk about the FBI MOU is one that's been in place for a very long time. Some hold decades to my knowledge. Again, the idea is to refresh it; to have me the point of contact as opposed to a chief who may be retired. And the other change in the FBI MOU is there's some updated information in there about bodycam footage. So,previous versions of the MOU with the FBI didn't have language about bodycams because bodycams weren't around in a real full swing use. So, now the FBI want to make sure that the signatories of this MOU in addition to the other requirements that it will provide a limited amount of officers at our discresion. They are background checked and receive Federal authority. Page 5 GOEAC-6 March 18,2025 Then what happens at these investigations? That person remains under our authority at the Police Department where the Federal authorities are not in command of this officer. They act independently. All that is spelt out in the MOU. The two updates of this particular version of the FBI MOU is now there's language in there about bodycam footage. That taskforce officer is from my department and have bodycam footage of something they're doing as a Taskforce officer, then we are agreeing to work the Federal agency to facilitate what happens with that bodycam footage. And then the other changes are the point of contact and the new effective date. The two MOUs with HSI(Homeland Security Investigations), The first one, again creates the authority for us to have Taskforce,officers who can act under Title 19 of the U.S. Code to help conduct federal investitgations. These federal investigations are limited to the authority that's listed in the MOU. In fact, the MOU specifically includes language that says, and I'm reading right from the first page, Number 3. It says, pursuant to United States Code, customs officers, which is a designation for these TFO's are authorized to enforce the full range of federal offense: However, in designating customs officers exempted, which is this TFO. HSI is'not conveying the authority to' enforce administrative violations of immigrtion law. So, the MOU is very clear that in,no way do our TFO officers with HSI have any type of Title 8 authority. Then the final MOU talks about leasing office space. So, we have had HSI officers in our office space for five years at least according to Assistant Chief Bird; before I gothere. That's why I had to pan for the expert info here. o, what that1ooks like is this: There are two HSI officers who spend about half or a little more than half of their time here. And they're back and forth between here and the neighbor islands and Oahu working on Taskforce operations. So, that could be drug importation that's going into Maui. It could be a fugitive on the loose on Kauai; it could be somebody flying into the Honolulu Airport in Honolulu. So, I would say an average with two total full-time equivalent people, there's probably about one person here most of the time. They've done a lot, because'they're kind of bouncing around the whole state. So, what that looks like logistically and physically, is that in our—we have two buildings in the Hilo station, right, two main buildings. One is the Administration building, that's where my office is; that's where Records is. If you don't know where to go, that's probably where you come. Page 6 GOEAC-6 March 18,2025 Then, the other building is the Patrol building. And the Patrol building, on the ground floor, houses our patrol officers. So, that's where the old detention center use to be before we built the new one, kind of next door. It's where the Patrol Division in South Hilo is. It's where the officers park their cars, their motorized cars around the building. And there's like a squadroom there; there's a report-writing area. There are clerks, there's evidence. Our crime lab is on the first floor of this building, and the building is secure. On the upstairs part of the building is where our investigative unit sits. So, there's a secure office that houses our Criminal Investigations Section. There's a secure office the houses our Juvinile Aid Section, which investigates any kind of domestic related felony office or anything involving juveniles. Thenthere's a secure location that houses our vice office. So, inside the secured building on the second floor, inside the Vice offices there are two desks where these two agents have their computers. And then there's also, I think a file cabinet that they can keep their own'evidence and information and papers in that secured. So, from what I understand and my reading of the MOUs, what MOU does simply is refresh me as the point of contact; establishes a new MOU date. And continues this formal relationship where these two HSI officers have a seat in our Vice section. What they're doing a significantportion of the time is when they're here, is relating to where they're sitting, right? They're not in the Criminal Investigation Section or the Juvinile Aid section. They're„specifically in the Vice section, because that's where we have a lot of use for, and,a lot of partnership with HSI, specifically on Hawai`i Island is drug interjection:and preventing drugs from coming into the island. And when there are people here who are dealing, depending on the size, quantity and amount, we can go from having a State case, if we're at an ounce or pound of Met to the Federal case, if we have five or ten or 15 pounds of Met. Again, the benefit of the Federal case is real incarceration time. And it gets that person whoever that suspect is, away from the island for a significant amount of time to protect the rest of the people in the community. When,flook at these MOUs and I listen to the testimony, I actually agree with a lot of it; a signficant portion of it. The parts that I don't agree with are just diversions to not pass the MOUs. I think there's a lot of process to understanding to what the MOUs are or are not. I would agree with Patti Cook, it is difficult to find on the website. I found it; I see that it's there. And Mr. Rodriguez, I think, said it very well. He said, a lot of people believe what they're told. Page 7 GOEAC-6 March 18,2025 So, that's why I appeciate the opportunity to come here and explain to you what the MOUs are and what they say. And answer any questions. They are certainly legal douments, right? They limit the rights and the responsibilities of parties. It's a similar agreement between our department and the Federal partners. Subject to a 30-day withdrawal from either side. Here's what we're going to do. Here's what you're going to do. Here's the relationship. Here's the authority. Like I said, they require office space. Where HSI works? They're in the Vice Section. They also established, like I said, aTFO position.,for the Hawaii Police Department to work with HSI investigators and establish TFO poisitions for HPD officers to work with the Federal Bureau of Investigation while specifically excluding Title 8 authority. Again, what they're not, they're certainly not an'entree to this 287(g)relationship. That would require some sort of additional agreement that I as a the Chief will tell you, I'm not interested in. So, as long as I'm here, you've got my word that we're not going to entertain a 287(g) relationship. We're not interested it it. And for a lot of the reasons that the testifiers said. We don't have the training for it; we don't have the staffing for it. We're notinterested in it. It's not our role, and we don't want it to be our role. The other thug it's not, is it's not any type of ability or permission to conduct the immigration enforement. Thatsimply doesn't exist. It doesn't exist by the Hawaii Revised Statutes or the U.S. Constitution or anywhere in the U.S. Code, or the County,Charter or any of these MOUs So, I understand the anxiety, I certainly do. I agree With a vastmajority of it. But at the same time, I think it's important to desribe whatthese MOUs are and what they would do, and what they wouldn't do. And then certainly to answer any questions that you folks may have about the MOUs themselves. CHR. KAGIWADA: Thank you so much, Chief Moszkowicz. And I want to open it up to my colleagues. We have Chief and Assistant Chief here. We also have the president of the Hawaii Coalition for Immigrant Rights; Liza Ryan Gill is on Zoom if we have any questions for her. And we have our Corporation Counsel Renee Schoen here. So, if you have any questions for any of these folks or just want to make comments, please go ahead. Council Member Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, the floor is yours. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Chair. Thank you for being here, Chief. Thank you to the testifiers. Thank you to everybody for showing up today. I'm just going to start at the beginning. I had a few questions for you. I might come circle back to those, as you went through your opening statement. And thank Page 8 GOEAC-6 March 18,2025 you. First of all, we had a confidential document provided to us which described the Hawaii High-Intensity Drug Trafficking Area. CHR. KAGIWADA: I'm going to stop you right there. Are you talking about the thing that was given to you today? MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: We actually have three MOUs in front of us. I'm just clarifying which one. CHR KAGIWADA: Okay, the confidential one that was distributed today is for the April l"meeting, and it's not on the agenda today. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, good. That was one question. So, I'm looking at the MOU, not provided in our folders, but the MOU that was provided to us as attached to the resolution, correct? Between the Hawaii Police Department and HSI. You have the same one inTrcnt of you? MR. MOSZKOWICZ: I do. I think so. Is that the one with the designation of the Hawaii Police Department employees as customs officers accepted. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFI LWER: Beautiful, and I think this came up in the testimony from Ms. Cook, Communication No. 125.1, which is the actual communication from the department:'Okay, so, looking at the MOU,just real quickly, this was in place for'five years, is that right? MR. MOSZKOWICZ: At least. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. And then you described two officers. Two officers being at the State level or two officers being at the County level? MR. MOSZKOWICZ: So, there are two Federal agents who have office space in our building in the Nice Section. Those are the two people that I'm talking about. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. And then they're not our Police Department"empl oyees? MR. MOSZKOWICZ: Correct. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. How many officers have we designated as these types of customs officers? MR. MOSZKOWICZ: Taskforce officers. My understanding is four. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: So, we have four out of our 460 or 490? Page 9 GOEAC-6 March 18,2025 MR. MOSZKOWICZ: We have 430, but we have people starting in April. So, 430 to 440. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. So, we have four people. Two East two West? MR. MOSZKOWICZ: That's my understanding. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. So, being at this for five years, we've kind of established how we do this. This isn't anything new. This is an existing program. We've been inundated with this office for five years. MR. MOSZKOWICZ: Yes. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Beautiful. Okay, my first question,this just stood out to me. Number 2, authority., There's a filled in section here in this MOU. It says the Homeland Security Act of 202. I believe that's supposed to be 2002. As I referenced it online, it's the Homeland Security Act of 2002, not 202. That's clerical. I wanted to point that out in case that's important. MR. MOSZKOWICZ: Okay, the one I'm looking at says 2002. But the one that's typewritten in. Okay, yes,you're absolutely correct. That should be 2002. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay: Thank you. Secondly, that statement, HSI is not conveying the authority to enforce administrative violations of immigration law. So, the difference that was interesting was that the customs officers accepteds what we would be training our officers to be under this program, correct? 1R. MOSZIKOWICZ: Right, which are Title 19 Taskforce Officers. HSI does the designation for them. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Aka TFOs or, okay. So, we are going to be training our personnel to be Customs officers/TFO officers. Then the statement, "HSI is not conveying the authority to enforce administration violations of immigration law." What is the difference between a Customs officer in this case, and not conveying the authority to enforce administrative violations of immigration law. MR. MOSZKOWICZ: So, a designation that would allow officers the authority to enforce administration violation of immigration law would be that 287(g) designation. So, that would be a totally separate agreement, and training, setup. That again, I as a Chief am not interested in pursuing. I think that line is in there to express that this agreement is not that. Page 10 GOEAC-6 March 18,2025 MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. So, the difference is cloudy for me. What's the difference between customs officer and the abilities to perform under DHS enforcing administration violations of immigration law, aka 287(g)? MR. MOSZKOWICZ: So, an employee of the Homeland Security Investigations who is designated as a customs officer; a Federal employee with Federal training who is designated as a customs officer. My understanding is they are empowered by their authority that they can enforce immigration law and criminal law. So, they can enforce Title 19, they can enforce Title 18; they can enforce Title 8. But again, my understanding is that language,is in there to make it clear that these Taskforce officers; the people that work for the Police Department that are going to take on a role in this Federal partnership do not have that authority. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. So, our officers differ by not being able to—our own police officers. What can we not do that this section is not conveying the authority for? MR. MOSZKOWICZ: Conducting immigration authority. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER I guess I'm being real specific. What is an administrative violation? MR. MOSZKOWICZ: So, an administrative violation of immigration law, my understanding is,that would involve some sort of civil process that could lead to taking someone into custody. And a civil deportation where a person is removed from the United States and sent somewhere outside the United States. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. And our sworn in HPD officers will nothave thatpower. So, what is our officers' role then in the community, as they've been deemed custom officers? MR. MOSZKOWICZ: So, you know, one of the testifiers said it very well, the situation is very rapidly evolving. So, I can describe for you what their role is in conj unction,with the MOU, and then I can also talk a little about what role they're playing in this larger sequence of events that's going on in that community. I think both are important. As part of this MOU, their role would be to conduct investigations and make arrests in Title 18 and Title 19 cases involving violations of criminal law. By the felons, robberies and drug trafficking. What they don't have, like we said, is this authority to involve themselves in or conduct immigration enforcement. So, how it's played out in the community, there have been two cases that I'm aware of that the Police Department was at least tangentially involved in over the past Page 11 GOEAC-6 March 18,2025 several weeks. The first one involved ICE agents who had located a person that they were going to deport. My understanding is that we weren't involved in that at all until the individual mentioned that his child attended an elementary school in West Hawaii. And that, you know, poses a significant challenge, right, for the Federal agents. And they're not sure what—it's all very new. And they know that if they go to the school and demand the child—it's all bad choices from there, right? If the Feds go to the school to get a child, that's a bad,choice. If they deport the father without the child, that's a bad choice;if they deport the father and say nothing to the child, that's probably the worse of the choices. No one is going to pick up the kid from school, for instance, right? So, they reached out to request some assistance in this notification process with the school to act as kind of an intermediary. So, we actually have a school resource officer at this particular school. The officer communicated with the office staff. The office staff sought advice from the State DOE(Department of Education). The DOE instructed them to contact the people ortthe emergency contact list for the child. I understand no contact was made. And,at that point, DOE reached out to CPS (Child Protection Services)to find out what to do with the child that was essentially going at the end of the school day, going to�be unsupervised. And CPS became involVed'and facilitated reuniting the child with the father. So, our involvement was essentially talking to the school about what's going to happen with this child and that sequence of events. When you talk aboutour role in anything that happens in the community, I think it's threefold., The first thing is, and our responsibility is to protect people. Protect people from injury;protect people from violence. The second role is to protect peoples' rights. Whatever that might look like. And the third role is to provide whatever type of humanitarian assistance we can to anyone in the community on any given day under any sort of circumstances. So, while this is certainly not something that we would have envisioned, I think that having an,officer there to facilitate a conversation with who's at the school; who knows the administrators, there to facilitate the conversation about, hey, what's going to happen with this kid? And how do we make sure that the kid gets some sort of supervision? And whether it's contacting emergency contacts or escalating to CPS or whatever, I think that's actually good problem solving. What precipitated the problem, we can agree with, or we can disagree with, it didn't involve us. We were kind of put into this situation where we were being asked to help. Page 12 GOEAC-6 March 18,2025 The second situation involved an adult female, who again, was said to be contacted by immigration authorities. I'm told that there is a list of unaccompanied minors that were sent to Hawaii over the past several years, and Immigration Enforcement officers are out checking up on the kids to make sure they're not being exploited; they're not being used for child labor, etc. And in the course of this conduct, they came across a woman who they determined was in the United States illegally. And they made the decision that they were going to invoke their immigration authority to remove the woman from the State. They made arrangements to come back the next day,and the woman indicated that she had four children who were with her thatshe wanted to again, keep the family together as a whole; maintain custody of everybody together in a group and keep the family unit together as this process played,out. Again, we can agree with the process; we can disagree with the process. We weren't really involved in it. Until the point where, because it's a family unit and because there are kids involved, the Federal authorities decided to hire a contractor from Oahu to fly over to the Big Island to facilitate all the things that had to happen. We had to get car seats for the kids. They had to find two hotet1 ooms to house the family until whatever flights could be arranged. They had to provide toiletries and get food, and all those things that come with having someone that you have to care for. So, the immigration authorities went'oht, They took custody of the woman and the four kids. And for whatever reason, there's a delay now in the contractor flying from Oahu to land in Kona. So,again, we're in a bit of an interesting situation where we're not essentially involved;,but we are now. Because we as the Police Department have the decision to make,right? Do e letthis woman and her four kids sit in a van in the Kona Airport parkifig,lot for four, five, six hours while we wait for this contractor to fly to the Big Island;,or is it maybe a little more humane to offer the Immigration authorities the use of our conference room at the station that has access and locked in a secured area. There's air conditioning; there's access to running water; there's snacks. We have food. There's all kinds of, you know, humanitarian conditions that come with being able to sit in a conference room as opposed to sitting in a van at the airport. So again, we made the decision that we would offer them this unsecured conference room in the station. No one was in the cellblock, no one was in handcuffs. And the immigration authorities maintained custody over these folks the entire time. Again, it's where we get kind of backed into the situation. It happens all the time in police work, when we don't exactly know what's going to evolve or what's going to transpire or what's going to happen. But at the end of the day, we do our best to go back to the street priorities. Protect people,protect Page 13 GOEAC-6 March 18,2025 people's rights and to provide humanitarian aid and comfort when and where we can. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay. Thank you for that, Chief. So, what I'm hearing is, the MOU allows for the interaction, and that the Police Department fulfills their normal roles, and that's exactly what's been happening for the last five years. I'm trying to stay away from the sensationalized social media outlets and their approach. But also, being very cognizant of our community here, especially given Hawai`i's a very unique melting pot of culture. So, I appreciate the information. Thank you for laying that out, and I'm'gping to yield. I may have a follow-up question for you, but that was veryhelpful. The governmentalprocess is involved; the different agencies involved. That last story about DHS/ICE and HPD; your different roles and how it played out for this family. Here, and being given space in a conference room_ I think that highlights that as it was pointed outby a testimony,that we still have aloha in our process, and HPD is looking to fulfill a role. Actually, not looking to, but being requsted to fulfill a role. But doing it within:the law and that I appreciate hearing. Thank you. I yield, Chair. MR. MOSZKOWICZ: Thank you, CHR. KAGIWADA: Thank you, Council Member. Council Member Villegas. MS. VILLEAS: Aloha, Chief. Wow, what couple of months. Thank you for being here Chief Bird. These times have been really hard on everybody. You know, my last name is Villegas. `My husband's father and grandparents came from Spain through Mexico. I'd like to point out that much of America used to be Mexico. The ironies in this war against immigrants are repugnant, quite frankly. I am a descendent of Caucasian immigrants to what was once the sovereign land of Hawaii. Interesting enough colonizers make laws, but then exempt them from being responsible for their actions. And then puts them in positions of power. A lot of people I know right now are on edge. Because it is revolving and it's a bad episode of the twilight zone. And what really concerns me is, we can look at the "I's" and the "T's" and explain all of the things that have been put in here that makes sense under normal circumstances. But in the highest office of our national government sits a man who does not respect or operate based on those same principles or processes and defies laws daily. And that is my challenge. There is so little I feel like I can do, and I feel stuck. And I feel traumatized. Thank you, Armando for sharing the story of your family. The human element. Page 14 GOEAC-6 March 18,2025 Thank you to the warriors, and, activists, and facilitators of supporting our immigrant communities providing the exact data and details. Our coffee industry is reliant on the immigrant community for its success. Our restaurant industry, the construction industry. So, for myself, I cannot support just out of principle. I apologize to you, as the position that you're being put in, and I get that. But because I don't trust what's next going to happen. And because the laws aren't being followed in the highest office the land, this is my opportunity to sit in this role and say, I don't want our Police Department to be required to participate in things. I appreciate the support, and the empathy, and the humanitarian aid that's been offered because that is the way our Police Department serves. I have different reflections after, you know, I have a friendship with a police officer who's worked with Vice and Drug Trafficking and all those things. So, to me that is a separate issue that I firmly see the value there. But I want to say that deportation of immigrants does not protect us. The nature and the premise for this war against immigrants was horrific statements about them being rapists, and criminals, and murderers. And unfounded statements to give justification to harm otherpeople and to strip them from their homes and tear families apart. The term immigrant invasion I believe is'insulting,inflammatory, and absurd. As a white woman:in a sovereign land I recognizes that I have responsibilities because my family was an immigrant family. As a woman, I'm already a target for Donald Trump. My rights, my privileges, my standing in our country is currently threatened. So,I stand as an ally with our immigrant community. I've been'told by a number of different people why don't people just get legal; why don't people hecome citizens? It's so easy when you're in a position of financial affluence or power; or you have relationships and connection. But there's an expense associated with that. Regular people don't have that money. Not to mention it's scary. So, I just want to state that I won't be supporting this because I trust our Police Department. But I do not trust this Federal Administration. It's too trepidatious of a time. If the terminology in here was more specific, and it would probably take a very long book of all the exceptions for what would really be imposed on you, you'll be put in a tough position. But in the times when I don't feel like I can do enough, this is the time when I will speak up. I will stand with you, and I will stand with you in my attempt to protect you from what will—you didn't even know it was coming. So, with that I yield. CHR. KAGIWADA: Thank you. Checking over in Hilo, Council Member Kimball, do you have any questions or comments you'd like to make? Page 15 GOEAC-6 March 18,2025 MS. KIMBALL: Yes, thank you Chair. I was actually hoping to ask Corporation Counsel a question just in terms of the legal interpretation under the first MOU, the one that's included in Communication 125.1. And this would be under Item No. 2, Authority. And just the last clause there, which says, "HIS Honolulu has jurisdiction to enforce violations listed under, but not limited to Titles 18 and 19 of the United States Code. I bring this in the context of Ms. DeArmas' written statement about how there's a little bit of lack of clarity around the "limited to." But I think that this could be interpreted more narrowly as just a statement of how HIS gets its authority at all. Not necessarily its authority under the MOU. CHR. KAGIWADA: Thank you, Council Member. Corporation Counsel is joining us now. (Note: At this time, Corporation Counsel Renee Schoen and Deputy Corporation Counsel Dakota"Cody"Frenz, came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MS. SCHOEN: Good morning, Renee Shoen, Corporation Counsel. MS. FRENZ: Good morning, Deputy Corporation Counsel (DCC) Cody Frenz. So,just to clarify, Council Member Kagiwada, you're talking about the MOU that's titled, "Memorandum of Understanding between Hawaii Police Department and the United Stges Department of Homeland Security and Homeland Investigations Honolulu, regarding Embedding"NISI Special Agents with the Hawaii Police Department." Is that right? CHR KAGIWADA: This is Council Member Kimball's question. So, I'd rather make sure that that's correct: MS. KIMBALL: Yes, that's correct. Thank you. MS. FRENZ: Okay. So, Section 2 of that specific MOU, Council Member Kimball is specific to Homeland Security for Honolulu. That's their authority. So, this is not something this is talking about what authorities, the United States Codes. These are all federal statutes that are applicable to federal agents and federal employees. MS. KIMBALL: So, to confirm, the fact that it says, "listed under, but not limited to, Titles 18 and 19," doesn't provide any additional authority under this agreement. It just speaks to the authorities, in general, that are given to HSI. MS. FRENZ: That is correct. Page 16 GOEAC-6 March 18,2025 MS. KIMBALL: Alright, thank you. That's the only question I had, Chair. Mahalo. CHR. KAGIWADA: Thank you, Council Member. Any other questions? Council Member Hustace, go ahead. MR. HUSTACE: Thank you, Chair. I really had a question for our Chief or Assistant Chief. Could you speak to the, you know, some of the conversation and some of the information out there about what our other counties have signed on to with DHS, specifically. I believe we have other agreements with FBI with other counties. But DHS, I believe we seem to be the only County that has a DHS MOU. MR. MOSZKOWICZ: My understanding is that you know,I was going to say that my understanding is that HSI has a MOU with Honolulu. I think that's correct. I'm not sure if they have a MOU with Maui or Kauai. I know there are HSI TFOs in Honolulu as well. MR. HUSTACE: Okay. But no clear reason why Maui and Kauai don't have a MOU with DHS then? .,,. MR. MOSZKOWICZ: They may, and I could probably find that out by asking those Chiefs there in a moment. MR. HUSTACE: Okay, thank you. I think we're kind of going down an interesting route, and Council Member Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder was kind of explaining a little bit, I believe in talking about some of our—and you Chief as well, about the shared spaces and allowing the use of the space with federal agents. There was some conversation from testifiers about there's associated costs. What does that place on us as a County if these agents are using our space, or in working with them, what are our associated costs that we're really not being compensated for? MR. MOSZKOWICZ: So, they have two agents sit at a desk in a room,probably a third of the size of this room. Basically, there's no additional electricity or space cost. We're not renting or using any other additional space other than our normal to operate the building kind of costs, which we would undertake whether they were there or not. We do have, you know, this is another interesting MOU that I hope in the coming months we'll be able to come back and talk to you about. But we don't have the department has not had ever an agreement with anyone, including the State Department of Law Enforcement regarding housing people who are arrested for crimes by other agencies. Page 17 GOEAC-6 March 18,2025 Okay, so take immigration out of it for just a second. If the sheriffs make a warrant arrest at the airport, and it's not within the hours that the courthouse is operating, they don't have a facility to fingerprint the person, and photo the person; and hold them and interview them, etcetera; release them, bail out; take them to court or whatever. But that housing in the meantime is done by us. So, we have an East and a West Hawaii. We do the same thing for our federal partners when they're out and they do a federal arrest. So, if it's a federal arrest that doesn'tinvolve one of our Taskforce officers, which would be very rare. And the feds haven't already arranged for some sort of transport directly back to Oahu to the Federal Detention Center, which normally, they're going to get on the next flight to make that happen. But we do, as a matter of practice, allow them access to our facilities because we are the only facility on the island, right, and we're geographically isolated. So, one of the things we're thinking about is developing that MOU with the Department of Law Enforcement and potentially having our other potential federal partners sign on. Volcanos National Park has law enforcement rangers but nowhere to house people. DOCARE (Division of Conservation and Resources Enforcement) has State law enforcement:authority but nowhere to house people. So, to have that agreement in place is something I hope it's going to'get developed and you'll see in the coming months. Sorry, does'thatanswer your question? MR. HUSTACE: Thank you. To an extent, yes, thank you. I'm just concerned about,the associated costs when we're either embedding officers or being put out in the field to, you know, they're tasked to do these other duties. If there's any sort of other additional funds that's supporting the work that they're doing that they're tasked to do above and beyond. And now with the FBI agreement there is some of that compensation in effect with that. MR. MOSZKOWICZ: Yes, speaking to that particular point, you're correct. So, if officers go out where we incur overtime costs because the case lasted past eight hours or they're on their day off. As you can see by this weekend, they happened at crazy weird hours and times. Part of that agreement with HSI, and FBI, and whoever else U.S. Marshals serviced; postal inspection, all those places that we have TFOs with,part of that agreement is to provide compensation for those extra costs associated with doing enforcement with a federal partner on a taskforce. In the meantime, thanks to technology, I got a text message from both Chief Raybuck of Kauai and Chief Pelletier of Maui, who both confirmed that they also have HSI TFOs. MR. HUSTACE: Okay, thank you. The last question I have for now is, you know, you've heard sentiment from the community from testifiers today and even spoked about that shared sentiment you have with the concerns the community has. Page 18 GOEAC-6 March 18,2025 These documents, these MOUs have a termination clause. Would there be anything that you see cause, or you know, that you feel has pushed to a certain extent, HPD is pushed to a certain extent that we need to terminate this clause? MR. MOSZKOWICZ: Sure. I mean, it's possible. If there is a push by the Federal Government to exceed the authority on what's specifically, and you know, described in the MOUs, then that partnership could become untenable. And if that partnership became untenable, then we would dissolve it by ending the MOU. It is not something we're able to negotiate or, you know, getthem toI mean, that's a very theoretical conversation. Absolutely, I mean, that's one of the reasons to your point, why,the escape clause for either party is built into these MOUs. So, it's not a long formal drawn out process where people have obligations for a long period of time. You notify the other partner, and I think it's probably 30 days. And within 30 days then the MOU dissolves. MR. HUSTACE: Thank you, Chief. Thanks Chair. CHR. KAGIWADA: Alright. Anybody else before I go' back to Council Member Kdneali`i-Kleinfelder? No, okay. Go ahead, Council Member. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Chief, I think the big distinction here just from what I heard today, is County participating with DHS ICE; and County participating under the 287(g) Section of the Code, which interestingly enough was signed into effect by President Clinton in 1996. But 287(g)really does refer to what's happening right now with Donald Trump and his Executive Order that he put into place a couple weeks back. So, that distinction becomes very important and given the conversation today regarding an existing MOU that we've held for a number of years now with HPD and the Department of Homeland Security. And the difference between 287(g) because we would have to enter into an agreement with an agency under the 287(g). That's a specific agreement, correct? MR. MOZKOWICZ: Yes, it would be conceivably, but it's not something that I would agree to and bring to you in the first place, nor have we've been asked. But thatwould require a separate agreement. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: We don't have that in place right now? MR. MOSZKOWICZ: No, absolutely not. Page 19 GOEAC-6 March 18,2025 MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, because I think there's, as I'm just reviewing online right now, what's available under the ICE website, there's 30-something states with an agreement form between them to do and handle under the 287(g)platform. We're not on there. MR. MOSZKOWICZ: We are not. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Beautiful. Okay, Corporation Counsel, I have a question for you. Thank you, Chief. Thank you,'Ms. Frenz for being here today. Pretty simple question, on the last page of the MOU that we have in front of us. Are you following the same MOU? This is one dated"2017 from Paul Ferreira. Do we have a whole brand-new MOU? MS. FRENZ: Can you reiterate and refer to it by the Communication number, that might help. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Sorry, Communication 125.1, Paul Ferreira, 2017. Yes? The same MOU or the newer MOU that has been presented? MS. FRENZ: So, the three MOUs before Council today for Resolution 74-25; the two older ones that you have executed copies of, 2017 and 2015, those are just on our list of coming before Council,as required by HRS. The third one that is specific that the Chief is really focused on here today as well about shared office space. That's the one that isI apologize, I don't have the communication in front of me. That's where Council Member Kimball asked a question, and I read the title of it. It is five pages long. And we don't have my signature or the Mayor's signature yet. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, I got it in here. I think that's all part of the same Communication number on 125.1. MS:FRENZ:` So,that one is unexecuted. This is the one that would be refreshing an older MOU thathas been in place for years. And it was being done to add the office space and update it for Chief Moszkowicz. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: The itemized sections of the MOU that was in place from'Paul Ferreira 2017, do those carry then forward, and this MOU just names our new Chief of Police as the executor of this agreement? MS FRENZ: Two of the three MOUs that you have before you, even the old version of what we need to execute, with Council's permission, should we get there, they all remain in effect until terminated. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, then the new one that's been provided that's a little bit more simplified, it looks like, as far asa whole different format, Page 20 GOEAC-6 March 18,2025 if you will. That would be the new agreement, or the existing agreements remain in effect, and this just modifies. MS. FRENZ: These are completely different agreements. So, the unexecuted copy that you have before you, that MOU would be executed. And again, that was primarily to update a new Chief of Police and add the office space for the special agent. And there were some formatting. It was an older document, so there were some formatting changes. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, and to your knowledge, does this new MOU reflect at all, of an agreement to participate under 287(g)? MS. FRENZ: Definitely not. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Beautiful,thank you. If modified,does that require coming back in front the Council to have the modification approved, or does the modification get done outside of the Council chambers and Council approval, aka in a public kind of section. MS. FRENZ: I think itw6uld depend on the type of requested modification. So, say for example, the MOLT thatwe're updating, let's say there was a point of contact change. Let's say they wanted,a location at a different office. I'm not sure if that would require if the agreement is the same, if it would require that we come back because we're received Council authority for the Mayor to enter into an agreement in,substance. So, if we were going to change the entire formatting; change the font. I don't know. I thinkthat would require us to comeback and say, hey, we've changed the font; or we're going to update. Maybe Chief decides he wants to retire sooner than everybody would—hope hewouldn't. But you know, if there was a new Chief, do we need to come back every time we want to update a point of contact. So, I think the substance matters. If they vote wanting to add completely different, say a 287(g)provision, that would absolutely require that we come back before Council. Because I don't believe the Council's,intent in providing authority should provide authority, would encompass a change such as that. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, that makes me more comfortable. Thank you. Okay, thank you, Ms. Frenz. I yield, Chair. CHR. KAGIWADA: Thank you, Alright. Council Member Villegas let's try to keep it concise here. Actually, I'm going to go to Council Member Inaba, since he hasn't had a chance yet then we'll come back to you. Go ahead, Council Member Inaba. Page 21 GOEAC-6 March 18,2025 MR. INABA: Thank you, Chair Kagiwada. With that, in reviewing this second agreement, Communication 125.1. I'm trying to understand there's this conversation going on right now about the 287(g). And then, I'm wondering if you folks can shed some light on the difference between the authorities granting via that section versus those authorities granted by ICE form 73-001. And those are essentially, I believe, the forms that would need to be completed by each of the officers being designated. There seems to be overlap there. So, I wanted to make sure that while we're saying we're not going to be following up with a 287(g)-type enforcement, it appears that ICE form 73-001 does allow for that type of enforcement So, I don't know who to direct the question to. The Chief or DCC (Deputy Corporation:Counsel) Frenz. CHR. KAGIWADA: Both of them. ,. MS. FRENZ: Good morning again. Deputy Corporation Counsel Cody Frenz. So, I think, and I'll defer to the Chief on whether or not he's seen this form before. I have not. However, a review of Box 13 on the form as it would relate to the 287(g) authorities that have been'discussed here this morning, I can see that there is the potential to be overlap should those boxes be checked. However, the Chief has already made clear this morning that there are very specific enforcement mechanisms thatthe departmeritis not only not trained, let alone equipped'personnel-wise, etcetera, nor interested in pursuing. So, theoretically if this form were actually utilized, when they go through the TFO process, it's a matter;in my opinion, of insuring that certain boxes are not checked. They are not elected,Io insure that we stay in compliance with, not just the MOUs but the intent of the MOUs as well as the limitations that the department may have. MR. MOSZKOWICZ: Please correct me if I'm wrong, I'm a novice attorney, part-time, unqualified, but familiar with the legal process. My guess would be that if the WU authorizes taskforce officers, but specifically limits our ability to conduct immigration enforcement, that would control the subsequent paperwork that it refers anyway, right? This would not be that kind of superseding top of the pyramid document that controls everything else. And I agree with you anyway, we would certainly not sign off on TFOs with the authority granted to include any type of immigration enforcement. MS. FRENZ: I agree with that. MR. INABA: I mean, if this resolution is to pass, these promises being made today are there while you're here, right? If we pass it as is, DCC Frenz, do we have a clear definition of administrative violations of immigration law? Because everything refers to certain forms and certain codes. And then there's just this term Page 22 GOEAC-6 March 18,2025 of administrative violations of immigration law. So, I'm wondering if there's a specific definition for that. MS. FRENZ: There are specific definitions within the United States Code. When I went and pulled in looking at some other potential law being considered, and some of the United States Code sections within the MOUs. It came apparent, for example, like a larger, like you say, Title 8 and Title 19, for example. Within each United States code normally the very first provision of close there to an entire list of definitions that are going to be applicable for that entire title, for example. So, even there, there are. I think it's important to ensure thaffocus is made as to those and that used accurately, right? Because there are significant equal differences between some of them. I don't practice in Federal Immigration'law at all. It's a very specialized practice. I'm licensed, but I don't. So, I don't want to misspeak But I do know that I did look at the definitions, and they are very„specific when you're talking about who has the authority to issue Administrative warrants. 'That's a little bit broader than we will have on the State and County level where are very specific parameters for who can actually issue warrants. So, it's pretty,different. MR. INABA: Okay. I know it's the desire of the Police Department to move this along. I don't necessarily have a problem moving it,forward, but I think there's definitely some work to be done with the wording of the resolution. And really to close any loopholes that would maybe exist should Administration of the Police Department change. And I think that can be ironed out. So,forme, if we were at Council today, I would vote, "no"based on what's before us. Butt think I'd be comfortable moving it forward and working together in the next two weeks. Sri',thank you for your answers to these questions. Mahalo Chair, I yield. CHR:KAGIWADA: Thank you. Council Member Villegas. MS. VILLEGAS: Yes. First of all, I want to thank you, Corp. Counsel for your joint service with the Police Department as their Corp. Counsel and have taken on the serious task of cleaning up all the administrative things like this, which is fantastic. So, thank you for that. Unfortunately, it's all happening at a time when we're operating under a Federal Administration that doesn't abide by our own Constitution or our laws. I continue to have serious concerns of anything associated with this when our, you know, "Tom Wholesome"publicly stated he won't follow court orders when it comes to deportation laws. So, I recognize that this is an administrative cleanup. Page 23 GOEAC-6 March 18,2025 But I also see this as an opportunity for our County to resist in a time when we aren't provided a lot of opportunities to make a statement about the value systems of this County and our leadership. These MOUs have the potential to do more harm than good, and that makes it very clear to me. While our police officers won't have the authority to participate in administrative violations of immigrant law and also forces thea school officer had to go remove a young boy from his school. When I think about the psychological and emotional toll that that took on that officer andhow that affected all of his classmates and the teachers and how it proceeded to traumatize a lot of people in our community. While it may not be direct responsibility,of our police officers, it does require them then to operate in a supportive role for the work of HSI and ICE. And I just have to take this stand in resistance. I won't be supporting this today. It does sound,like members of this Council will be moving it forward. But I do ask,and,I hope that there will be specific amendments because it depends on the principles and value systems for me. And in a time and an era when those who are supposed to be upholding the highest laws of the land completely disregard it. It's not about the "I' " and the "T's" for me. It's about the value systems and the statements that makes our community; and for our alignment and our support based on the principles of our community. With that I yield. CHR. KAGIWADA: Thank you. Council Member Kimball, did you have something else to add to the conversation? MS. KIMBALL: Yeah, two follow-up questions. First, along the lines of Council Member Hustace's questioning. It's never been done in my time here, as I recall. But when we authorize through resolution, these agreements, and it pertains to the 30-day termination period;and this may be Clerk question or a Corporation Counsel question. I r not certain. Does the Council have the authority to come back at a later day and actually—if something went very wary, come back and say, we want HPD'to enact that termination clause through resolution or other vehicle? CHR KAGIWADA: Mr. Clerk, you have any input there? MR. HENRICKS: No. CHR. KAGIWADA: Okay, Deputy Corporation Counsel Frenz. MS. FRENZ: Council Member Kimball. I don't believe so, to be honest. I might be incorrect, but the termination agreement, I mean, the authority is granted to the Mayor that allows the execution of a MOU, specifically. I mean, you guys do matters quite often when you urge a particular approach to something, or you urge that the Mayor consider via video Zoom technology. Page 24 GOEAC-6 March 18,2025 There's a lot of different actions that this Council as a body can take to urge maybe the Mayor or the Police Department to consider termination of a specific MOU. But I don't think that you would have the authority to take a specific action that require the termination of the MOU. I don't see that language in the MOU either. So, I think the answer is, "no." MS. KIMBALL: Okay, thank you. My second question is a little more general in the sense that Chief, one of the concept thoughts that came up in some of the testimonies was greater transparency around what is happening in our community around immigration enforcement. Do you have any thoughts on how we might improve public communications around this issue so that there is that sense of transparency within the public? MR. MOSZKOWICZ: Sure. So, I think certain members of this body actually, have done a really good job of connecting community organizations and advocates with the Police Department. We've had an opportunity to sit down with groups who are represented here in testimony today._ We also have had an opportunity to collaborate in the past with Dr. Heeley who's here but didn't testify of the Hawai`i Island Community Health Center, who we've worked with in the past on other issues; and who I th nk is going to work in the community facilitating kind of, you know, distribution of information. There are certainly anxieties that are realistic,,and I don't know that we can do much"to'assuage those. But if by providing information that we can consistently through the community through public testimony or through meeting constituency advocacy groups, or in partnership with Dr. Heeley. You know, we can certainly help toalleviate any concerns thatrmight be irrational based on not knowing something teat if they knew certain things, then maybe that would lower the fear factor in certain other areas. In terms of like operations and what ICE is going to do, and where they're going to go, ante who they're going to detain and deport, they don't provide us with that information. So, it's not something we could share because we don't have it. But in terms of, you know, continuing to strengthen partnerships and pass along information like, hey, when there is an incident, and it might look like something. And it might be that or something else. I think every Council Member has my cellphone number. A lot of these advocates and community groups have my cellphone number. I get contacted all the time with these kinds of questions. And so, whether it's for me or through Major Shopay in West Hawaii or Major Amaral in East Hawaii, or a member of the Council, or one of our community partners, we're absolutely open to sharing any kind of information we can to help people at least have some solid actual information upon which to base their decisions, thoughts and feelings. Page 25 GOEAC-6 March 18,2025 MS. KIMBALL: Okay, thank you, Chief. I yield Chair. CHR. KAGIWADA: Thank you. Anybody else? Alright. Could I askI don't know if Ms. Liza Ryan Gill is still on Zoom. Don't go away, I'm going to be back to you in a minute. You've been listening to the conversation. You represent, you said, over 30 organizations around the state that are supporting immigrant rights. What are your biggest concerns if we do pass this. Say it is okay to sign these MOUs currently. I mean, you've had a chance to look at them. For our immigrant communities specifically, what are some of the concerns of things we should be aware of or paying attention to if we do end up passing these. (Note: At this time, Hawaii Coalition for Immigration Rights Executive Director Liza Ryan Gill, came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MS. RYAN GILL: I really appreciate the Chief's statements and his willingness to meet with all of these groups. You know, he has been very supportive. And I think in the case of the first grader who was detained,and everything, you know, I recognize, and my heart goes out to HPD in having to deal with that situation. And we've also had those conversations, as we mentioned before, with the special agent in charge of HSI. And I'm real thankful that special agent also understands how deleterious it,would be if DHS were to go to a local school. I think, you know, I am a bit relieved. One of our concerns about where the desks are essentially, so it's mundane but where they would be in the station and whether or notbhey wouldbe visible. So, thankful to the Chief for clarifying on those issues. I think it's hardbecause we're facing a huge unknown right now. We as advocates in this base,just know, that we're not yet two months into this Administration, and the Feds continue to pile on new priorities and ask HSI to do many things that are outside the scope of their typical work, which you know, in the past we've not necessarily had an issue with. o, I think that's the main concern that we have is just that this relationship continues to be open between the Council and advocates and folks on the ground and the Chief. So that we can continue to assess, because like you said, we're two months in right now. And in two months, things are also going to look different. So, I hope that if this were to move forward, that the Council doesn't consider this issue closed. I know that if the Chief doesn't consider the issue closed because it's going to be ever evolving, and we hope that the relationship stays open, respectful Page 26 GOEAC-6 March 18,2025 and appreciative. So, that we can all get through without traumatizing our keiki in this County as much as possible. CHR. KAGIWADA: Thank you so much for that. Appreciate you hanging on here with us. Alright. Chief, thank you. I do want to express my gratitude for your openness and willingness to work and connect with the community whenever I've asked for it. And also connect me to your staff who are, you know, boots on the ground and overseeing things to really get that information and clarify it. Because there's so much misinformation that's out there and really terrifying people. So, whenever we can clarify that this is actually not happening, or that is a photo that's taken from the mainland and is being shared around; It's really important. So, thank you for that. Really do appreciate it. I am having a hard time passing this forward for some of the things that have been said here today. But I also understand that without HPD's involvement in a couple of these instances, things would have been much worse for the immigrant families. And so, I want to figure out a way to keep,yOu guys somewhat in there in that you can help when things are going bad. But one of the issues I really want to ask you aboutis the issue around having people's rights respected and making sure that if there's things we can do as a County as HPD to help people, for instance, who may not understand what's happened to them because of language issues, or may not understand their rights in a certain situation. Is there anything that we can do in that kind of situation where your officers are present: They may not be doing the actual action, but they are there; or they're in our conference room,or something like that, and they're in our space and we're there. Are there things that we can do as a County to support families going through this very hard time, or individuals going through this hard time that would, you know, make things a little better? I'm also thinking that if we're not at all involved and people get whisked off the island, then'they don't necessarily have a chance then for their family, or attorneys, or other people to connect with them before they're gone. So, it's a very complicated situation, right? I don't want to see our resources, and I don't want to see us collaborating to deport people in our community, but I absolutely see the value of there may be being a little bit of a place where we can insert some humanity, some rights, and making sure that, you know, like I said people have that chance to connect before people are whisked off. So, anything that we can share that we might be able to support? Page 27 GOEAC-6 March 18,2025 MR. MOSZKOWICZ: Sure. It's a tight corner to be in, right? And there are not a lot of wonderful options available. I would agree with you, and that's why we've prioritized protecting people,protecting their rights, and offering humanitarian assistance where and when we could. I mean, absent an MOU, I feel like the officers that work in this department would offer that same spirit of hospitality and aloha regardless, right? So, whether there's a MOU or another resolution or whatever, it's my experience having been a little over two years, that the men and women in the Hawai`i Police Department truly, and I'm not just saying this to hit abuzz word, but really truly have aloha in their hearts. And that's why they do what they do. So, with that, then that becomes the guiding factor behind whether they make an arrest, or whether they issue a citation; or whether they work in the community in a totally unrelated situation. That's sort of a guiding light of everything we do in the first place. And so, you know, when we talk about limiting the polices' interactions or limiting our ability to cooperate, again;,that'kind'of paints us further into the corner. Because like you, I think that the Police Department has a role to play in protecting people's rights in making sure that they're treated humanely, and that's certainly something that with no additional training, all of our officers are going to do in the first place. That's going to be their kind,of gut reaction. The other thing that I meant to mention earlier that hasn't been mentioned we do also have internal policies, right? So, there are laws regarding what we can and whatwe can't do. And then within that framework, my role as the Chief is to establish:the rules in the department. If you're going to do this, here are the steps you have to do; here are the Procedures. So, we ado actually have a procedure about unlawful or improper bias in public safety: And it very clearly calls out, look there are several protected classes of people according to my vision, and the vision of the chiefs, and the guidance of the chiefs before me that you know, we are not allowing our officers under our internal rules to take certain factors into account when they're making law enforcement decisions, So, things like race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, age, gender, gender identity, gender expression; sexual orientation, disability, housing status, occupation, language fluency, immigration status. Things like that, officers are already prohibited from using any of that information in making arrests; no arrest decisions. In making a decision on whether or not to stop someone. And that's not to say that if a certain description of age, race, gender person is a suspect that we can't use that information to stop them. Page 28 GOEAC-6 March 18,2025 But we can't stop them simply because of those protected classes without some sort of additional, you know, reasonable suspicion or probable cause or whatever. So, there is kind of another layer of protection built into that where the guidance from the department, and this predatesI think the latest update here is September of 2024. So, this predates any of the MOUs, right? These events that have happened, or the elections, or anything else. So, it's very much in our rule house to provide this kind of support and oversight; and to protect people's rights regardless of these particular lists of protected class status. CHR. KAGIWADA: Okay, thank you very much. I hear from some people here that they're still a little bit uncomfortabl,e4ith the lack of clarification on some of the wording. Is it possible to amend,any of these documents before moving forward? MR. MOSZKOWICZ: So, you gave us this question at the previous Council meeting. In consulting with both HSI and the FBI, this is kind of the standard boilerplate language that their attorneys have approved to authorize these kinds of relationships. So, thank you for pointing out I think another Council Member pointed out typo of"202"to "2002". Aside from like thdt,kind of misspelled word or the date changes, or who's going to sign off changes; other than that they're not willing to make any substantive changes to these agreements. CHR. KAGIWADA: Okay. I would still like to hold this for two weeks. Because we're not able to do amendments to these specific agreements, I'm considering d6ing a resolution that kind of lays out what we've discussed here today as far as general agreements around this work. So, I would like to hold it for two more weeks. If the rest of the body feels like it should move on to full Council, and you know, I could discuss it there. But I won't be able to do a resolution before that meeting. So, if we hold this for two weeks, then I will have enough time before final decision on this to get a resolution introduced that everybody can look at and discuss. So, that would be my thoughts on this. Alright. So, at this point, I'm wondering—do you want to make a motion? Okay, go ahead and make a motion. Motion to Postpone: Ms. Villegas moved to postpone Res. 74-25 to April 1, 2025. Seconded by Mr. Hustace. CHR KAGIWADA: Any discussion. Go ahead. Page 29 GOEAC-6 March 18,2025 MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Chair. Just to Corporation Counsel. I'm hearing different things as far as Council wants. In my understanding, if we want to make a very clear directive, it would need to be in the MOU not via a resolution or an urge within the resolution if we're clearly highlighting things we will or will not do. Does that sound correct? CHR. KAGIWADA: Council Member, we just stated,that they will not do any amendments to the MOUs. MS. FRENZ: Correct. DCC Cody Frenz. So.I think Council Member Inaba has already indicated his intent to do an amendment that would,,I think, and I don't want to get this wrong. So, he can correct me if I'm mistaken: Likely impose some conditions within the resolution on the Police Department's ability to sign any updated agreements that include—I don't know what the amendment will look like. But maybe some very specific parameters and constraints that would require we come back before County Council to get-updated and renewed authority to enter into a document that maybe include something beyond changes of points of contact. So, the points that I made earlier; typographical corrections. Something that goes the merits of or the basis for the authority that the MOU would include. I think that would be the mechanism. Is, if Council continues to have concerns. Because we do nothave authority and there won't be an agreement to modify the NIOUs themselves. But that would be the mechanism that this body could take to cover those concerns. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Is there strength in resolution amendments via Council reverses actual MOU language? MS:FRENZ:` I'm-not sure. I think the MOU languages serve different purposes, right?—So, the resolution or the amendment to the resolution would control—would put the Police Department and I or their assigned Corporation Counsel on notice, that if you had A, B, and C for example, right? Whatever was specific to the amendment to the resolution, then we need to come back before Council versus the modification of the MOU language would theoretically provide constraints or parameters for the agreement between the parties, right? Before the Police Department and Homeland Security; and Police Department and the FBI. When the other party is not willing and/or interested. I mean I can't speak for them, but the other jurisdictions have already entered into these agreements with them recently. It's their standard boilerplate language that they're not going to be amending just for our jurisdiction. So, I think the only real parameter if this is going to continue to move forward and we're going to be able to appease concerns that some Council Members have. If Page 30 GOEAC-6 March 18,2025 there's a willingness to allow it to move forward, it would be in that purpose with that mechanism. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, that's interesting. I see the MOU as being the agreement. That's it. We can put whatever we want in a resolution; we can point at different things. We can call the sky red. But the MOU is really the reality of our agreement with DHS, correct? MS. FRENZ: Correct, yes. So, this would be, sort of, conditions on the department. CHR. KAGIWADA: Yes. Absolutely. MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER; And yet, in your understanding, can Federal let's say taxes. Taxes are allowed'by the State. So, we can choose to tax our residents at 4.72, or whatever we wantto do, but'only if allowed by the State. Is Federal law mandating us to do these things? 'Obviously, the MOU points for this being voluntary. But I mean, have you seen,anything that would say that at the Federal level, they'll mandate us to do thesethngs? MS. FRENZ: That's such a broad,question. I don't know the answer to it without doing proper research. I'm not sure. I think there are when you go back to some of the definitions that Council Member Inaba asked questions about, because there are significant legal differences in the nature and the types of documents that the Federal Government is utilizing for this work that has raised some concerns versus the work that the Police Department does every single day. You know, utilizing and/or enforcing the valid court warrant of arrest, for example. That's very d fferentfrom'adetainer document. So, there are some legal differences that I think matter. And the Police Department, maybe they don't have the manpower to exercise 100 percent of their staff to serve warrants every single day. If they come across somebody at a traffic stop that has a valid warrant. That's a power that they are expected to utilize if time permits, right? So, I think that the definitions that Council Member Inaba asked about are important for everyone to understand what the limitations are within these agreements for the Police Department and their partnership under these MOUs. Because it is pretty specific, and it is very limiting. It's not what everybody thinks it might be. And I'm hoping that the conversation today flushed that out and appeased some of those concerns for what they're worth, right? Because there's still a lot of valid legitimate concerns that we can't address because we don't control what the Federal Government is doing. Page 31 GOEAC-6 March 18,2025 MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Okay, I agree. Thank you for that. Thank you for your time today and your knowledge. And then,just to say it, I was looking at the 2017 agreement signed by Paul (Ferreira); and that was 202. Yours it 2002. So, you guys did good. Thank you. I yield, thank you. CHR. KAGIWADA: Okay, on the postponement, Council Member Inaba. MR. INABA: Thank you. Like I said earlier, I think we can proceed. I don't think an additional resolution would be helpful in this case. I just think we need to amend with those conditions. I understand what Council Member Kaneali`i- Kleinfelder is saying regarding the language in the MOLT. However, we can restrict, you know, which of the duties or responsibilities we're going to allow the Police Department to authorize via that form I referenced earlier. So, I'm happy to work with the Police Department and Chair Kagiwada to make sure that any of those areas or duties that we don't,necess ari ly want to authorize the department for, we can specify thatin the,resolution. Thank you, Chair, I yield. CHR KAGIWADA: Thank you. I'm sorry,I misspoke, I did mean that what you're planning on doing is,changing the existing resolution and amending the resolution. Anybody else on the postponement? Okay, with that, it sounds like we could please take a roll call on the postponement. Vote on Motion to The motion to postpone Res. 74-25 to'April 1, 2025, Postpone: was carried by the following roll call vote: Failed Ayes: Committee Members Hustace, Villegas, and Chair Kagiwada—3. Noes: Committee Member Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kimball, and Onishi—4. Absent: Committee Members Galimba and Kierkiewicz—2. Excused: None. CHR KAGIWADA: Alright, back to the main motion then. Anybody have comments on the main motion. Alright. Thank you. No other comments. Roll call vote, please. Page 32 GOEAC-6 March 18,2025 Vote on Res. 74-25: The motion to recommend adoption of Res. 74-25, was Failed carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Committee Members Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kimball, and Onishi—4. Noes: Committee Member Hustace, Villegas, and Chair Kagiwada—3. Absent: Committee Members Galimba and Kiefkiewicz—2. Excused: None. MR. HENRICKS: The motion is lost. It'll be forwarded to the Council with an unfavorable recommendation. CHR. KAGIWADA: Thank you everybody. We'll pick this up at,the next meeting. We have one more item on our agenda today. Return to Order The Chair directed the Committee to return to the order of business. of Business: COMMUNI- The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, CATIONS: Communications. Comm. 176: NOMINATION OF JANET R. BRITT TO THE PUBLIC ACCESS, OPEN SPACE,, AND NATURAL RESOURCES PRESERVATION COMMISSION From Mayor C. Kimo Alameda, dated February 27, 2025, requesting the Council's review and confirmation. Requires Council Confirmation by: April 12, 2025 (Section 13-4(k), Hawaii County Charter) (Note: Atth s time, Executive Assistant to the Mayor Micah Alameda and,the nominee came forward to address the members of the Committee.) Page 33 GOEAC-6 March 18,2025 Vote on Comm. 176: Mr. Inaba moved to recommend confirmation of the nomination (Approved) of Ms. Janet R. Britt to the Public Access, Open Space, and Natural Resources Preservation Commission (PONC). Seconded by Mr. Onishi and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Hustace, Inaba, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kimball, Onishi, Villegas, and Chair Kagiwada—7. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Members Galimba and Kierkiewicz—2. Excused: None. Mr. Alameda provided a brief narrative of the nominee's background and experience. Committee Members spoke in favor of the appointment. CHR. KAGIWADA: Alright, thank you,so much.I And with that, we've come to the end of our meeting. It is 11:18 a.m. And we'll be starting our next meeting in just a couple minutes. Thank you so much. ADJOURN- Seeing no further business, Chair Kagiwada adjourned the meeting at MENT: 11:18 a.m. Approved; Ms. Jenn Kagiwada, Chair (Date) Committee on Governmental Operations and External Affairs JK/dt Page 34