Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN PCENRM 2025/07/22 (2024-2026)Policy Committee on Environmental and Natural Resource Management 2"d Session West Hawaii Civic Center 74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Highway, Building A Kailua-Kona, Hawaii July 22, 2025 CALL TO The regular meeting of the Policy Committee on Environmental and Natural ORDER: Resource Management was called to order at 2:33 p.m., in the Council Chambers, Kailua-Kona, by Ms. Rebecca Villegas, Chair. ROLL CALL: Present: Ms. Rebecca Villegas, Chair Ms. Jenn Kagiwada, Vice Chair Ms. Michelle M. Galimba, Member (via videoconference from Hilo, came in later) Mr. James E. Hustace, Member Ms. Ashley L. Kierkiewicz, Member (via videoconference from Hilo) Ms. Heather L. Kimball, Member Mr. Dennis "Fresh" Onishi, Member Absent & Excused: Mr. Holeka Goro Inaba, Member Mr. Matt Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, 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 on Res. 234-25 (Comm. 377), and came forward when called by the Chair: Patricia Greene: In support. Maxine Kahaulelio: In support. Cory Harden: In support. (representing Club Hawaii Island Group) Jim Albertini: In support. (representing Malu `Aina) Vaughn Cook: In opposition. (representing Japanese Chamber of Commerce and Industry of Hawaii) PCENRM-2 July 22, 2025 Kencho Gurung: In support. (representing Hawaii Alliance for Progressive Action) Tanya Yamanaka Aynessazian: In support. Mary Begier: In opposition. David Kurohara: Comment. (representing Hawaii Island Chamber of Commerce) Noelle Lindermann: In support. Pua Case: In support. John Kawano: In support. Maki Morinoue: In support. Zahz Hewlen: In support. D. Noelani Kalipi: In opposition. Jennifer Leina`ala Sleightholm: In support. ORDER OF The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, RESOLUTIONS: Order of Resolutions. Relinquish Chair: At this time, the Chair relinquished the chair to Vice Chair Kagiwada. Res. 234-25: URGES THE STATE OF HAWAI`I TO ENSURE THE HEALTH AND SAFETY OF HAWAI`I ISLAND RESIDENTS BY REQUESTING THE MILITARY TO CEASE ALL BOMBING AND DESECRATION ACTIVITIES AT THE POHAKULOA TRAINING AREA, REJECTING LAND SWAPS AND LEASE RENEWALS WITH THE MILITARY UNLESS CERTAIN STIPULATIONS ARE ESTABLISHED, AND CONDUCTING A KA PA`AKAI ANALYSIS ON THE AREA Reference: Comm.377 Imr. by: Council Member Villegas Motion to Approve: Ms. Villegas moved to recommend adoption of Res. 234-25. Seconded by Mr. Onishi. Page 2 PCENRM-2 July 22, 2025 ACTING CHR. KAGIWADA: Okay. Go ahead, Council Member Villegas. The floor is yours. MS. VILLEGAS: I just want to start off by thanking the people here today who have stood side by side, hand in hand, for generations; diligent, vigilant, undeterred in their knowing about how sacred this space is and what it means to this place and our host culture. Your legacy precedes you and I would not have had the wherewithal to bring this forward had it not been for your support and guidance and it is an honor and a privilege to do so. When asked recently why I was doing it at this time, to me it's so obvious. I mean, we just had on May 9th, the Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) voted to reject the army's final EIS (Environmental Impact Statement) to retain its lease on state land for P6hakuloa Training Area (PTA) and they rejected this based on the inadequacy of the environmental impact statement, which has been heard by testifiers numerous times here today the historical desecration, destruction of our lands and our waters with post destruction, cover ups, denials, endless legal battles that leave us with poisoned drinking water, unexploded ordinances. You know, we have about 100 acres the County does to build affordable housing is the Waik6loa area but one of the greatest challenges for the last decades to even utilize that land to provide homes for our people are unexploded ordinances. So personally and professionally I cried bologna on that promise. I also want to point out that one dollar is not an equitable amount of money to pay for 66,000 acres. That's under the jurisdiction of the Department of Hawaiian Home Land (DHHL). That is a blatant reflection of the manipulation, commodifrcation, and desecration, and complete disconcern and disregard for Hawaiian people. I find it way tragic. A lot of reasons people avoid this issue is because it is so heightened and it is so controversial because those in the commercial sector or the economic sector will point out all the financial reasons why the military belongs here, and I get it. There are some beautiful perks. I have been to P6hakuloa. I have seen the work that's been done to improve there. But I also want to point out that that work right as the lease agreements, within a decade of the lease agreements coming to term. That's not coincidence that all of a sudden things there get solidified when prior they've been in half dome sheds. I'd be happy to work with you, Aunty, on an amendment that adds in the terminology that you had shared about. I also want to say that this resolution does not preclude, nor does it require the stopping of emergency services, fire mitigation, reforestation, clean up, that's not mutually exclusive. That continues and will continue for decades to come to be the responsibility of the military in compensation for the damage that's been done there. Page 3 PCENRM-2 July 22, 2025 We all drive back and forth to Hilo quite a bit, right? I've watched just in my six and a half years in Council the change in the geography in the dryness of the area in the propagation and overrun of ungulates of the changes in pulu as they dry in the proliferation of fire. I've gathered more than seven native birds `io and pueo. The first time it happened I was driving to Hilo in my first term and Aunty Maile (David) and Aunty Karen (Eoff) were in a car ahead of me and there was a pueo dead in the road right in the front of the Pohakuloa turnoff. And the pueo is the `aumakua for Aunty Maile David, and I called her. What do I do; would it be pono; would it be okay for me to turn around? I feel not okay with leaving this native bird indigenous owl to this island in the middle of the highway. One moment and I'll finish up. And I turned around, and I gathered up the pueo and I took it back to Hilo and I shared it with Aunty Maile and said, "Would it be appropriate for me to keep it and take it and bury it at home, and say oli and make sure it's at least provided honor?" In the last six and a half years I have gathered seven `io and pueo, and that's just in my once a month drive back and forth. And the zone that it is happening in and where I see these birds is directly within a one mile radius of the entrance to Pohakuloa. And I always struct me how, what would I —God, this is such a big issue; how would you ever prove that, and where's the data, and the this and that and the other. But even just having one other testifier here share her testimony of birds falling from the sky, it doesn't take a scientist or a data collector when nowhere else on that road am I personally encountering our protected native birds that exist nowhere else in the wild in this state and that is one of their last safe habitats. So I ask for Council Members to consider supporting this. I brought it forward so we could have the conversation, so community could have the opportunity to revisit, and we as a County would have the opportunity to reconsider where and how we align ourselves moving forward at a time when it is so pivotal for the future health and safety of our people, of this land, of the species we share it with, of our water, of all of it. With that, I yield. ACTING CHR. KAGIWADA: Thank you, Council Member. I'll open it up to the other Council Members for comments or questions. Council Member Hustace. MR. HUSTACE: Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Council Member. Grateful for you bringing this forward. I respect the balance you're trying to attempt here and trying to find solutions tlirough, you know, treacherous times and what not. And I respect and admire the intent that we're trying to achieve here collectively. I just had some questions about the resolution. There are parts where you referenced very specific things. So I do have some concern about a couple of whereas clauses that are kind of open ended. So I would request that we do site particular things whether it's regarding the depleted diuranium specifically, you know, in Page 4 PCENRM-2 July 22, 2025 regard to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and their findings. I think it's important to kind of site, you know, these specific instances where things are a little bit open and broad. So that's my request for that. And on the third "WHEREAS" clause with a similar sort of situation where we're claiming the destruction of land particularly by wildfires. Just to reference where that kind of information comes from, kind of that calculation. And I think it's in overall, you know, some of this makes me sit a little bit incomplete in my mind so just kind of add some of those citations. Some of the data might provide some more insight, you know, particularly to some of the testifiers and some of the collaboration we have there is also part of that conversation when it comes to wildfires. It's claiming that these activities have caused or exacerbated, but there's also instances where we've benefited and been supported by those partnerships. So there is part and parcel with that and two sides of the equation there. When it comes to the, let's see, the desecration of burial and cultural sites, you know, the military and its capacity there to my understanding, is federally mandated to care for those other sites, identify them, protect them, so we need to make reference of that in there as well under the conditions that they occupy that space right now. Let's see, I think it's about the seventh "WHEREAS" clause. And then like I said, I admire the intent. I do fear that we don't have the authority and jurisdiction as a County to kind of undertake some of these issues because it is an ongoing state item right now. They went through the process, were rejected and then more information has been requested of the military Department of Defense and the Army to answer those questions that are still lingering from community, from its citizens, from the people here. So I fear this is duplicative of the process as well. I don't know what more impact that we can make with that process being required of them. For example, in one of the first `BE IT RESOLVED" clauses the requesting of ceasing bombing; that's really a federal determination. I don't think we have a say in that matter unfortunately. You know, that's with our partnership with our federal partners and what we can do there. And then similar with the land swaps, leases, that's between the feds and the state and kind of that partnership there. The full Ka Pa`akai, I respect that. I look forward to seeing that as well so thank you for making mention of that. I do hope that's part of the process. It is being rectified at the state level so do look forward to seeing that coming forward. Those are just some of my thoughts on the resolution. I just wanted to share that with you. So thank you, Council Member. Thank you, Chair. ACTING CHR. KAGIWADA: Thank you, Council Member. Council Members over in Hilo? Page 5 PCENRM-2 July 22, 2025 MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Yes, Chair. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Villegas, for bringing this resolution forward. I echo the sentiments that were provided by my colleague Mr. Hustace. I think there are opportunities to strengthen with citation, you know, some of the clauses that you've put forward here. You know, first I just want to recognize that, you know, PTA personnel have been very helpful in responding to a number of disasters that our County has faced. I think about wildfires, volcanic eruptions, and other emergencies that happen in the area, but that's not what this is about. You know, the rejection by DLNR of Pohakuloa's EIS really gave everyone pause because we need to hold agencies accountable. There are processes in place that are meant to protect the public health, wellbeing of people, and `aina. And that rejection of the EIS was a strong statement that the work was deficient and that the military needed to do better and I hope that they do. Ka Pa`akai needs to happen and it's concerning that it hasn't. So thank you for using a legislative tool that we have. Resolutions; they are not law. They are symbolic in nature, but they are very strong statements of the sentiment of this body. We require applicants, developers, of all types to do various plans and analysis and various statements so we require the military to do this as well if they are going to be provided not just the opportunity but the privilege, right, to be utilizing our precious lands and resources. So I look forward to some amendments based on Council Member feedback and will be supporting the resolution. Thank you. ACTING CHR. KAGIWADA: Thank you, Council Member Kierkiewicz. Council Member Galimba, do you want to weigh in? MS. GALIMBA: Thank you. Sure. You know, this one with every testifier I was almost like switching positions in my mind because there's truth on both sides. There's unquestionably been a lot of destruction at Pohakuloa and outside of Pohakuloa just the amount of unexploded ordinance on this island and other islands has just not been counted and has made a good deal of land unusable for anything in the, you know, foreseeable future. On the other hand it's also true that having an area for training for the military, you know, no one really wants to have to sacrifice a spot but there is a need still for the military. We haven't evolved beyond that. So just practically speaking, we're still at this point do need to have a strong military. Perhaps some day we won't, but that time is quite far away. And there are also the emergency help that we get. And it's also true that there are important native flora and fauna that are protected on Pohakuloa in a way that we might not be able to do as a County and State because there are federal resources that are protecting some very, very endangered species on that in that area. So it's a complicated issue. I would also say at the same time when you drive through on the road that was created largely because Page 6 PCENRM-2 July 22, 2025 we got funding by saying that we needed better roads to Pohakuloa, that it doesn't look good, you know, in these drought times there's dust clouds; the ungulate problem is very, very concerning and is doing active destruction to native plants there. So there's a lot more that the military and that command at Pohakuloa could do to do a better job. So all of these things are true even though they're sort of opposite. So I would like to see this resolution be more balanced in that. I don't know that the introducer would be open to that, but I would like to see balance to better reflect I think a more consensus view of the community around this. Beyond that there's certain phrases in it that are unclear to me exactly what they mean. For instance in the title, desecration activities, you know, I can understand what they're aiming at but it's a very open-ended phrase and also the phrase unless certain stipulations are established. And I didn't really see where those stipulations were detailed. Sc there's some things about this resolution on a more technical level that give me pause. So those are my thoughts at this time. ACTING CHR. KAGIWADA: Thank you, Council Member. Anybody else over here. Council Member Kimball. MS. KIMBALL: Thank you. Thank you, Council Member, for putting this forward so we could have this discussion. I have a number of questions so I'll just go through them and then hopefully you can answer some of them. But stemming from kind of from some of the same concerns about completeness of the information, so I'm not familiar with in the second "WHEREAS" clause the Ching case supreme —yes. Well maybe you can be called up. So I understand in this citation here in the second "WHEREAS" clause that in this particular case it was the state not, the PTA that was found to have not complied with the terms that they were supposed to. And so I would like to kind of understand how we should make the connection in the second clause between the citation of that case and then the second half of that "WHEREAS" clause, which talks about the military having neglected. So to me there's an inconsistency there in the reference because the case refers to the state's negligence and the second half refers to the federal negligence and so there's a disconnect there in terms of what is being cited. As I read this, the case reference the supreme court case refers to the state's breach of its constitutional duty whereas the second half of the clause refers to the federal failure to manage the lands properly. So I think there's like a missing middle piece there that connects the states negligence with the presumed neglect by the military. Similarly I think there needs to be a citation or some sort of reference in the first clause to solidify that as well as third clause with respect to the causes or exacerbation of fire. I was hoping that there is, do you know if there's a reference that actually states the requirement of PTA in the fourth clause to do the Ka Pa`akai analysis. It says that it was required somewhere but is there Page 7 PCENRM-2 July 22, 2025 a document that you could reference that requires that? That would be useful there. Also I'm hoping you could briefly explain what that framework requires. Not necessarily in the legislation but for me personally I'm not familiar just so I can have that information to review the rest of this. I see you have the list in the next whereas clause but,I'm not clear who's conducting it and what are the metrics and is there a document that outlines this in statute? Again it looks like it was established by a court case so it seems like there should be something that references that process from this land use commission. MS. VILLEGAS: Can I answer that? MS. KIMBALL: Sure. ACTING CHR. KAGIWADA: Do you have more things to get through? MS. KIMBALL: I do have more questions but maybe I'll stop there because I did like a bunch of them. ACTING CHR. KAGIWADA: Okay. MS. KIMBALL: I can yield, and you can come back to me. ACTING CHR. KAGIWADA: Thank you, Council Member Kimball. Go ahead, Council Member Villegas, if you want to answer that one that you can answer. MS. VILLEGAS: Yeah. It's interesting because the Ka Pa`akai case is a case that Angel Pilago, Maile David, and Karen Eoff took to the supreme court, which established in conjunction with the PASH (Public Access Shoreline Hawaii) decision, native Hawaiian gathering rights and the requirement of a cultural impact statement be connected with an environmental impact statement with land use issues. So I would gladly provide that information and yeah, I guess being born and raised with this group of people and the legal work they did, I guess I'm a little bit heartbroken that not more people know about it because it's been so instrumental in creating and elevating the recognition of native Hawaiian law as it relates to the current legal system that we abide by here in the state. So thank you for that. I will do abetter job at bringing that forward. ACTING CHR. KAGIWADA: Thank you. Anybody else? Do you have things you want to get back to? MS. KIMBALL: I did have more but Council Member Onishi hasn't had a chance. Page 8 106003M July 22, 2025 ACTING CHR. KAGIWADA: Council Member Onishi, would you like to weigh in? MR. ONISHI: Thank you, Madam Chair. For me it's like, well when I was with the Governor's office it was mentioned about Waikoloa of the clean ups and the problem was there was about Department of Health not signing off because they felt it wasn't safe, right? And so they weren't signing off. So that's why housing couldn't be built. The other one was down in Maku`u, the Hawaiian Home Lands in those areas also was used for bombing. And so the department required the lessee, the beneficiary, to do the checking or making sure the property was free of anything, right, any ordinances and stuff. So that was required by the beneficiary but then you needed money in order to do that study or do that clean up, right? And so that was hard where they couldn't build on those properties that were awarded to them. So within the governor's office, working for the governor's office I was trying to help them in trying to get the connections, but we never could. And so things couldn't get done. So I don't know if within this resolution something can be said about that too, about like having more some kind of stewardship where they need to like after using the lands that they need to I guess put in the investment of making sure that it's returned to be able to be used again for the public and not having it where the public or the agencies will need to have to spend money to go and do the clean ups. So something like that within that. I yield. ACTING CHR. KAGIWADA: Thank you, Council Member. Council Member Kimball. MS. VILLEGAS: Can I just quickly? ACTING CHR. KAGIWADA: Sure. Go ahead. MS. VILLEGAS: Because I want to make sure I understand. So wow, I'm deeply grateful for the insights and the specifics being requested and suggested. And if I understand correctly, Council Member Onishi, what you are asking for within the resolution, which is a forceful suggestion of perspective of not only Council but our constituents, is that something be included in here which clarifies, specifies, and delineates whose responsibility it will be to pay for and execute a thorough clean-up of the area? MR. ONISHI: Yes. Basically yes. MS. VILLEGAS: Okay. MR. ONISHI: And would be the responsible party that is using the land. Page 9 PCENRM-2 July 22, 2025 MS. VILLEGAS: It would be the military. MR.ONISHI: Yes. MS. VILLEGAS: Correct; So we don't end up in this leeway where Department of Health is, they're not going to sign off because they don't believe but because it's already been deeded to them it becomes their responsibility to then clean it up and we end up in limbo. Okay. MR. ONISHI: And I know like for the Waikoloa one they did give some funding. So I think with the Hawaii Community College they had a program where they went and surveyed that areas. But Department of Health still didn't want to sign off. MS. VILLEGAS: Yeah because Waikoloa Land bought the property for pennies on the dollar decades prior and then as part of the affordable housing requirement for all of their development they gave the land to the County, which once again bringing it back to what you're saying is then the land changes hands a bunch of times and where the responsibility really relies for the clean up ends up with public jurisdictions and taxpayer dollars, which we all know we're all struggling to do ten gazillion projects with the resources or maybe one gazillion. So thank you. ACTING CHR. KAGIWADA: Okay. I'm going to —you guys, you got it? MS. VILLEGAS: Yup. ACTING CHR. KAGIWADA: Okay, great. Thank you so much. Thank you both, Council Members. I want to just avoid the back and forth and back and forth. Council Member Kimball, did you want to finish up with some comments? MS. KIMBALL: Yeah. Thank you. And thank you for the clarification. This is the same case as the PASH decision? I did attend the Native Hawaiian Law training, and I don't recall this particular reference, so we can follow up on that afterwards; it's connected. The very last "WHEREAS" clause I think needs some TLC (Tender Love and Care). I can't really put my finger on what it is but it's kind of a, statutorily it's kind of unusual language to find in a resolution. I would suggest maybe rephrasing that. And then, what was the other thing I was going to mention? The list of —because there's so many references to health in here, I would suggest that this also be forwarded to the Department or the Director of the Department of Health in the list of folks that are being listed. Page 10 10491 MIM July 22, 2025 And then, similar to Council Member Galimba, I think the desecration activities need to be described more specifically. I mean, I feel like I know what that means but I'd rather have it well described in the resolution as we need to have that level of clarity if we're going to make this statement. So those are my thoughts. ACTING CHR. KAGIWADA: Okay. Thank you. I'm going to go back to Council Member Villegas and then I'll wrap up before; I'll say a little bit before we go. So go ahead, Council Member Villegas, I'll give you another chance. MS. VILLEGAS: Sure. Yeah. Ka Pa`akai followed that PASH decision, and it was related to, and correct me if I'm wrong, it was related to the Ka`npnlehu development that was happening closer to the Kua Bay area where the PASH decision was related to Kohanaiki. So but both landmark decisions that would be mentioned in the Native Hawaiian Law training. Although there's so much in that training it would be hard to gather it all and remember it all. But I look forward to moving forward and answering some of these questions. It's interesting because in my mind less specificity seemed like a safer resolution to move forward and I'm really grateful that what I'm hearing from my colleagues is more specificity and more accountability to be included. And yes, while it is just a resolution, the time is now for us to have these conversations again and things will be brought forward. But while some of it may be in the state and the federal realm, it does send a message for what the will of the County and the people of this place is and will remain. So thank you, Chair. I yield. ACTING CHR. KAGIWADA: Thank you so much. So yeah, I just wanted to make a few comments. You know, earlier today I brought forward Resolution 235-25, which commemorates the 801h anniversary of the bombings in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and clearly, we don't live in a world where we can completely do away with the military. But we're never going to get closer to the world we want to live if we don't start taking some of these steps. And so for me the end of live fire bombings, I know the military really keeps saying they need it, they need it, they need it, but I just, you know, virtual reality and the technology that's been developed over the last couple decades but even more in the last couple years, it's just amazing. And I feel like there are opportunities to do so much of this training without actually doing live explosives on our land. You know, we would never say we have to actually kill people in order for people to get trained to learn how to kill people. We can do that through, you know, virtual situations, things like that and I feel like we're at a place with technology where we can really start to get the training that our military needs without actually doing live explosives. I think if we do that, we can also start to shrink the footprint of the military on our island, which I think is really important because if we aren't doing the live fire training then we can start to really shrink the amount of land that is needed by the military. Page 11 PCENRM-2 July 22, 2025 I hear and I echo that we don't really have a lot of jurisdiction to make things happen here, but I do still think it's important that we make especially as the state going along, you know, this is the island that we're responsible for. This is our kuleana to speak for this island. So I think we have to make our voice heard to the state as they are responsible for negotiating with the federal government. So I support a lot of what my colleagues have said today, and it sounds like you've got some ideas of things you want to refine for this resolution. I guess I would suggest that maybe we hold it here one more time, but I'm going to leave it up to you, Council Member Villegas, to decide where you want to go with that at this point. MS. VILLEGAS: Yes, definitely. Can you remind me the terminology, Mr. Clerk, on how I would say that? Just postpone it? MR. BROWN: Yeah. So you could postpone it to a specific date for another meeting or to the call of the chair and then you would work with the committee chair when you're ready to bring it back and have it agendized again. ACTING CHR. KAGIWADA: She is the Chair. MS. VILLEGAS: Which is me. I'm actually going to motion to postpone, because I feel like there's a lot of opportunity to dig. I just got a text from Karen Eoff with all the Ka Pa`akai stuff. Thank you. Motion to Postpone: Ms. Villegas moved to postpone Res. 234-25 to (Approved) August 19, 2025. Seconded by Mr. Onishi and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Galimba, Hustace, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Onishi, Villegas, and Acting Chair Kagiwada — 7. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Members Inaba and Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder — 2. Excused: None. ACTING CHR. KAGIWADA: Thank you. Alright, and with that that is our only item on the agenda today. So thank you very much and we will finish up. Page 12 1041003MM ADJOURN- MENT: There being no further business, Acting Chair Kagiwada adjourned the meeting at 3:58 p.m. Approved: Ms. e ca V' legas, Chair Policy Committee on Environmental and Natural Resource Management RV/tk 6111kl�l� (Date) July 22, 2025 Page 13