Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN PCHSW 2026/05/19 (2024-2026)Policy Committee on Health, Safety, and Well-being 81, Session Hawaii County Building 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, Hawaii May 19, 2026 CALL TO The regular meeting of the Policy Committee on Planning, Safety, and ORDER: Well-being was called to order at 4:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers, Hilo, by Dennis "Fresh" Onishi, Chair. ROLL CALL: Present: Mr. Dennis "Fresh" Onishi, Chair Ms. Heather L. Kimball, Vice Chair Ms. Michelle M. Galimba, Member Mr. James E. Hustace, Member Mr. Holeka Goro Inaba, Member Ms. Jenn Kagiwada, Member Mr. Matt Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Member Ms. Ashley L. Kierkiewicz, Member Ms. Rebecca Villegas, Member STATEMENTS The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, FROM THE Statements from the Public on Agenda Items. PUBLIC ON AGENDA ITEMS: The following individuals registered to speak on Bill 157 (Comm. 888), and came forward when called by the Chair: Amedeo Markoff: In Support. Susan Osborne: In Support. Eileen O'Hara: In Support. CHR. ONISHI: Great. Thank you. Mr. Clerk, can you read in Bill 157. BILLS FOR The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, ORDINANCES: Bills for Ordinances. Page I PCHSW-8 May 19, 2026 Bill 157: AMENDS CHAPTER 7 OF THE HAWAI`I COUNTY CODE 1983 (2016 EDITION, AS AMENDED), RELATING TO DISASTER RECOVERY Establishes a County Disaster Recovery Program to coordinate short -and long-term recovery efforts following major disasters, led by a recovery officer appointed by the mayor with the responsibility for recovery planning, interagency coordination, community engagement, funding management, and the development of interim and long -tern recovery and resilience plans. Reference: Comm.888 Intr. by: Council Member Kierkiewicz Motion to Approve: Ms. Kierkiewicz moved to recommend passage of Bill 157 on first reading. Seconded by Mr. Hustace. CHR. ONISHI: Go ahead Ms. Kierkiewicz. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chair. I really appreciate the opportunity to bring this particular measure forward for our community. It's something that I have been working on for a number of years. It's actually taken several drafts to actually get to this point. It was certainly inspired by the work that needed to happen in the response to the volcanic eruption. But I also recognized structural gaps within our county, when our county faced the coronavirus pandemic and how to navigate, supporting community at that time. There was so much chaos that follows a disaster and, in that chaos, I think it's really hard to be clear headed and think about how to support communities in their recovery. There is no framework within the county to guide how we mobilize and activate resources and work with community to design their own recovery strategies and implement that. I want to acknowledge the very heroic improvisation that occurred within our county across three different administrations to support lower Puna's recovery. Our recovery officer Douglas Le, who led us for many years, played such an instrumental role in designing programs from scratch, a voluntary housing buyout program, you know, supporting the Kilauea Recovery Grant Program. So many things that were very experimental that the county had never done before, working in partnership with community, trust based philanthropy. So much of that he built from scratch with an incredible team, he is no longer with us. He's now the Deputy Director with HHFDC (Hawai`i Housing Finance and Development Corporation), so the state is very lucky to have him working on housing products and strategies for our state. But I'm so grateful for his leadership and before he left, we sat down to really think about and reflect over the last eight years. Page 2 PCHS W-8 May 19, 2026 What worked, in this recovery process, and what might we institutionalize to serve as a guide so that in the event of a future disaster, the county has some kind of playbook that it can activate to guide next steps in terms of response. You know at the end of the day, I never want any other community to suffer in the same way that lower Puna did. And lower Puna suffered because of the lack of coordination and honestly, knowing what to do next. So much time was wasted because there wasn't a framework in place. And frankly, I think the county tried to penny pinch quite a bit. Trying to keep a lot of the work in-house when there was money available from state, federal, philanthropic partners, to bring on the necessary professionals to move projects forward. We are still waiting for roads to be completed, water lines to be installed, parks to be restored, and rather than asking county employees, who are already doing so much, to do more, it behoofs us and makes so much sense to take the recovery resources that are available to build a team, specifically focused on recovery, a hundred percent of the time. The bill before you is essentially a framework. It activates during a disaster moment, so a federal declaration, a governor's proclamation, or under the determination of the mayor. This is not a permanent function within county. It will also deactivate when recovery services, functions are no longer required. The size and scope of the program is commensurate to the available resources that are being given by county, state, or federal. The recovery officer position has defined qualifications, clear authority and responsibilities, and it's actually a cabinet level position. So as one of the testifiers pointed out, wanting to make sure that this individual could make decisions, they do. The next person they report to is the mayor but their ultimate boss and folks that they need to report to is the community, is the people. But the recovery officer position is a cabinet level position. There are two guiding deliverables that are required as part of this process. One is the interim recovery strategy, and I just wanted to note for the public because I —six months does seem like a long time but to just put things into perspective, the interim recovery strategy for the volcanic eruption took 16 months. It took 16 months and that, in my opinion, is horrific. That is absolutely absurd, and so six months seems like, fast enough, when you think about government speed, that seems like lightning speed. So six months is the recommendation and then following that, 12 months after the publication of the interim recovery strategy, a recovery and resilience plan that would guide the long-term recovery and revitalization of community, that particular plan would be adopted by council resolution. This— CHR. ONISHI: I'll give you a couple more minutes. Page 3 PCHS W-8 May 19, 2026 MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Thank you, Chair. I really appreciate that. There is also a provision in there for council oversight, so the requirement of semi-annual reporting back to this body so that conversations can happen publicly, and the community can be informed of progress that's being made on recovery initiatives. One of the things that's also imbedded within this framework is community engagement. And I wasn't able to codify the incredible work that has happened through revitalize Puna. This is a deliberate partnership between county, community, and philanthropy. We would've been subject to Sunshine Law, and that is a wonderful thing, but it would not be helpful when in a recovery process, you're trying to move quickly, and adapt and be responsive to community. And so I just want to make notes of that, it's on the record, that I do encourage future administration, that there's ever a need to activate this particular framework, that you bring community along and give them a seat at the table because they need to be involved in decisions, that impact their future. Happy to answer any questions you folks have. And I just want to acknowledge the individuals and departments that were involved in helping to crack the legislation, you know Douglas Le, our former recovery officer; Patti Pinto; Misty Carter with Recovery; Planning department was involved, we also had Keym Wong with Corporation Counsel; Director Nakagawa with Finance; and then our Civil Defense Administrator Talmadge Magno. Everyone made sure to kokua on this particular piece of legislation. I think at the end of the day folks felt really good about this kind of framework being a guiding post in the future, if we need it. Thank you, Chair, for the latitude. CHR. ONISHI: Members. Ms. Kimball. MS. KIMBALL: Yeah. Thank you, Council Member Kierkiewicz, for putting this forward. I actually remember having some conversations with Douglas about the need to do this after everything was done with the Puna recovery, to actually codify this, so that the next time this happens, which it will, there's not a complete reinvention of the will. I think this kind of ties into some earlier conversations about how when we see failures, we do really need to fundamentally look at some of the structures and the processes and make those adjustments. Just two questions and then a couple of proposed amendment ideas. So with the officer, is that the individual be appointed by the Mayor, not confirmed by Council, not civil service, and not for any defined period of time, other than the " recovery period". You're nodding, so she's agreeing with that. Page 4 PCHSW-8 May 19, 2026 What is the recourse, that for this should happen, that that person is not the right fit. Is that, is it entirely at -will, where the Mayor could say, "Okay. No, I want somebody else now." or like how would that all play out? Okay the other question would be— CHR. ONISHI: No. You can, no hold on. MS. KIMBALL: Oh okay. CHR. ONISHI: She'll answer right now. MS. KIMBALL: Okay, thank you. CHR. ONISHI: Yeah, sure. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: This is not a civil service position. This individual would be exempt from that. Yes, appointed by the Mayor. No confirmation necessary by Council. I think it's really important that the Mayor had the ability to appoint someone very quickly to lead the recovery process. You know, if the individual is not the right fit, I'm sure the Mayor is going to hear it from the Council and the community and make decisions in the best interest of the recovery process. So the removal of that individual that authority would be retained by the Mayor. MS. KIMBALL: Okay. I'm not sure, and this is a Corporation Counsel question, if we need that language in there, that it clarifies that this is not, I know that for some of our other non -civil service positions, there's that language in there that says this shall not be a civil service position, to just clearly identify that. The second question I had then, was around, there's the, under the coordination, sorry I've lost it here, departmental responsibilities, "such cooperation may include but is not limited to committing staff and resources to support the recovery operations and coordination." Which, I, you know, support, wondering though, where would the oversight be for, you know, the expenditure, resources, and staff towards, from other departments to this activity. Like, how would you envision that all playing out? MS. KIERKIEWICZ: I'm sorry could you clarify the expenditure of resources. MS. KIMBALL: Yeah, so, it says, "in terms of the cooperation", under that section, departmental responsibilities, "there's such cooperation may include but not limited to committing staff and resources." Page 5 PCHSW-S May 19, 2026 The way I'm reading that is that other departments would commit staff and resources to the recovery effort. I'm just wondering where the oversight of that would happen because it's not going to necessarily be within the budget process or any other, so just trying to understand what you're envisioning there. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Yeah. So this was ensuring that coordination and collaboration happens between county departments and the recovery office. Recovery office as it's, mobilized, this would not be something that is sustained long-term. Like I mentioned earlier, I think it's important for a lot of these functions, like a parks, you know, development manager, somebody that is working on roads projects, you know, an individual that is doing some of the legal stuff for the financing, rest within, the recovery office, because right now a lot of that is actually spread across different county departments and I think that has kind of belabored the whole recovery process. So this is designed to be for the very beginning, first few months of recovery, while the team is being built with those professionals that are needed to guide recovery for the long term. And if you think that clarification is necessary, where it's mentioned that it's just for the interim, it's just to get things off the ground, and the ball rolling until the staff is fully stood up. I'm happy to — MS. KIMBALL: Yeah. I think that that would make me more comfortable. Just because I think, unfortunately there are examples where it's these kinds of scenarios where if there isn't an oversight piece, spending can be misappropriated. And so just some sort of like thing, I don't know, I'll ruminate about it more based on your answer, what would be appropriate there. I wondered if it might be appropriate as an amendment just to also put a timeframe on the after action report, so that we're not waiting for a really long time for that. The six months for the implementation plan, but also, I wondered if it might be appropriate to just say six months after, we set an after action report. I think those are as critical sometimes, in terms of reviewing best practices. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: I agree with you and our Civil Defense Administrator is here, Administrator Magno. We had talked about wanting to put a timeframe on the after action report. I think that's very difficult to do based on just the size and the scope, and the duration of a particular disaster. Administrator, do you want to come forward and, you know, kind of talk about everything that's involved in the after action report. I deliberately did not put a timeframe on that. I also didn't want any of the recovery strategies to be linked to this report being completed, because we needed to get these, at least the interim strategy, off the ground. But there's a lot that is involved. I just wanted to make Page 6 flINWT�i May 19, 2026 sure that folks were aware that this is a document that needed to happen. It's part of the reflection, the Hikaloi of, you know, disaster response. Hi, Administrator. (Note: At this time, Civil Defense Administrator Talmadge Magno came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. MAGNO: Good afternoon, Council. Talmadge Magno, Hawaii County Civil Defense Administrator. Yeah, as far as a timeline on after action reports, you know, we kind of do them as soon as possible after an event. Some delays have been because we've had back-to-back events and other things going on. But we try to get them out as soon as possible. No real line in the sand drawn for timeframes because, like I said, other things can happen. But we get them out pretty quick. MS. KIMBALL: So, if I may Chair. You know I think, I was thinking about that comment —that no two disasters are alike —and then there can be these confounding events where you have one and then there's something else that layers on top of it. So you have the timeline for the recovery strategy and then, you know, there's this after action report. I was thinking okay would it make sense to build some flexibility in the interim recovery strategy based on what kind of disaster it is, what time, and then also maybe it's not a timeline to have an after action report, like that specific term, but some sort of like, progress report to the Council on, you know, a biannual basis or something like that. Just so that there is open communication about how things are going, I think, Council Member Villegas before was talking about like how the budget process becomes a sort of reminder that things need to happen. That's kind of where I'm thinking along those lines. I'll leave that there, just mention the last amendment, from the amendment proposal that I had, just because you're talking about, and I think this is really key, in your long-term recovery, but then also future resilience plans. And I would love to find a way to weave in a tie in with OSCER (Office of Sustainability, Climate, Equity, and Resilience) there too. And so, I was kind of looking at different places, but we can maybe take that conversation offline about how to, when we talk about resilience, weave in some of their work as well, in terms of developing that strategy. Thank you. CHR. ONISHI: Okay. Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. Page 7 PCHS W-8 May 19, 2026 MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Simply. Been here since the beginning and watched Ashley struggle with how to bring the funding in, how to get it in the right place, how to get a team in place to spend it, and then more so, in the past month, watched the different departments struggle to explain why after this much time, things haven't been spent or built. And that was frustrating to listen to money that's on the table and has been for years, not be incumbered and spent down for projects that need to happen. And to sit here and listen to that, and I understand how hard she has worked and we've worked to make things better. And this is not against you, Civil Defense Administrator Magno. Just, it was frustrating but also clarifying to see how much work it takes to get the money in, money spent, projects done, seeing the government lag. It just takes time for us to do projects at this scale to rebuild what was lost during the eruption. And seeing all that, understanding what it takes this kind of a, body or agency, is in place in future emergency situations as Ms. O'Hara pointed out. It's going to happen again. So to have this built into government where we know how the process works with the department, between the Mayor, the Council, FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency), any other body, HIEMA (Hawai`i Emergency Management Agency) to bring together this well-rounded approach that's clearly laid out in code. How it's going to happen to me is needed. Again, nothing against the Civil Defense Agency, you guys are great, this just clarifies how it's going to happen. And for me, my standout moment was the Kea`au Armory; getting a $1.4 million grant from the recovery agency to improve it and seeing zero work done, while that building falls apart. While we have the numbers to show, it's incredibly needed and it's our emergency facility in the area where people go for shelter. That was my "A -ha" moment. But the other big projects; waterlines, replacement parks, road, without the work of the recovery group, Civil Defense, Public Works, but having this tight -knit crew within the government itself, this little body that she's creating, I think it wouldn't have happened or maybe it just wouldn't have happened as quickly. So I'll be supporting the bill. I like the bill, I like the intent, and yeah this was talked about. So to see it actually come about, as you hit the last six months of your tenure, well done. Thank you, I yield Chair. CHR. ONISHI: Ms. Galimba. Page 8 PCHSW-8 May 19, 2026 MS. GALIMBA: Thank you. I'm in support of this in general. I think for me, one or two more definitions might be helpful. For instance, defining disaster recovery, I think would be helpful to me. I think you do define it to some extent on when, as you detail the interim recovery and long-term recovery plans and what they should include, but I think an overall disaster recovery definition might be helpful just to sort of, make sure there's a focus for this program. That's my comment. CHR. ONISHI: Chair, Inaba. MR. INABA: Thank you. So just to confirm, Administrator Magno, your agency is in support of this bill? MR. MAGNO: Yes, we are and it's actually, you know, part of our function with Civil Defense. Recovery actually starts while the disaster is just wrapping up, and starts with damage assessments. So our department has that under our responsibilities at this time. Adding this level of recovery would add to that and bring continuity to the whole operation in the county I believe. MR. INABA: Thank you. Wanting to see and hear that on the record. I don't think any Council Member here on this dais is as familiar with disaster preparedness and recovery, as Council Member Kierkiewicz and her community. So and in reviewing this bill, I'm in full support because I can also recall, I mean I know this work started before I got on the Council, but I can also recall in those first couple years of me being on the Council. A lot of effort coming from Council Member Kierkiewicz to try and get updates to have those updates be provided here at Council and it shouldn't have to be that much work to see progress, to ensure that progress is continuing. So to have those updates; six months, twelve months, as articulated here in this bill, I think really sets up the county and future Council Members and administrations, not to have to fight so hard to have an organized recovery effort. So thank you, Council Member Kierkiewicz. We hope we don't have to use this but the likelihood of us needing to is, is high. So mahalo to you and your staff for putting this together and mahalo, Administrator, for your support. CHR. ONISHI: Okay. Any other members? Mr. Hustace. MR. HUSTACE: Thank you, Chair. Thank you Council Member for proposing this idea. As we hear from testifiers and we all know in different communities Page 9 PCHSW-8 May 19, 2026 that disaster is around the corner for a lot of us in different ways. So I appreciate your foresight in bringing this forward and having this conversation. I just have one question about the head of the establishment of the program and if there were any sort of possible barriers in setting up the program. Because it puts that authority within the Mayor to establish it, under certain conditions. And I recognized that it would alleviate, you know, some strain from Civil Defense as well as Mayor's Office and we've seen recovery in plenty departments, so it's kind of centralizing some of that effort for sure. But I guess I'm just a little curious if you could, just explain a little bit further in terms of the establishment of it, because it says that it shall be administered by the officer and maybe activated under any of these conditions. So I just want to make sure that it does happen, right, regarding one of these conditions. So that, that authority is then given that support is then falls to— CHR. ONISHI: Go ahead, Ms. Kierkiewicz. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. I'm going to do my best to interpret and then answer your question. MR. HUSTACE: I'm sorry. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: No, no. So there are three conditions that are articulated in the ordinance for when this function, this office would be stood up. A federally declared disaster. So, the volcanic eruption was one of them, a state proclaimed emergency and the reason why I noted that there was under the current administration, there haven't been as many federal declaration, emergency declarations issued, so we wanted to make sure at least locally there was the ability to make that proclamation and to use that as a catalyst to activate, mobilize this function. The Mayor can also make that determination if there is nothing that is coming from the state or federal government. The reason to house this function within Civil Defense is Civil Defense is there from the very beginning to provide that initial emergency response and so there's a nice sort of transition from response to recovery. Right now, the volcanic eruption recovery effort is housed within Planning. And that was very, very unique. It was functioning sort of out of the mayor's office and R & D (Research and Development), under Mayor Kim because, you know, Diane Le, Director at the time, had a lot of ties to the Puna community, so between her and Dwight Takemoto they were kind of co -leading the process. The Page 10 PCHSW-8 May 19, 2026 recovery officer, Douglas Le was named and with the new administration, the idea of putting that function within Planning because we needed to plan the future of this community. This was, you know, very devastating and so, I think, Michael you volunteered to kind of take it on. And it made sense to keep there when the next Director, Mr. Kern, was of that particular community and knew kind of how to navigate Puna community engagement. But in all of that reflection, it made the most sense that if this were to happen again, the most natural fit would be to retain this function within Civil Defense. I hope I answered your question, partially. If there's more clarification needed, please let me know. MR. HUSTACE: Thank you. No, I appreciate that. No, thank you. It's, I guess maybe I'm struggling with the —yeah I know I'm trying to express it as best as I can on that one too, because it's, it shall be established with Civil Defense Agency and then shall be administered by the recovery officer, and then may be activated upon the occurrence of any of the following. Just trying to connect the dots there a little bit. It does make sense to me, and I really do appreciate the direction you're going with this. To kind of be that very forward thinking, on how we, beyond the response after an event but where we take community in the next step, yeah, so I really do appreciate what you're doing here. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Yeah, and I think I know where you're going, I think I know where you're going with this. Not every disaster is going to require a full recovery team. MR. HUSTACE: Right. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: And so, to provide the Mayor that discretion to determine whether or not they activate this function, I think is important. And so that's why the Mayor's there, the Mayor has this authority to do this. And should he or she say, "Let's mobilize a recovery function." Then everything else within the ordinance kind of falls into play, the appointment of a recovery officer, and these are all of the functions that should be stood up to support that office and the community's recovery process. MR. HUSTACE: Thank you and I guess where I'm kind of going with that as well, is there an expectation from community that it should be stood up at a certain point? Because it gives that option to the Mayor and administration to kind of take it on if they so see fit, but will there be an expectation from community to also establish it if some triggers, and you know, within the Mayor's Page 11 PCHSW-8 May 19, 2026 mind say, "No, it doesn't rise to that occasion." Will there be an issue there? And I don't know if community would say, "You know you did it for this situation but not this situation." So I'm just trying to analyze it from that kind of standpoint that there are these conditions that should be administered. But it still gives some leeway to administration to maybe take it on or not, take it on. And I don't know if there will be some ;consignation in community about it. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: If we adopt this, then there's a framework and the community can put pressure on future administrations to activate this function if they believe it's necessary to have a dedicated recovery officer and officer to support community. MR. HUSTACE: Okay. Thank you. No, I and —administrator anything else you wanted to add to that? MR. MAGNO: Sure. Civil Defense supports this and then Ashley and I have had discussion early on about this position. But there's some changes that have happened in the language that I kind of want to have some clarification or further discussion on where this has gone. In our discussion I kind of expressed that this position should be with Civil Defense, but it should be a civil service permanent position. That recovery officer can function within Civil Defense all the time with additional roles of mitigation, because mitigation and recovery are tied together. Like I said earlier, as soon as we get impacts, and we are doing disaster damage assessments, that's when the recovery process starts already. We start to develop thresholds where federal programs might come into play. So from that point already, the recovery officer is working in that role. It's more dictated by the event itself than somebody saying, "Oh, let's activate the recovery officer." So we don't know what thresholds we are hitting, you know sometimes it's automatic. Definitely the lava flow in 2018 was a pretty close to automatic, this Kona Low was pretty, you know, evident that we were going to get that declaration as well. So other events, not so easy. But then the recovery officer could be running the damage assessments and establishing those, you know, what thresholds we make, so. And the continuity of knowledge, experience, and information that this person would have, needs to be passed through administrations because we know and we're hearing, FEMA has changed and we're seeing it right now with what we're going through. And they tell us, the county, the state, needs to take on the lead, basically, take on the load as far as running recovery. Page 12 PCHSW-8 May 19, 2026 So, it's even more important that this position be established and then brought on to the county. MR. HUSTACE: Thanks, Administrator. So couple questions there then. So little bit of different insight then, I guess on the position and maybe more of a, I think as you see it, more problematic in terms of when an incident occurs and rises to a level of necessary recovery for community and that position then transitions into more mitigation and enduring the resilience, sort of, entity inside of it, going forward. MR. MAGNO: Yes. All those other activities that were involved with that recovery officer will be part of and also was noted is —you know, 2018, we still got projects from that event even though FEMA is telling us no more extensions, you know, they're trying to narrow down their window, they want projects to be done. So, you know, what was stated already, you know, projects got to get done within the timelines that they give us initially. So, even more important that position becomes, you know, that person that pushes, make sures that projects get done, as far as recovery. MR. HUSTACE: I think that's critical and Council Member Kaneali`i- Kleinfelder spoke about it on the budget and in terms of someone that is tracking all these funds, incumbering them, you know, appropriating them and correct allocation in places and ensure that we're using them in a timely fashion to benefit community support, community. I think that's really critical what you're proposing here, Council Member Kierkiewicz, in terms of there is a clearing house of one person through the guise of Civil Defense and the Mayor's Office that is activating these dollars, that were not belaboring it, that we don't know what's going to happen at the state or federal levels, in terms of funding and additional support. So these dollars need to be adequately spent in a timely fashion. So I do appreciate what you're trying to go for here, but I do sense that there's a little bit of difference of opinions, maybe, I'm not sure. So, at least on that deposition itself, yeah. I'll leave it there for now. Thank you for letting me babble on. CHR. ONISHI: Ms. Kierkiewicz. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Yeah. I'll respond. You know during our meetings as a hui to talk about this particular measure, Administrator Magno did advocate for making the recovery officer position a permanent one. But the majority consensus in the room, including the voice of Deputy Managing Director Merrick Nishimoto, folks could not agree with making this officer position permanent. Page 13 PCHS W-8 May 19, 2026 They felt that it would be necessary to activate this function and the position for a future disaster, and that it not be a permanent fixture within Civil Defense. If there are projects that departments need to get done, and they're running out of time, I don't know what to say. I honestly don't know what to say because departments have had close to 8 years to get projects completed, and there really is no excuse. I think the role that a recovery officer would play in future disasters, is sort of being the accountability coach and making sure that every single department that has a kuleana to do, to support recovery, is getting the job done in a reasonable amount of time so that we're not losing, you know, credibility with state and federal government and that we're helping people rebuild their lives faster. Thank you. CHR. ONISHI: Any other members? Ms. Kimball. Oh, Ms. Kagiwada. MS. KAGIWADA: Thank you. First of all, thank you, Council Member Kierkiewicz. I'm full support of this. I'm just wondering kind of what would happen if horribly, you know, hopefully this never happens but we have, you know, major disasters happening in several different locations at the same time. Does that mean we would have potentially several disaster individuals that are brought on board at the same time or would that one person deal with multiples disasters or how do you foresee something like that should it ever happen. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you for that. Knock on wood. Hoping that is not a scenario that we'll have to actually navigate. We talked about a singular recovery officer and that there being divisions within that office to focus on each of the disasters that our community has to recover from. CHR. ONISHI: You finish? Oh okay. I didn't hear you say, you yield. Okay. Ms. Kimball. MS. KIMBALL: Yeah. Just wanted to follow up a little bit more on what James was saying and just kind of your thoughts. Based on your experience with the Puna recovery, in terms of this position I'm sensing, I'm just looking for confirmation that part of what you think is necessary through this is having somebody at that higher level coordinating position of the cabinet, right, in order to, you know, actually jump in a quick way through this appointment to sort of take the reins. That's kind of what I'm gathering. So my question in terms of being a permanent position, like you said, is all that lost? Is that kind of why you went, —I'd like to Page 14 PCHSW-8 May 19, 2026 understand why or more about the decision making between, you know, what Administrator Magno was saying and then what the rest of your hui kind of decided it was appropriate and why that might've happened. And then secondly, one of the things I would potentially worry about would be if it weren't civil service, if it weren't more permanent, the ability to find somebody appropriate that quickly. Like I almost wonder if there would be benefit and making it a permanent position that is the position itself is activated, right. And they're given this particular kuleana that kind of triggers when there's this recovery event. But they're always there, right. So I'm, that's kind of where I'm thinking about —that way we might have a better ability to get somebody that has the skillset we're looking for. Those are my thoughts. CHR. ONISHI: Okay. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Can I just, I want to clarify because that's interesting. So the position would be a permanent one but the individual, not necessarily. MS. KIMBALL: And more thinking that they, the position, sorry Chair. I hope you don't mind the back and forth. CHR. ONISHI: No, so go ahead. MS. KIMBALL: The position and potential individual would be a fixed one that is like in reserves, if you will, and then there are these functions of recovery triggered at the time that disaster is declared. And so, like their —maybe they have like two PDs (Position Description), and this is your like every day PD and this is your disaster recovery PD. And when there's a disaster event it goes into that other function. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: I honestly want somebody that's completely singularly focused on supporting this community and this particular disaster. And I know that administrator is advocating for a permanent function, but it sounds very closely tied to more mitigation activities. And this is specifically designed to help a community recover from a particular disaster. We don't know when that's going to be, it could be two months from now, five years from now, ten years from now. And I wouldn't want that individual to be mired in county bureaucracy. I want fresh kind of leadership coming in to support a community; navigate this, you know, very devastating life altering event. I think that's really important. Page 15 PCHS W-8 May 19, 2026 CHR. ONISHI: Okay. Any other members? Okay, if not, I'm going to close and I do support this. I think in 2018, when we had the lava flow eruption, if we had someone there that was doing this, but Ms. Kierkiewicz, you need to in your bill to maybe, even like during the time of the disaster, for example, with the eruption, Pahoa businesses were lacking a lot of income coming in. So thanks to Governor Ige, allowing me to help organize and getting the proper, I guess, agencies; federal, state to come and talk to them, meet with them, let them know what they going be required to have when their business goes down. Also, like I said, state. So it was with the farmers, we had meetings with the farmers to let them know what kind of pictures they needed to have, what kind documents they need to have, because once the lava overtakes the property and they say, "Oh, you need this proof," it's too late. It's gone, right? So, with someone with this kind position, if they had it back then, it would really help out too, to help things moving forward because then, you can wait until the end, but it's kind of late. They could be one year later and they're going to be suffering for that one year of not having this revenue, right or support. So I do support this, and maybe you can tweak a little bit more, and I do agree that it shouldn't be permanent under Civil Defense. And so with that, I'm going to, oh go ahead, Ms. Kierkiewicz, to end it. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Yeah. Thank you, Chair. There are some friendly amendments that I want to offer based on feedback from the group; including definitions and clarification on some of the language. So if I could make a motion to postpone Bill 157 to our oh, June 2"d committee hearing. CHR. ONISHI: Okay. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Motion to Postpone: Ms. Kierkiewicz moved to postpone Bill 157 to June 2, 2026. Seconded by Mr. Inaba. CHR. ONISHI: Any discussions? Hearing and seeing none, all those in favor of postponing Bill 157 to the June 2"d committee meeting, all say "aye." Those opposed? Page 16 PCHSW-S Vote on Motion to Postpone: (Approved) ADJOURN- MENT: May 19, 2026 The motion to postpone Bill 157 to June 2, 2026, was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Galimba, Hustace, Inaba, Kagiwada, Kaneah'i-Kleinfelder, Kierkiewicz, Kimball, Villegas, and Chair Onishi — 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. CHR. ONISHI: Okay. That ends our meeting. It's adjourned at 4:53 p.m. Thank you. There being no further business, Chair Onishi adjourned the meeting at 4:53 p.m. Approved: Nalf 07 Mr. Dennis "Fresh" Onishi, Chair Policy Committee on Health, Safety, and Well-being DO/mp JUN 2 6 2026 (Date) Page 17