The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCOM 0728.000 2004-2006 X11 ,..l~l~~ ~ 1~~1~1 Counties of Kauai, Maui anc~ Flawaii, City 8. County of ~-Ionolulu ~ NTY p~ ~J~ Y OF ~ P?O P R Q 9 Y c t:. Ferr~uary 24, 2006 IvIEI~1QRANDUM TO: Council Member Hawaii County ~ 3 <£~:Ll FROM: Stac K. Higa, Viec-Chatr • • y Hawaii State Association of Coun~~~ SUBJECT: HSAC Executive Committee Meeting of h •ha'ua~ ~ I }~I!C Attached for your review is the HSAC Executive Cominittee,~1lc~t~€t; ~tg~nda and related communications. Ifyou have any questions, please feel free to contact me. SKH/daw Attachments Co~rr~. Po9~.~ Ref. To: R~. Ucat~ II ',NSY OP //q~ SY OF u S~ `oJN MyG ~I~~ ,~1 y; S~q ~p~ 8J4TF p,•NA'~4 lF Uf N° arr °~°~~qN~ h-Ia~aii State Association of Counties 4 • Counties of Kauai,lVdaui, HaWalll and City and County of Honolulu qe >E ~G~~~~ Q HSAC EXECIJTii/E C®IVII~11T1`EE iVIEETING ~ Tnu~~d~y, ~~~~u~~y ~s, Zoos ~ ~ , ~ :oo , , \ . ~ Council Corna~ittee Room, Honolulu Hale ~ _ ~ r Honolulu, Ha~oaii ~ ~ ~ ~ N 1~J I. CALL TO ORDER II. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE METING MINUTES A. Minutes of the January 18, 2006 Executive Committee Meeting, submitted by the HSAC Secretary. III. TREASURER'S REPORT A, Report for December 2005, submitted by the HSAC Treasurer, by ~~orrespondence dated January 24, 2006, for the fiscal period December 1 through December 31, 2005. IV. REPORTS A. Executive Committee Reports. B. County Reports. 1. Maui County Report. 2. Hawaii County Report. 3. City and County of Honolulu Report. 4. Kauai County Report. C. National Association of Counties (NACo) Report. Western Interstate Region (V1IIR) Report. a"pTr of y ON ~ e p ~ , OF i~~AC Executive Committee Agenda l~~ge 2 V. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Uniform Statewide Building Code flask Force. B. School Impact Fee Working. group. C. Schedule of Upcoming HSAC Meetings. 1. March 20, 2006, Monday, Honolulu Hale, 10:00 a.m. 2. April 13, 2006, Thursday, Honolulu bale, 10:00 a.m. 3. May 12, 2006, Friday, place and time to be announced. 4. June 9, 2006, Friday, place and time to be announced. 5. July 14, 2006, Friday, place and time to be announced. 6. August 2006 no HSAC meeting, 7. September 2006 - no HSAC meeting. 8. October 13, 2006, Friday, place and time to be announced. 9. November 9, 2006, Thursday, place and time to be announced. 10. December 8, 2006, Friday, place and time to be announced. VI. NEW BUSINESS A. Correspondence received on January 17, 2006, from Chris Cannon, IVlember of Congress, Utah 3~d District, requesting that the Western Interstate Region withdraw its October 7, 2005 letter recommending that counties not participate with the "Western Counties Alliance". B. Correspondence dated February 3, 2006, from Hawaii County Councilmember James Y. Arakaki to the HSAC President, requesting that H-82839 Relating to Land Use be placed on the February 16, 2006 HSAC Executive Committee meeting agenda for discussion. HSAC Executive Committee Agenda Page 3 VII. ANNOUNCEMENTS A. Next Executive Committee Meeting to be held on Monday, March 20, 2006, 10:00 a.m., at Honolulu Hale. S. Other announcements. VIII. ADJOURNMENT ocs:proj:hsac:hsac2005-2006:06 agendas:060216:ske II t~ C.I.~I~rl. C.~L~t`1~I Counties of Kau~i,lV~~ui an~i HaeoOO~ii, City 8. County of Honolulu ~ov...,. 9 ® _ 1: MINUTES HSAC EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING January 18, 2006 Council Committee Meeting Room, City Hall. Honolulu, Hawaii I. CALM, TO ORDER The Executive Committee was called to order by President Dain P. Kane at 2:52 p.m. The following members present comprised a quorum: County of Maui: President Dain P. Kane County of Hawaii: Alternate James Arakaki City and County of Secretary Romy M. C:ach~la Of Honolulu: County of Kauai: Treasurer James Kunane Tokioka Others Present: Kauai Councilmember Mel Rapozo Maui Staff Shelly Espeleta Kauai Staff Cydni Ayono Honolulu Staff Calvin Azama II. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES The minutes of the December 15, 2006 meeting of the Executive Committee was approved. III. TREASURER'S REPORTS The following reports from the Treasurer were approved: A. Report, dated December 7, 2005, for the fiscal period October 1 through 31, 2005; and • ~ q;;•~...a;; OCS/012406/08:34/CT r B. Report, dated December 12, 2005, for the fiscal period November 1 through 30, 2005. TV. REPORTS A. Executive Committee Report The report of official action-taken by the Executive Committee at the December 15, 2005 meeting concerning the inclusion of a county liability bill in the 2006 HSAC Legislative Package was approved. B. County Reports There were no county reports. C. National Association Of Counties (NACo) Report There was no NACo report. D. Western Interstate Region (WIR) Report There was no WIR report. V. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Uniform Statewide Building Code Task Force President Kane noted that Russ Saito, State Comptroller, has sent a letter thanking the Executive Committee for allowing him to make a presentation at the meeting of December 15th on the findings and recommendations of the Uniform Statewide Building Code Task Force. Attached to the letter is the report of the Task Force. President Kane stated that the item will continue to be placed on future meeting agendas for discussion. Treasurer Tokioka requested the President to send a letter of appreciation to Mr. Saito for his punctual response to the Executive Committee's request for the Task Force's report. President Kane replied that he would do so. 2 'VI. NEW BUSINESS A. School Impact Fee Working Group President Kane, who is a member of the School Impact Fee Working Group established by the Legislature, distributed a packet of material on the Working Group from the State Auditor`s Office, which provides administrative staff for the Working Group. He noted that Act 246 of the Regular Session of 2005, which created the Working Group, designated as one of its members a representative from HSAC. The purpose of the Working Group is to discuss school impact fees and alternatives. There are 10 members in the Working Group, and State Senator Norman Sakamoto has been elected as Chair. Two:meetings have already been held. The first meeting gave the members the opportunity to get their bearings on the Working Group's purpose and effort. At the second meeting, the Working Group discussed the selection of a consultant to update two previous school impact fee studies. One outstanding issue is that Act 246 required the Working Group to submit a report to the Legislature by the opening of the 2006 session. They, however, have informed the House Speaker and Senate President that a report has not been completed, but that the Working Group has moved towards selecting a consultant and intends to submit a report in April. President Kane invited councilmembers to provide feedback on the Working Group's effort. He stated that he would not feel comfortable taking the initiative in the Working Group on behalf of the counties without feedback from HSAC. He further indicated that questions may be directed to himself, his staff, or Jan Yamane of the State Auditor's Office. Treasurer Tokioka noted that the membership of the Working Group does not include representatives from the neighbor islands. President Kane responded that Treasurer Tokioka is correct. Only President Kane is from the neighbor islands, and he technically is a representative of HSAC, not Maui County. 3 President Kane also noted that the representative from the Land Use Research Foundation on the Working Group indicated that a study on the impact fee issue is being conducted on the Big Island. Treasurer Tokioka requested President Kane to ask the Working Group if it will have dialogue with the neighbor islands. President Kane responded that he believed that the question was asked. He commented that, under Act 246, the HSAC representative's role is to represent the views of all counties. President Kane then indicated that, as the HSAC representative or. the Working Group, his role is to discuss the issue with all counties. He reiterated that he does not want to move forward on recommendations without feedback from the counties. President Kane stated that the next meeting of the Working Group is February 21, and that he will send more information to the Executive Committee members. Secretary Cachola noted that the Working Group's minutes indicate that the study for the Big Island is being conducted by Duncan Associates. Alternate Arakaki stated that he was not aware of the study. President Kane clarified that one consultant will update two past .reports on school impact fees. According to the Working Group's minutes, one report was conducted in 2001 by Group 70 and Duncan Associates and the other was conducted in 1992 by the Land Use Research Foundation. Finally, President Kane stated that he will obtain information concerning the study on the Big Island. VII. ANNOUNCEMENTS A. President Kane recommended that the next Executive Committee meetings be held on Thursday, February 16th, and Monday, March 20th, at 10 a.m. at City Hall. 9 The Executive Committee had no objections. B. Treasurer Tokioka announced that he plans to run for the State House at the next election. Consequently, the next few Executive Committee meetings will be his last. Treasurer Tokioka also stated that Kauai Councilmember Mel Rapozo now will become more involved in HSAC matters. C. Secretary Cachola distributed material on Senate Bill No. 54, a carryover bill from the 2005 session. The Bill allows any elective officer of age 65 years or over to retire and collect normal retirement benefits while continuing in elective office. He indicated that House Representative Kirk Caldwell, House Labor Committee Chair, will introduce a companion bill in the House. D. President Kane announced that Hawaii Council Chair Stacy Higa has sent a letter indicating that Hawaii Councilmember Angel Pilago resigned as the Hawaii Council's representative on the Executive Committee. Chair Higa has indicated that the Hawaii Council will appoint a replacement by resolution. VIII. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, President Kane adjourned the Executive Committee meeting at 3:28 p.m. Very truly yours, f Y M. C HOLA, Secretary H aii to Association of Counties 5 F VMIf 'P ~p nt r•~, t.,.; January 24, 2006 The Executive Committee Members Hawaii State Associatiori'bf Counties Dear Executive Committee Members: Please find enclosed a report of the Association's revenues collected and expenses paid for the fiscal period .December 1 through December 31, 2005. Sin ely, AM NANE TOKIOKA Treasurer, Hawaii State Association of Counties u p;v oi~ ~N'av e l ~ 1 ~ :l'~. P.•: ~re rte"'%~ ~ a'a~ HAWAII STATE ASSOC1ATlON OF COUNTIES REVENUES COLLECTED AND EXPENSES PAIID Fiscal Period: December 1 through December 31, 2005 1"UNIB ;BALANCE AT BEGINNING DATE $64,453.68 This Period Year to Date Budget 001 Membership Fees $0.00 $42,000.00 $42,000.00 O10 Conference Income (2004 Mid-Year Conference-Oahu) $0.00 $104.51 $10,000.00 030 Interest Income $23.93 $138.83 $300.00 050 Corporate Sponsorship $0.00 $0.00 $500.00 Carryover Balance $5,000.00 Total $23.93 $42,243.34 $57,800.00 TOTAL RECEIPTS THIS PERIOD $23.93 Disbursera~ents Executive Committee 20] Travel 450.00 450.00 4,500.00 202 Auditing Services 0.00 0.00 8,100.00 203 Stationery 0.00 0.00 100.00 209 Miscellaneous 5.00 5.00 500.00 Special Committees 301 Travel 0.00 0.00 600.00 309 Miscellaneous 0.00 0.00 100.00 NACo 40 ] Travel 785. ] 5 785.15 9,000.00 402 Promotional 0.00 0.00 500.00 403 Dues 0.00 23,686.00 23,700.00 409 Miscellaneous 0.00 0.00 1,200.00 W1R 501 Travel 1,000.00 1,000.00 6,000.OU 502 Promotional 0.00 0.00 500.00 503 Dues 0.00 0.00 3,000.00 509 Miscellaneous 0.00 0.00 0.00 Conferences 609 Miscellaneous 0.00 0.00 0.00 611 NACo Annual Conference 2005 0.00 0.00 0.00 613 2005 Mid-Year Conference 0.00 ],000.00 0.00 Total $2,240.15 $26,926.15 $ 57,800.00 TOTAL EXPENSES THIS PER10D $2,140.1 S FUND BALANCE AT END OF PER10D: $62,237.46 Chris ~ar~n~n . _ 11t2~h 3~d L)IStI"ICt Commissioner Connie Eissinger President Western Interstate Region P.O. Box 199 Circle, MT 592]5-0199 Dear Commissioner Eissinger: Thank you for taking more than an hour of your tune recently to discuss WIR's October 7`~ letter concerning the Western Counties Alliance (WCA). As we agreed, iet me sunan~arize in this letttT what I think were the most important things we discussed. Let me first reiterate how disappointed I am with the characterization of WCA in the October 7`~ letter and its tons. It painted an inaccurate portrayal of WCA and of our joint efforts on PILT funding this year. From my perspective as Chair of the Congressional Western Caucus, it is extremely important that everyone understands that WIR, the WCA and other organizations must play complementary roles if we are to achieve our mutual goal of resolving the many problems facing rural western counties. We in the Western Caucus have made full funding of PILT one of our top priorities. This is happening as part of our larger effort to change the entire political climate in the: House in which public lands issues are viewed and voted upon. We have bean largely successful in this effort and we are now ready to finally begin dealing with some of the serious problems facing counties, such as increasing PILT funding. As you know, with respect to PILT, we had great and historic success in this past Session. We prevailed in the House to approve 80% of full funding, the highest level in PILT's nearly 30-year history. But, significantly, we also did it by passing a floor amendment. No one before had successfully increased PILT funding through a floor amendment above what the appropriations committees had recommended. While changing the political environment in the House was an important factor in this success, there was another important element: a new approach by counties themselves. It was more aggressive, focused, intense and more professional than anything done previously. These new elements in the PILT fight were provided largely by the WCA. For the previous 28 years, WIR~NACo, acting as virtually the sole organization representing counties, has not been able to get as close to full funding of PILT as we did in the House this year. More important, due to its inherently diffused interests, it is doubtful WIR/NACo, acting alone, will be able to achieve full PILT funding in the future. ' I recognize that NACo and WIR do important work to support counties, work which WCA doss not want to do and never will. But it is a simple reality that WIR/NACo must respond to a broader base of counties, including those in urban areas. This is why it is essential that there be a number of organizations representing county interests ir. Washington, all complementing each other and working together as cooperatively as possible. Our success in the House on PILT is proof that this approach is the key to successfully addressing the whole range of problems facing public lands counties. In short, WCA augments WIR/NACo's effectiveness and shoulders some of the burden when conflicting priorities make it difficult for WIR/NACo to pursue narrow western and rural counties' goals. An excellent example of the need for more diverse voices representing county interests was WIR/NACo's surprising opposition to the amendment Sen. Salazar introduced to increase the level of PII,T funding in the Senate appropriations bill to the 80% funding level we had achieved. in the Douse. WCA was beginning to generate significant support for the Salazar amendment when WIR/NACo weighed in against it. It would have been tough enough for Sen. Salazar to increase PIi..T funding through a floor amendment, even if all organizations representing counties supported it. But with the counties divided, he had no choice but to pull his amendment. A bit of coordination and cooperation, as opposed to competition, might have avoided such a costly inconsistency among those representing public lands counties. We know what will work. To best serve the interests of western counties, we must. do more of what has proven successful. This is why I hope that WIR/NACo will withdraw its October 7`" letter and reconsider its recommendation that counties not participate with WCA. If the goal is to solve the many natural resources-related problems facing western counties, it is difficult to justify discouraging participation in an organization that is becoming an important part of what should be a broad, coordinated effort. Thank you once again for your time and attention. It is my hope that this letter might shed further light on why it is essential that groups like the WIlZ and WCA must work together and complement each other in promoting western interests. I will be more than happy to participate in another conference call to discuss any of these points- or anything else that came up that you might wish to discuss further. Sincerely, ~ Chris Cannon CC: WIIZ Board of Directors and State Association Executives Not paid for at taxpayer expense ~ °a Member States: ~ Alaska Arizona California OCtOber 7, 2005 Colorado Hawaii I~a111 bane, President Idaho I'~awail State ASSOCflatflOII Of COUntfleS Montana 200 South high Street Nevada c/o Office of Council Services New Mexico ~ailuku, ICI 95793-2155 North Dakota Oregon South Dakota ~R and Other Organizations Utah Washington Dear Wyoming On Friday, October 07, 2005, the WIR Board finished its annual board meeting in ~llflitefflsh,lViontana. The Board asks that you send this letter with your own cover letter to each county commission in your state strongly encouraging them to n®t participate in the request for membership in the so-called "Western Counties Alliance". Ve~e make that request for the following reasons: For more than 50 years, the Western Interstate Region (WIR) of the National Association of Counties has represented the interests of the fifleen member western states before Congress with incredible success. WIR was created by counties for counties in the West and fauflded through your state association of counties. No other organization can or will represent your interests like WIR. From the initial creation of PILT, its fiflll funding authorization, to regular appropriation increases, VJIR, through NACo, has achieved results for our member counties that other organizations can only dream of. In addition, WIR continues to strongly represent your counties' interests related to Endangered Species Act reform, forest and rangeland health, wildland f~Ire plans, RS2477 rights-of--way, active multiple-use management and the National Forest Counties and Schools Coalition's work on timber receipts funding. It is through WIR and NACo that counties are represented on the Wildland Fire Leadership Council and the Secretary of Agriculture's new Advisory Committee on Roadless Areas Conservation. Recently, you or your counties may have received a request asking that you join a new organization so that full funding of PILT can be achieved. We strongly caution you against spending your county dollars for an unknown entity that makes claims it cannot substantiate and, in fact, duplicates the efforts already being made on your behalf. Western Interstate Region National Association of Counties 440 First Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20001 www,naco.org/affils/wir/index.htm Continuous participation and membership in WIR ensures that your count~';~ end all other western counties' interests aze represented before Congress and the Administration. Sincerely, C~~ Connie Eissinger v VJII~ President Cc: Council Member K. Angel Pilago , j z. T k~- -*J ~ ~ `f D J c_..~-R~ FHB -6 ~~c mow:. .1 ~ t i..~i ~ TI ~i(: 11 February 3, 2006 Dain P. Kane, President Hawaii State Association of Counties 200 South High Street Wailuku, Maui, Hawaii 96793 Dear President Kane: I would like to request that HB2839 Relating to Land Use be placed on the next HSAC Executive Committee agenda for discussion. This bill provides that developments that have received county approval before a certain date are deemed to be in compliance with state land use restrictions. I have attached a copy of HB2839 for your review. Thank you for your consideration. ncerely, G T..? A [r J ames Y. r>rakaki, Councilmen„ben Hawaii County Council JYA/daw Enclosure . HB2839 Bill Status Page 1 of 1 ~ ~ " ~ii~ ~t~ttts >E-€B2~39 Generated on 2/3/2006 10:13:00 AM A9easure Title: RELATING TO LAND USE. Report Title: Land Developments; Compliance with Land Use Restrictions Description: Provides that developments that have received county approval before a certain date are deemed to be in compliance with state land use restrictions. Package: None Companion: lntroducer(s): SOUKI, CHANG, EVANS, HERKES, NISHIMOTO, Cabanilla, Chong, Ito, Kanoho, Karamatsu; Kawakami,. Magaoay, Nakasone, Sonson, Takamine, Tanaka, Tsuji, Wakai, Yamane, Yamashita. Current Referral: WLO, EDB, FIN Date ~ Status Text 1 /25/2006 H~ Introduced and Pass First Reading ]/30/2006 ' ~ Referred to WLO, EDB, FIN, referral sheet 6 $ =Appropriation measure ConAm =Constitutional Amendment ,.,._:.,,i ,,,,,~/c;tal /~nrc/o PictAt11C7 acn'7hillnn=HB2839 2/3/2006 I-IB2839 Page 1 of 2 Report ~'i~l~ Land Developments; Compliance with Land Use Restrictions D~scr~ptiori Provides that developments that have received county approval before a certain date are deemed to be in compliance with state land use restrictions. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2839 NTY-THIRD LEGISLATURE 2006 • TWE STATE OF HAWAII I relating to land use. BE IT ENACTED BY TIIE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF HAdVAII: SECTION 1. In a recent decision, the state circuit court of the third circuit halted the Hokulia project in South Kona after ruling that the dwellings being constructed for the project were not farm dwellings and therefore not a permitted use in the state agricultural district. The court made this decision in spite of arguments by the developer that it had relied on the county's prior approval of the project in proceeding with the development, including the sale of over one hundred ninety homes and after investing more than 5350,000,000. The legislature finds that the Hokulia decision has created great uncertainty over the validity of county approvals of land development projects granted prior to the decision. The adverse effect the decision has on land development and investment in the state is far- reaching. County approvals of projects are devoid of certainty. Developers of county-approved projects face the loss of millions of dollars after undertaking or completing projects while relying on government approval. Buyers and investors are at risk of losing the use of their property for purposes that were previously approved. http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/sessioncurrent/bills/hb2839_.htm 2/3/200b HB2839 Page 2 of 2 Uncertainty in the real estate market also has a negative impact on Hawaii's economy by deterring investment and reducing the amount of jobs and the demand for local materials and supplies tied to affected projects. Counties will lose property tax revenue that could help pay for community infrastructure and services. The reduction of development projects in the state would also result in a corresponding decrease in the multitude of benefits for local communities that frequently accompany these projects, such as exactions on developers to include affordable housing, transportation infrastructure, shoreline and beach access, and public parks. The Hokulia decision could also draw a variety of parties into costly and time-consuming litigation, including the government, developers, construction companies, buyers, lenders, realtors, title insurers, and residential lot owners. Such litigation only adds to delays of projects and the uncertainty of their status. All of these considerations revolve around the need for assurances and finality regarding the validity of existing land development projects. An area of such profound importance to the state economy, local businesses, employment, housing, and general community interests deserves a greater measure of certainty in the status of county-approved land developments. The purpose of this Act is to reestablish certainty for existing land development projects that have received county approval, by providing that developments approved by counties prior to the Hokulia decision are deemed to be in compliance with state laws relating to permissible land use. SECTION 2. Chapter 205, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by adding a new section to be appropriately designated and to read as follows: "§205_ hand use_ restrictions ;___certain _developments. approved by counti~s;__com~liance_ Notwithstanding a~___other__law to_the__contrary_, and land development_or yroj_ect therefor _ap~roved )~_the_appropriate count y_ land use decision=makin_g__authority____ rior to _shall ._be deemed to be in__compliance with the provisions of__ this chapter relating to permissible_uses__of land." SECTION 3. New statutory material is underscored. SECTION 4. This Act shall take effect upon its approval. INTRODUCED BY: httn://www.capitol.hawaii.Qov/sessioncurrent/bills/hb2839_.htm 2/3/2006