Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0338.000 2006-2008BOB JACOBSON Councilmember Chair, Environmental Management Committee Vice -Chair, Finance Committee 333 Kilauea Avenue, Second Floor Ben Franklin Building, Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Mailing Address: 25 Aupuni Street, Suite 200 Phone: (808)961-8263 Fax: (808)961-8912 E -Mail: jjacora co.hawaii.hins HAWAII COUNTY COUNCIL Counly of'Hcnvai'i r_ April 18, 2007 rD Pete Hoffmann, Chair and Members of the Hawaii County Council •J Re: HSAC report v Aloha Pete, On April 12, 2007 my legislative assistant and I, attended the monthly HSAC board meeting in Honolulu. Attached is a copy of the agenda as well as copies of the minutes of the March 13s' meeting. After approving the last meetings minutes and filing committee reports, there were announcements of the NACo Transportation Steering Committee memberships. I am proud to say that my membership has been approved as well as that of Honolulu Council Member Romy Cachola. Hawaii County reported the following: • Hawai`i County Council approval of HSAC Budget via communication 258. (April 4, 2007) • Appointment of Hawaii County's representative to serve on the HSAC Executive Committee and its representative to serve on the WIR Board of Directors. (Bob Jacobson) • Confirmation letter from NACo President Colleen Landkamer, regarding appointment of Hawaii County's representative to serve on Transportation Steering committee. (Bob Jacobson) • My WIR conference assignment. (Email attached) The treasurer reported a balance of $82,000.00. The committee approved the offer of Russell Yamane & Associates CPA to provide auditing services for a fee of $3,250.00. There was also a proposed amendment to the bylaws to allow for travel reimbursements for County officials that attend conferences and are not Executive or Board Directors. This proposal will be submitted in writing at the next HSAC meeting and formally discussed at that time. The HSAC Slate of Officers as approved and will remain the same with: • Mel Rapozo, Chair (Kauai) • Bob Jacobson, Vice Chair (Hawai`i) • Joseph Pontanilla, Treasurer (Maui) • Romy Cachola, Secretary (Honolulu) There will be no HSAC meeting in May. HSAC Conference will be at Maui Prince Hotel June 7-8, 2007. Mahalo, Att. BJ/bl Comm. No. District 6 — Upper Puna, Ka'a, and South Kona Ref. To: f '^' ��-� Aaivai'i County Is An Equal Opportunity Provider And Employer Ref, Date APR 1 8 9[1(11 A. AGENDA HSAC EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING Thursday, April 12, 2007 9:00 a.m. Council Chambers, Honolulu Hale Honolulu, Hawaii I. CALL TO ORDER II. MINUTES A. Minutes of the March 13, 2007, Executive Committee Meeting, submitted by the HSAC Secretary. III. REPORTS A. Executive Committee Reports. Report of official action taken at the March 13, 2007 Executive Committee Meeting, submitting the recommendation of the proposed HSAC annual budget for fiscal year 2007-08. B. County Reports. 1. Maui County Report. 2. Hawai'i County Report. 3. City and County of Honolulu Report. 4. Kauai County Report. C. National Association of Counties (NACo) Report. D. Western Interstate Region (WIR) Report. IV. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. 2007 HSAC Legislative Package Status Update. HSAC Executive Committee Agenda April 12, 2007 Page 2 B. School Impact Fee Working Group (SIFWG) Correspondence dated March 27, 2007, from State Auditor Marion M. Higa, transmitting a copy of the Hawai'i School Impact Fee Working Group Report, prepared by Duncan Associates and Group 70 International, Inc. dated March 2007. C. State Identity Theft Task Force D. 201 H-38 Affordable Housing Exemption Projects Correspondence dated March 29, 2007 from the HSAC Treasurer transmitting a copy of an opinion dated March 13, 2007, from the County of Maui's Department of the Corporation Counsel, relating to the Maui County Council's ability to modify projects proposed under Section 201 H-38, Hawai'i Revised Statutes. V. NEW BUSINESS A. Treasurer's Report Report for February 2007, submitted by the HSAC Treasurer, by correspondence dated March 27, 2007, for the fiscal period February 1 through February 28, 2007. B. Correspondence dated March 23, 2007, from HSAC Treasurer requesting for seed money for the 2007 HSAC Annual Conference which will be held at the Makena Resort, Maui Prince Hotel on June 7 and 8, 2007. B. Correspondence dated March 21, 2007, submitted by the HSAC President to the NACo President Colleen Landkamer transmitting the Hawai'i State Association of Counties Representatives to serve on the NACo Steering Committees. VI. OLD BUSINESS A. Nominations 1. Appointments of HSAC Officers 2. Appointments to the Western Interstate Region Board of Directors 3 HSAC Executive Committee Agenda April 12, 2007 Page 3 3. Appointments to the National Association of Counties Board of Directors VII. ANNOUNCEMENTS A. Schedule of Upcoming HSAC Meetings. May 2007 — No meeting scheduled at this time. June 7-8, 2007 — HSAC Conference, Makena Resort, Maui Print Hotel B. Other announcements. VII. ADJOURNMENT Hawaii State Association of Counties Counties of Kauai, Maui and Hawaii, City & County of Honolulu i MINUTES HSAC EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING »•� March 13, 2007 Council Chambers, City Hall Honolulu, Hawaii 1. fl ORDER WN6C Executive Committee was called to order by President Mel Rapozo, at 10:02 a.m. The following, members comprised a quorum: County of Kauai: _._. President Mel Rapozo County of Hawaii: ice President Bob Jacobson City and County of Honolulu: SecretaryRorrtachola County of Maui: Treasurer Josp lira y, Y Others present: Hawaii Staff Barbaral IVgfy. Honolulu Staff Andrew Sekine Kauai Staff Cyndi Ayonon Maui Staff Shelley Espeleta Honolulu Council Chair Staff Vent II. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES The minutes of the February 23, 2007, Executive Committee me approved as circulated.. - 4 III. REPORTS OF THE TREASURER The December 2006 and January 2007 (revised) Treasurer's Reports were approved. IV. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES A. Executive Committee Reports There were no Executive Committee Reports. G B. County Reports Hawaii County Report. Vice President Jacobson commented on the NACo conference. City and County of Honolulu Report. None. Kauai County Report. None. Maui County Report. Treasurer Pontanilla distributed the tentative schedule for the HSAC Year -End Conference to be held on Maui on June 7-8 at the Maui Prince Hotel. Treasurer Pontanilla stated that the sessions for the conference will be held during the mornings on two days in order to avoid having afternoon sessions, which in the past have not been well attended. President Rapozo noted that the HSAC Executive Committee meeting starts at 8:00 a.m., which would require members from the other islands to be in Maui the day before the conference. C. National Association of Counties (NACo) Report President Rapozo stated that reports on the NACo conference will be deferred until the HSAC annual meeting. The members commended Maui Council Chair Hokama for his work in chairing the Transportation Committee. D. Western Interstate Region (WIR) Report The Executive Committee members discussed the WIR conference that will be held in Fairbanks, Alaska, May 9-11. V. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Update on the Hawaii Superferry Honolulu staff Sekine reported that the Honolulu Council did not adopt a resolution relating to an Environmental Impact Statement for the Superferry. Secretary Cachola suggested that the neighbor island counties that have adopted such resolutions send a joint letter to the Senate President and House Speaker. B. 2007 HSAC Legislative Package Status Update. Kauai staff Ayonon referred the members to a chart she prepared summarizing the status of the HSAC legislative package bills as of the crossover. Ms. Ayonon reported that the bills relating to county indemnification and lifeguard immunity crossed over. Ms. Ayonon also distributed an email from Dawn Spurlin of the City and County of Honolulu Corporation Counsel reporting on the status of H.B. No. 38, H.D. 2 (Lifeguard Immunity). President Rapozo acknowledged the hard work of Ms. Ayonon in the Kauai Council Services office, which is currently understaffed. Secretary Cachola offered comments on legislative strategy for passing H. B. No. 38, H. D. 2. President Rapozo stated that the counties should be mindful of the composition of the task force proposed in the legislation, particularly in regard to the number of task force members set aside for representatives of the counties. C. School Impact Fee Working Group (SIGWG) President Rapozo stated that there is nothing new to report on the School Impact Fee Working Group. D. State Identity Theft Task Force President Rapozo stated that there is nothing new to report on the State Identity Theft Task Force. VI. NEW BUSINESS A. The Executive Committee received the following communication: Correspondence dated February 16, 2007, from Kauai County Council Chair Bill "Kaipo" Asing to the National Association of Counties President Colleen Landkamer, informing her of the appointment of Councilmember Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho to the NACo Board of Directors. B Secretary Cachola reported that he has received a letter appointing him to the Hawaii Sister State Committee. The appointment is subject to confirmation by the State Senate. VII. HSAC FISCAL YEAR 2007-08 PROPOSED ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET Treasurer Pontanilla stated that most budget items are unchanged from the previous year's budget except as follows: • The conference income reflects $10,000 anticipated income from the Maui Year -End Conference. • Auditing expenses was increased by $1,500 based on comments by Maui auditing service providers. 4 • NACo and WIR dues will increase by 2.8 percent. • Interisland travel for executive Committee members is reduced due to decreases in the price of interisland fares. In response to questions from Secretary Cachola, President Rapozo stated that the counties share equally in membership fees at $10,500 each pursuant to a resolution adopted in 1999. President Rapozo explained that prior to 1999, membership fees were based on population, with Honolulu paying the highest fees. However, in 1999, it was decided that membership fees shall be shared equally among the counties in order to secure the continued participation of Honolulu in NACo, which would ensure 100 percent participation by the Hawaii counties and allow an extra seat on the NACo board of directors. President Rapozo stated he has no problem with splitting the fees equally, but he would also expect fair representation for the counties. Secretary Cachola suggested that consideration be given to adjusting membership fees based on inflation. President Rapozo suggested that membership fee adjustments be based on increases in NACo and WIR dues. Vice President Jacobson commented that HSAC needs to respond to increases in NACo and WIR dues or HSAC's budget would ultimately be diminished. President Rapozo suggested that increases in membership fees should not be greater than increases in NACo dues. Secretary Cachola suggested that travel expenses may be reviewed after issues regarding adjusting membership fees are resolved. Treasurer Pontanilla stated that he is committed to the Year -End Conference at Maui raising $10,000. President Rapozo noted that HSAC recently began having only one conference a year and suggested that the Executive Committee, at a later date, may reconsider holding two conferences a year. Secretary Cachola moved to amend the proposed HSAC budget for Fiscal Year 2007-08 by increasing membership fees by 4 percent to correspond with increases in NACo and WIR dues, as well as inflationary factors. Vice President Jacobson seconded the motion. In response to a question from Treasurer Pontanilla, President Rapozo stated that with a 4 percent increase in membership fees, the new total would be $43,680. President Rapozo further stated that the each county's share would be increased by about $400. Treasurer Pontanilla noted that the fund balance would be reduced by $1,680. Kauai Staff Ayonon stated that when the NACo conference was held in Honolulu, the counties paid large amounts of dues, as well as assessments. Secretary Cachola suggested that in the future, legislation should be prepared to provide that in the event the counties host a conference such as the NACo conference, the state should pay to the counties a share of the tax revenues generated by the conference. President Rapozo stated again that the membership fees would be $43,680 and the fund balance would be $3,020. Treasurer Pontanilla'statefd that each county's share of the membership fees woulitbe $10,920. The motion was carried. VIII. NOMINATIONS President Rapozo reminded members that the county councils must appoint one of their members and an alternate to the HSAC Executive Committee no later than April 15. President Rapozo requested members to complete the respective procedures for appointment prior to the next HSAC meeting on April 12 so the slate of officers may be determined at that meeting. President Rapozo stated that if possible, he would like to forego meeting in May. Kauai Staff Ayonon stated that after the slate of officers is determined in April, then the slate of officers must be approved by the county councils prior to the annual meeting. President Rapozo stated that similar procedures apply to the nominations to the NACo and WIR boards of directors. President Rapozo stated that there is no requirement to designate alternates to the NACo and WIR boards of directors, and the designation of an alternate is an option for each county. President Rapozo requested members to inform him if any council members are interested in serving on NACo subcommittees. The Executive Committee received the following communications: A. Correspondence dated February 27, from the HSAC President informing the HSAC Executive Committee of deadlines relating to the appointment of HSAC Officers in accordance with Section 5 of the HSAC Bylaws. B. Correspondence dated February 27, 2007, from the HSAC President informing the HSAC Executive Committee of deadlines relating to nominations to the Western Interstate Region (WIR) Board of Directors in accordance with Section 56 of the HSAC Bylaws. C. Correspondence dated February 27, 2007, from the HSAC President informing the HSAC Executive Committee of deadlines relating to nominations to the National Association of Counties (NACo) Board of Directors in accordance with Section 5A of the HSAC Bylaws. IX. ANNOUNCEMENTS A. Schedule of Upcoming HSAC Meetings. The next meeting will be held on April 12, 2007, 10:00 a.m., at the Honolulu Council chambers. The HSAC Year -End conference will be held on June 7-8, 2007, in Maui. X. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 11:18 a.m. :ion of Counties P Hawaii State Association of Counties Counties of Kauai, Maui and Hawaii. City & County of Honolulu March 23, 2007 Official Action Taken _. Approval by Executive Committee Meeting of March 13, 2007 Mel Rapoio, President Hawaii State Association of Cou. nti"W.F 4396 Rice Street, Room 206 Lihue, Kauai, HI 96766 x Dear Mr. Pre ' Pursuant to Section 20 of the Bylaws of the Hgyyaan A ociation of Counties (HSAC), which requires a report of each official actiports on the recommendation of the proposed HSAC annual budget for fis.. 07-08. The Executive Committee recommends that the attached proposed. HSAC budget for fiscal year 2007-08 be approved by the county councils. Theirupanimous approval is necessary for the proposed budget to take effect. The Executive Committee notes that at its meeting on March 1 committee voted to revise the proposed budget transmitted by the HE correspondence dated March 5, 2007, by increasing membership fee with increases in NACo and WIR dues, as well as inflationary factors, the fund balance accordingly. The changes are reflected in the revis( budget transmitted by the HSAC Treasurer by correspondence dated Very truly yours, Attachments MAR.15.2007 9:45AM COUNCIL SERVICE NO. 1'111 Hawaii State Association of Counties (:ountlec of Kauai, Maui, Hawaii and Citi' and County of Honolulu March 15, 2007 President Mel Rapozo and Executive Committee Members Dcar President Rapozo and Members: P. 2/3 /OaC� J SUBJECT: HSAC FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2007-2008 PROPOSED ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET E7 The HSAC Executive Committee approved the attached proposed annual operating budget for FY 2007— 008, as amended, at the HSAC Executive Committee meeting on March 13, 2007. Th get was amended to increase the membership fees county by 4 per r $1,680.00. herefor mbership fees will increase t 680, each —caffnty' hip fe 'll be $1 ;920.0 The proposed fund balance ed f from FY 2 • as so amen 0 to create a balanced budget 01 Please traphed proposed budget to your respective counties for their approval pri the next utive Committee meeting on April 12, 2007. Attachment ocs:proj:hsac:FY 2007:071v:0708revpropbudgec:ske EXHIBIT A Treasurer MAR. 15. 2007 9:45AM COUNCIL SERVICE X00 Nu, 1ZIl r. v1 0 HSAC FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2007.2008 PROPOSED ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET FY 2006-2007 FY2007.2008 Budget Budget REVENUES 1. Membership Fees f $42,000.00 $43,680.00 2. Conference Income $0.00 $10,000.00 3. Interest Income $115.00 $100.00 4, Corporate Sponsorship $0.00 $0.00 Total Revenues $42,115.00 $53,780.00 Fund Balance, prior FY $12,065.00 $3,020.00 TOTAL REVENUES AND FUND BALANCE $54,180.00 $58,800,00 EXPENSES 1. Executive Committee Travel $5,250.00 $4,500.00 2. Executive Committee Auditing/Professional Services $3,500.00 $6,000.00 3. Executive Committee Stationery $250.00 $250.00 4, Executive Committee Miscellaneous $100.00 $150.00 1. Special Committee Travel $0.00 $0.00 2. Special Committee Miscellaneous $0.00 $0.00 1. NACo Travel $9,000.00 $9,000.00 2. NACo Promotional $250.00 $250.00 3. NACo Dues $25,580.00 $26,300.00 4. NACo Miscellaneous $1,000.00 $1,000.00 1. WIR Travel $6,000.00 $6,000.00 2. WIR Promotional $260.00 $250.00 3. WIR Dues $3,000.00 $3,100.00 4. WIR Miscellaneous $0.00 $1,000.00 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $54,180.00 $56,800,00 ocs:projhsec:FY 2007t0708proposedbudgetrev:ske MAR.21.2007 9:23AM COUNCIL SERVICE NO.7249 P. I FROM:ESPELITA,SHELLY Hawaii State Association of Counties Counties of Kauai. !Itaui, Hawaii and City and County of Honolulu 9 • 2 . Y March 5, 2007 President Mel Rapozo and Executive Committee Members Dear President Rapozo: SUBJECT: HSAC FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2007-2008 PROPOSED ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET As Treasurer of the Association, I am submitting the attached proposed annual operating budget for FY 2007.2008, along with the following budget details. In preparing the FY 2007.2008 operating budget, I have incorporated the following assumptions and changes: 1. Membership fees of $10,500 for each county will remain the same. 2 Y ,fonlerence income will reflect approximately $10,000 for the June conference that Maui •tr:n; ;.;•!"" ounty will be hosting. ' interest income will decrease slightly from last fiscal year based on an average of $8.33 et f�,;M1. J per month.`" 4. Executive*cosuw- avel will decrease slightly based on lower inter -island fares of approximand-trip $150 x 3 members x 10 meetings). 5. Executive it(] • 'rtes will increase to accommodate securing a new auditor to complete last fiscal years au pd altpyal tax return, 6. Executive committee miscellaneous.x�c ' 15 x 10 meetings). 7. NACo Travel of $9,000 will remain thq+&me ($1 d Directors x 3 meetings). S. NACo and WIR dues will increase by 2,8%. 9. WIR Travel of $6,000 will remain the same 9.000 x 2 Board Directors x 3 meetings). 10. A new line item for WIR "Miscellaneous" will be added at an arqequal to NACo "Miscellaneous" ($1,000). These miscellaneous funds are appropri essional , .,,• luncheons and contingencies. ; • „ t ; It is my recommendation that the Executive Committee submit this opera` htob,'#k AI - four counties for their approval by April 15, 2007, pursuant to the HSAC Bylaws. Sincerely yours, -�. 3 EP PONTANJLLA • SAC Treasurer Attachment ws:pmj:hsx:FY 2007:071a:0708proposedbodget:skc MAR.21.2007 9:24AM COUNCIL SERVICE N0, 7249 P. 2 HSAC FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2007-2008 PROPOSED ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET (P� 1. Executive Committee Travel FY 2006-2007 FY2007.2008 2. Executive Committee Auditing/Professional Services Budget Budget REVENUES $250.00 $260.00 1. Membership Fees $42,000.00 $42,000.00 2. Conference Income $0.00 $10,000.00 3, Interest Income $115.00 $100.00 4. Corporate Sponsorship $0.00 $0.00 Total Revenues $42,115.00 $52,100.00 Fund Balance, prior FY $12,065,00 $4,700.00 TOTAL REVENUES AND FUND BALANCE $54,180.00 $56,800.00 (P� 1. Executive Committee Travel $5,250.00 $4,500.00 2. Executive Committee Auditing/Professional Services $3,500.00 $51000.00 3. Executive Committee Stationery $250.00 $260.00 4. Executive Committee Miscellaneous $100.00 $150.00 1. Special Committee Travel $0.00 $0.00 2. Special Committee Miscellaneous $0.00 $0.00 1. NACo Travel $9,000.00 $9,000.00 2. NACo Promotional $250.00 $250.00 3. NACo Dues $25,580.00 $26,300.00 4. NACo Miscellaneous $1,000.00 $1,000.00 1. WIR Travel $6,000.00 $6,000.00 2. WIR Promotional $250.00 $250.00 3. WIR Dues $3,000.00 $3,100.00 4. WIR Miscellaneous $0.00 $1,000.00 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $54,180.00 $56,800.00 oos:proj:hsac.,FY 20D7:0708proposedbudget,,ske Hawaii State Association of Counties Bounties of Kauai, Maui, Hawaii and City and County of Honolulu q ry'ei'iii r` rr �� '•• March 29, 2007 President Mel Rapozo and Executive Committee Members Dear President Rapozo and Members: SUBJECT: DEPARTMENT OF THE CORPORATION COUNSEL OPINION RELATING TO MODIFICATION OF SECTION 20111-38 PROJECTS Attached is a copy of correspondence dated March 13, 2007, from the County of Maui's Department of the Corporation Counsel, relating to the Maui County Council's ability to modify projects proposed under Section 201H-38, Hawaii Revised Statutes. -,JN N : m attached opinion indicates, pending a written response from the Attorney Genee, the Departm rat of the Corporation Counsel has concurred with the oral advice rendered by the Attorney-- al that the Council does have the authority to approve, with modifications, proposed S OIH-38 projects. ..IH -38 s. Z �a May I request that this correspond{„t enc ; e be aced the April 12, 2007 HSAC Executive Committee meeting agenda for discussion. Th u f eration of this matter. Sincerel oll Attachment ocs:proj:hsac:FY2007:071tr:201 Hopinion:ske CHARMAINE TAVARES BRIAN T. MOTO Mayor Corporation Counsel DEPARTMENT OF THE CORPORATION COUNSEL COUNTY OF MAUI 200 SOUTH HIGH STREET 0 o WAILUKU, MAUI, HAWAII 96793 CD TELEPHONE: (808) 270.7740 Z T FAX: (808) 270.7152 r� March 13, 2007 C-),- w o-.,;. c MEMO TO: Danny A. Mateo Council Member — o F R 0 M: Edward S. Kushi, Jr. Deputy Corporation Counsel SUBJECT: COUNCIL'S ABILITY TO MODIFY CHAPTER 201H PROJECTS (PAF 06-208) We respond to your inquiry of January 8, 2007, as to whether, pursuant to Act 180,1 and Act 217,2 Session Laws of Hawaii 2006, the Maui County Council (the "Council"), as the legislative body of the county in which a project is situated, has the authority to approve, with modifications, a project proposed under Section 201H- 38, Hawaii Revised Statutes, ("201H-38 project"). We understand that the Department of the Attorney General ("Attorney General") has given your staff an oral opinion confirming the Council's authority to approve, with modifications, proposed Section 201H-38 projects. We believe it prudent to obtain a written opinion from the Attorney General. Accordingly, we have written a request for such an opinion to Deputy Attorney General Nalani Wilson -Ku, a copy of which is attached hereto. Pending a response from the Attorney General, we have reviewed the relevant legislation, and the Hawaii Supreme Court case referenced by the Attorney General, and concur with the oral advice rendered by the Attorney General. 1H.B. No. 2966, H.D.2, S.D.2, C.D.1, effective July 1, 2006. 2S.B. No. 3000, S.D.2, H.D.1, C.D.1, effective July 1, 2006. Danny A. Mateo Council Member March 13, 2007 Page 2 DISCUSSION: Act 180 repealed Chapter 201G, HRS,' and established a new Chapter 201x, HRS.° As codified and published,5 Section 201H-38, HRS, in relevant part, states: 201H-38. Housing development; exemption from statutes, ordinances, charter provisions, and rules. (a) The corporation may develop on behalf of the State or with an eligible developer, or may assist under a governmental assistance program in the development of, housing projects that shall be exempt from all statutes, ordinances, charter provisions, and rules of any government agency relating to planning, zoning, construction standards for subdivisions, development and improvement of land, and the construction of dwelling units thereon; provided that: (3) The legislative body of the county in which the housing project is to be situated shall have approved the project: (A) The legislative body shall approve or disapprove the project by resolution within forty-five days after the corporation has submitted the preliminary plans and specifications for the project to the legislative body. If on the forty-sixth day a project is not disapproved, it shall be deemed approved by the legislative body; (B) No action shall be prosecuted or maintained against any county, its officials, or employees on account of actions taken by them in reviewing, approving, or disapproving the plans and specifications; . . . . The portion of Section 201H-38 (a) (3) (A) and (B), HRS, referenced above is identical to Section 201G-118 (a) (4) (A) and (B), 'Note 1, Section 29. °Note 1, Section 3. 5Hawaii Revised Statutes, 2006 Cumulative Supplement, Vol. 4. Danny A. Mateo Council Member March 13, 2007 Page 3 HRS, prior to its amendment by Act 217 and repeal by Act 180. As discussed in a previous Corporation Counsel opinion,' old Section 201G-118, HRS, limited the Council to either approving or disapproving a project within forty-five days, without modifications. In 2006, the State Legislature also enacted Act 217, which amended Section 201G-118(a)(4)(A) and (B), HRS, to read as follows: (4) The legislative body of the county in which the project is to be situated shall have approved the project with or without modifications. (A) The legislative body shall approve approve with modifications, or disapprove the project by resolution within forty- five days after the administration has submitted the preliminary plans and specifications for the project to the legislative body. If on the forty-sixth day a project is not disapproved, it shall be deemed approved by the legislative body; (B) No action shall be prosecuted or maintained against any county, its officials, or employees on account of actions taken by them in reviewing, approving, modifying, or disapproving the plans and specifications; .' These Act 217 amendments to codified and published in the HRS information,9 we understand that incorporate the amendments made Section 201G-118, HRS, were not 2006 Cumulative Supplement.' On the Attorney General intended to by Act 217 in new Chapter 201H, 'See attached Memorandum to Dain P. Kane, Chair, Maui County Council, from Edward S. Kushi, Jr., Deputy Corporation Counsel (Nov. 18, 2003)(opining that Council could not modify exemptions or conditions for approval on Chapter 201G, HRS, applications). 'Note 2, Section 4. 'See Note 5. 9Your memorandum of January 8, 2007 to Brian T. Moto, Acting Corporation Counsel. Danny A. Mateo Council Member March 13, 2007 Page 4 HRS, when Chapter 201H, HRS, was published by the Legislative Reference Bureau; however, for unexplained reasons, said Act 217 amendments were not incorporated in the 2006 Cumulative Supplement. Notwithstanding said error or omission by the Legislative Reference Bureau, the Attorney General advised orally that: the 2006 State Legislature's intent in enacting Act 217 was clear; the Act 217 amendment authorizing a legislative body to modify a Chapter 201H project application is effective; and Section 201H-38, as published in the 2006 Cumulative Supplement, Volume 4, was amended by implication to incorporate the Act 217 amendments. To support this position, the Attorney General cites the Hawaii Supreme Court decision In re Water Use Permit Applications, Petitions for Interim Instream Flow Standard Amendments, and Petitions for Water Reservations for the Waiahole Ditch Combined Contested Case Hearing, 113 Hawai'i 52, 147 P.3d 836 (2006) ("Waiahole No. 4"). Waiahole No. 4 wrestled with the issue as to which Hawaii appellate court had jurisdiction to hear appeals from decisions of the Commission on Water Resource Management ("CWRM"). Prior to July 1, 2006,appeals from the CWRM were directly to the Hawaii Supreme Court .10 In 2004, the Hawaii State Legislature passed Act 202, effective July 1, 2006, the purpose of which was to: change the appellate structure of the state courts to require appeals from the circuit courts and decisions of administrative agencies to be heard by the intermediate appellate court. Under [Act 2021, the Supreme Court will retain original jurisdiction only in certain cases and, in all other cases, will hear appeals only upon acceptance of a writ of certiorari or transfer application from the intermediate appellate court. 11 To implement Act 202, the Legislature amended fifty-three HRS sections that previously authorized appeals directly to the Supreme Court, but did not amend Section 174C-60, HRS, that allowed direct appeals from CWRM decisions to the Supreme Court. The Court stated that ,the legislature's failure to amend HRS §174C-60 (1993) to authorize an appeal to the intermediate appellate court rather than 10Section 174C-60, HRS. 11Waiahole No. 4, at 54. Danny A. Mateo Council Member March 13, 2007 Page 5 to the supreme court was clearly an oversight. ,12 The Court concluded that "[p]ursuant to the principle of statutory construction of amendment by implication, the legislature will be held to have changed a law that it did not have under consideration while enacting a later law when 'the terms of the subsequent act are so inconsistent with the provisions of the prior law that they cannot stand together. "'i3 Accordingly, we believe that the "amendment by implication" position adopted by the Court in Waiahole No. 4 supports the Attorney General's oral opinion that Section 201H-38, HRS, was amended by implication and authorizes the Council to approve 201H- 38 projects with or without modifications. ESK:lkk Enclosures cc: Vanessa A. Medeiros, Director, Department of Housing and Human Concerns Michele M. White, Legal Assistant APPROVED FOR nnywiga _ � I • S:\ALL\ESK\Advisory\memo to m teo re hrs 201H, hrs 2.wpd 12Id . 13 Id. ALAN M. ARAKAWA'y°�`•+, Mayor �.'j�`y\��+, DEPARTMENT OF THE CORPORATION COUNSEL COUNTY OF MAUI 200 SOUTH HIGH STREET WAH,UKU, MAUI, HAWAII %793 TELEPHONE: (808) 270-7740 FAX: (808) 270-7152 November 18, 2003 MEMO TO: Honorable Dain P. Kane, Chair Maui County Council F R O M: Edward S. Kushi, Jr. Deputy Corporation Counsel BRIAN T. MOTO Corporation Counsel SUBJECT: CLARIFICATION ON ABILITY TO MODIFY EXEMPTIONS OR CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL ON HRS 201G APPLICATIONS SUBMITTED TO THE COUNCIL (PAF 03-211) Pursuant to your November 12, 2003 memo, you have requested our office to respond to the following inquiries: 1. Provide the authority relied upon in concluding that the project must be either approved or disapproved as submitted. 2. Consult with Honolulu's Corporation Counsel and the State Office of the Attorney General to see if some consensus can be reached. 3. If revisions are permissible, whether: a. they are limited in kind to 201G-118 exemptions; and; b. HCDCH and Kauaula Associates, LLC must approve of any revisions proposed by the Council within the 45 -day period. 4. Whether Council approval would be limited to the specific 201G-118 exemptions requested, or would be tantamount to approval of other developer representations made in the application, regardless of whether they are set forth in the proposed resolution. Honorable Dain P. Kane November 18, 2003 Page 2 Notwithstanding the time constraints that prevented our office from more fully reviewing and discussing these issues with the aforementioned third -party agencies, we respond as follows: I. APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE THE PROJECT AS SUBMITTED. Section 201G-118, Hawaii Revised Statutes ("HRS"), in pertinent part, states: (3) The legislative body of the county in which the project is situated shall have approved the project. (A) The legislative body shall approve or disapprove the project by resolution within forty- five days after the corporation has submitted the Preliminary plans and specifications for the project to the legislative body. If on the forty- sixth day a project is not disapproved, it shall be deemed approved by the legislative body; (B) No action shall be prosecuted or maintained against any county, its officials, or employees on account of actions taken by them in reviewing, approving, or disapproving the plans and specifications; and (C) The final plans and specifications for the project shall be deemed approved by the legislative body if the final plans and specifications do not substantially deviate from the preliminary plans and specifications.... (emphasis added) It is common practice that in reviewing legislation, the Maui County Council, through its committees and/or by the Council itself, will propose and/or impose revisions, modifications and/or conditions to the legislation, as initially submitted. However, the "fast-track" Section 201G-118, HRS, process is a creature of State legislation that provides for significant exemptions from planning, zoning, and construction standards that would otherwise apply to a development. Therefore, Section 201G-118 should be construed pursuant to the terms, conditions, and language of the statute itself. In interpreting statutes, the fundamental starting point is the language of the statute itself. State v. Kalama, 94 Hawaii 60 (2000). When construing a statute, the court's foremost obligation is to ascertain and give effect to the intention of the legislature, which is to be obtained primarily from the language contained in the statute itself. Coon v. City and County of Honolulu, 98 Hawai'i 233 (2002). If the language of a statute is clear and unambiguous, a court will apply the plain meaning of the Honorable Dain P. Kane November 18, 2003 Page 3 language unless a plain meaning interpretation would lead to an absurd result or a result at odds with the legislature's intent. Makin ex rel Russell v. Hawaii, 114 F. Supp. 2d 1017 (1999). A rational, sensible, and practicable interpretation of a statute is preferred to one which is unreasonable or impracticable. Metcalf v. Voluntary Employee's Ben. Ass'n. of Hawaii, 99 Hawaii 53 (2002). The legislature is presumed not to intend an .absurd result, and legislation will be construed to avoid, if possible, inconsistency, contradiction, and illogicality. Beneficial Hawaii. Inc. v. Kida, 96 Hawaii 289 (2001). Section 201G-118 (a) (3) (A) , HRS, states that the legislative body "shall approve or disapprove" the project. Section 201G-118, HRS, has no language explicitly providing for modification of the "preliminary plans and specifications" submitted, nor does it provide for approval in part and disapproval in part. Further, Section 201G-118(a)(3)(B), HRS, which provides the County and its officials with immunity from lawsuit, references actions taken by the County and its officials "in reviewing, approving, or disapproving the plans and specifications". Here again no explicit reference is made to the possibility of revisions, modifications, or partial approvals being made by the Council. A cursory review of the legislative history of Section 201G- 118, HRS, and Chapter 201G reveals no specific discussion that sheds light on this issue. However, Sections 201G-118(a) (3) (A) and (C), HRS, mandate that the preliminary plans and specifications be deemed the final plans and specifications if there are no substantial deviations from the preliminary plans. This implies that Section 201G-118 does not contemplate or anticipate that changes may be made by the legislative body to the preliminary plans and specifications. It also implies that a review and determination as to whether substantial deviations exist must necessarily occur after Council approval of the subject resolution. In light of the strict and expedited 45-day time frame within which approval or disapproval must be rendered, to allow or permit revisions, modifications and/or conditions could be impracticable, and result in new and additional legal issues, such as those posed in question 3(b) of your memorandum. In particular, if modifications were made by Council to the preliminary plans and specifications as a condition of, or incident to, approval of the project, it would render questionable the status and efficacy of the prior approval granted the project by the Housing and Community Development Corporation of Hawaii ("HCDCH"). Indeed, based on the informal comments of the Deputy Attorney General, it appears that modification of the preliminary plans and specifications would necessitate another review of the project by the HCDCH. The fact that Chapter 201G, HRS, does not explicitly provide for such a possibility and complication is further support for the proposition Honorable Dain P. Kane November 18, 2003 Page 4 that modification of project plans by the Council is not something contemplated by Section 201G-118, HRS. Accordingly, we opine that, based on the language of the State statute and the reasons discussed above, no modifications, revisions, and/or conditions may be made to the initial submittal. II. CONSULTATION WITH CITY AND COUNTY OF HONOLULU CORPORATION COUNSEL AND THE STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE. We have not had the time or opportunity to discuss these issues with the Corporation Counsel of the City and County of Honolulu. We did, however, briefly discuss this matter with the State Deputy Attorney General assigned to the HCDCH, and although he, understandably, would not formally respond to the specific inquiry as to whether modifications are permitted, he confirmed that, in the event modifications, conditions and/or revisions are proposed by Council, said changes would have to be reviewed and approved by the HCDCH Board of Directors. III. IF REVISIONS ARE PERMISSIBLE, ARE THEY LIMITED TO THE SPECIFIC REQUESTED EXEMPTIONS, OR TO THE PROJECT, AS A WHOLE, AS REPRESENTED AND SUBMITTED TO THE COUNCIL. As discussed above, the "project" to be considered is described and detailed by the preliminary plans and specifications, which plans and specifications include any requested statutory or regulatory exemptions. We opine that any and all representations incorporated in the preliminary plans and specifications submitted to Council are part and parcel of the "project." Call if further discussion and/or clarification is needed. It is hoped that the HCDCH will be successful in obtaining a written opinion from the State Attorney General's Office for our review. APPROVED FOR TRANSMITTAL: B AN T. MOTO Co ation Counsel S:\ALL\ESK\Advisory\memo to kane re puunoa.wpd CHARMAINE TAVARES �°�r�`'s Mayor DEPARTMENT OF THE CORPORATION COUNSEL COUNTY OF MAUI 200 SOUTH HIGH STREET WAILUKU, MAUI, HAWAII 96793 TELEPHONE: (808) 270.7740 FAX: (808) 270-7152 March 13, 2007 Ms. Nalani P. Wilson -Ku Deputy Attorney General Department of the Attorney General State of Hawaii 465 South King Street, Rm. B-2 Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 BRIAN T. MOTO Corporation Counsel Re: REQUEST FOR WRITTEN OPINION; CHAPTER 201H, HAWAII REVISES STATUTES Dear Ms. Wilson -Ku: Our office advises the Maui County Council ("Council") and has encountered a matter of state-wide concern with regard to the interpretation of recently enacted Chapter 201H, Hawaii Revised Statutes ("HRS"). Attached for your reference and review are the following: (1) Memorandum dated January 8, 2007 from Council Member Danny A. Mateo to the undersigned, with a copy of the Hawaii Supreme Court decision In re Water Use Permit Applications, Petitions for Interim Instream Flow Standard Amendments. and Petitions for Water Reservations for the Waiahole Ditch Combined Contested Case Hearing, 113 Hawai'i 52, 147 P.3d 836 (2006). (2) Memorandum to Council Member Mateo, dated March 13, 2007, from Edward S. Kushi, Deputy Corporation Counsel. In our March 13, 2007 memorandum to Council Member Mateo, after reviewing the question posed, we concluded that we concur with the verbal opinion you gave to Council Member Mateo's staff, specifically that the Council has the authority to approve, with modifications, proposed Section 201H-38 projects. However, we further advised Council Member Mateo that we would be writing to Ms. Nalani P. Wilson -Ku Deputy Attorney General March 13, 2007 Page 2 you to obtain a written opinion from your office. Accordingly, on behalf of Council Member Mateo and the Council, we respectfully request a written opinion on the following question: WHETHER, PURSUANT TO ACT 180 AND ACT 217, SESSION LAWS OF HAWAII 2006, THE MAUI COUNTY COUNCIL, AS THE LEGISLATIVE BODY OF THE COUNTY IN WHICH A PROJECT IS SITUATED, HAS THE AUTHORITY TO APPROVE, WITH MODIFICATIONS, A PROPOSED SECTION 201H-38 PROJECT? Your timely review and response will be most appreciated, as we understand the Council may be receiving Section 201H-38 project applications in the near future. Call if further clarification and/or information is needed. Sincerely, Edward S. Kushi, Jr. Deputy Corporation Counsel ESK:lkk Enclosures cc: Council Member Danny A. Mateo, Maui County Council Vanessa A. Medeiros, Director, Department of Housing and Human Concerns, County of Maui Brian T. Moto, Corporation Counsel, County of Maui S:\ALL\ESK\Advisory\letter to wilson-ku, state ag's office.wpd Council ChairDirector of Council Services s. G. Riki Hokmna Ken Fukuoka Vice -Chair —'r, • _"- Danny A. Mateo r ,� Council Members COUNTY COUNCIL' Michelle Anderson Gladys C. Balsa COUNTY OF MAUI Jo Anne Johnson Bill Kauakea Medeiros 200 S. HIGH STREET Michael J. Molina WAILUKU, MAUI, HAWAII 96793 Joseph Ponlanilla www.co.maui.hi.us/counciV Michael P. Victorino January 8, 2007 MEMO TO: Mr. Brian T. Moto Acting Corporation Counsel F R O M: Danny A. Mateo Council Membe SUBJECT: COUNCIL'S ABILITY TO MODIFY CHAPTER 201H PROJECTS (PAF 06-208) In the State's 2006 Legislative Session, two Acts were passed relating to Chapter 201G, Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS). Act 180, effective June 9, 2006 (attached), repealed Chapter 201G, HRS, and added a new Chapter 201H. Section 201H -H (now numbered Section 201H-38) corresponds to the old Section 201G-118. Act 217, effective June 21, 2006 (attached), amended Section 201G-118, HRS, which had since been repealed, to allow the legislative body of the county in which the project is to be situated to modify a project.' In light of the above, may I please request a written opinion as to whether the Council has the authority to modify a Section 201H-38 project. The Council is expecting to receive Chapter 201 H applications at the end of February and beginning of March, 2007. ' Three subsections were amended to reflect the council's authority to modify a project, as follows: 1. Subsection 201G -118(a)(4) provides that: "The legislative body of the county in which the project is to be situated shall have approved the project with or without modifications.". 2. Subsection 201G-118(a)(4)(A) provides that: "The legislative body shall approve approve with modifications, or disapprove the project by resolution within forty-five days after the administration has submitted the preliminary plans and specifications for the project to the legislative body. if on the forty-sixth day a project is not disapproved, it shall be deemed approved by the legislative body;'. 3. Subsection 201G-118(a)(4)(B) provides that: "No action shall be prosecuted or maintained against any county, its officials, or employees on account of actions taken by them in reviewing, approving, modifying, or disapproving the plans and specifications; and'. Mr. Brian T. Moto January 8, 2007 Page 2 By way of background information and to assist in your consideration, I would note the following: 1. In August 2006, Deputy Attorney General Nalani Wilson -Ku advised Office of Council Services staff that the Department of the Attorney General intended to incorporate the changes from Act 217 into the corresponding section in Chapter 201H when it was published by the Legislative Reference Bureau, but did not provide the decision in writing. 2. The Act 217 amendments to Section 201G-118 were not incorporated into Section 201H-38 upon publication (see attached). 3. Following publication of Section 20111-38, Ms. Wilson -Ku advised staff that the Department's position is that the amendments explicitly authorizing a legislative body to modify a Chapter 201G project are in effect, and that Section 20111-38 was amended by implication to incorporate the referenced amendments to Section 201G-118, stating that the legislature's intent in enacting Act 217 was clear, and citing the attached Supreme Court opinion for this position. 4. Staff has been informed that the Department does not currently intend to reduce this verbal opinion to writing. May I please request a response in writing no later than Friday, January 19, 2007. To ensure efficient processing, please include the relevant PAF number in the subject line of your response. Should you have any questions, please contact me, Legislative Analyst Gayle Revels at ext. 7687, or Legislative Attorney Carla Nakata at ext. 7659. paf.ghr.06-208a Attachments Westl".. 147 P.3d 836 113 Hawai'i 52, 147 P.3d 836 (Cite as: 113 Hawai'i 52,147 P.3d 836) H In re Water Use Permit Applications, Petitions for Interim Instream Flow Standard AmendmentsHawai 'i,2006. Supreme Court of Hawai'i. In the Matter of WATER USE PERMIT APPLICATIONS, PETITIONS FOR INTERIM INSTREAM FLOW STANDARD AMENDMENTS, and Petitions for Water Reservations for the Wei hole Ditch Combined Contested Case Hearing. No. 28108. Nov. 29,2006. Background: On second remand of contested hearing related to ditch system for collecting fresh surface water and dike -impounded ground water, the Water Commission issued its findings of fact, conclusions of law, and decision and order. Appeals were taken. Holding: The Supreme Court held that jurisdiction to hear and determine appeal, which was filed after July 1, 2006, was with intermediate appellate court. Appeal directed to intermediate appellate court. West Headnotes 111 Waters and Water Courses 405 0133 405 Waters and Water Courses 405VI Appropriation and Prescription 405k133 k. Proceedings to Effect and Character and Elements of Appropriation in General. Most Cited Cases Jurisdiction to hear and determine appeal from the Water Commission, which was filed after July 1, 2006, was with intermediate appellate court, subject to review by Supreme Court by transfer of certiorari; concurrent jurisdiction of supreme court and intermediate appellate court to hear and Page 2 of 5 Page 1 determine appeals from any other court or agency was discontinued with enactment of jurisdictional statutes that gave supreme court jurisdiction to hear and determine appeals only by application for a writ of certiorari to the intermediate appellate court or by transfer as specified. HRS §§ 174C-60, 602-5(a)(1),602-57(1). 121 Statutes 361 X142 361 Statutes 3611V Amendment, Revision, and Codification 361k142 k. Implied Amendment. Most Cited Cases Pursuant to the principle of statutory construction of amendment by implication, the legislature will be held to have changed a law that it did not have under consideration while enacting a later law when the terms of the subsequent act are so inconsistent with the provisions of the prior law that they cannot stand together. West CodenotesRecognized as Repealed by ImplicationHRS § 174C-60 (1993) **836 PER CURIAM.M' FN 1. Considered by: Moon, C.J., Levinson, Nakayama, Acoba, and Duffy, 1J. *52 This is an appeal from a decision and order of the Commission on Water Resource Management (Water Commission). The appeal was filed after the July 1, 2006 effective date of Act 202, 2004 Hawai'i Session Laws (Act 202) that changed the jurisdiction of the supreme court and the intermediate appellate court. We hold that pursuant to Hawai'i Revised Statutes ( HRS) §§ 602-57(1) (Supp.2005) and 602-5(aXl) (Supp.2005), quoted infra, jurisdiction to hear and determine appeals from the Water Commission, filed after July 1, 2006, is with the intermediate appellate court, subject to review by the supreme court by transfer or certiorari. C 2007 Thomson/West. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works. https://web2.westlaw.com/print/printstrewn.aspx?sv=Split&rlti=l &prft=HTMLE&fn=_top... 3/8/2007 147 P.3d 836 113 Hawaii 52, 147 P.3d 836 (Cite as: 113 Hawai'i 52,147 P.3d 836) 1. Background This appeal arises from the Water Commission's combined contested case hearing on applications and petitions concerning use of water from the Wai hole Ditch system. On December 24, 1997, the Water Commission issued its final decision and order in the combined contested case hearing. On appeal of that decision and order, we partly affirmed and partly vacated the decision and remanded seven issues for further findings and conclusions. In re Use Permit Applications, 94 Hawai'i 97, 9 P.3d 409 (2000). On remand, the Water Commission determined the seven issues and issued on December 28, 2001 its findings of fact and decision and order. On appeal of that decision and order, we partly affirmed and partly vacated the decision and remanded six issues for further findings and conclusions. In re Use Permit Applications, 105 Hawai'i 1, 93 P.3d 643 (2004). On second remand, the Water Commission determined the six issues and issued on July 13, 2006 its *53 **837 findings of fact, conclusions of law, and decision and order. Notices of appeal from July 13, 2006 decision and order were timely filed in the instant case on August 11, 2006 by appellants Hakipu'u 'Ohana and Ka Lahui Hawai'i and appellant HawaiTs Thousand Friends. The appeals were filed pursuant to HRS § 174C-60 (1993),rt42 which authorizes an appeal of the Water Commission's final decision and order in a contested case. The appeals were docketed in the appellate court on October 10, 2006 and were docketed in the supreme court rather than in the intermediate appellate court because HRS § 174C-60 (1993) provides for an appeal "to the supreme court." FN2. HRS § 174C-60 (1993) provides: Contested cases. Chapter 91 shall apply except where it conflicts with this chapter. In such a case, this chapter shall apply. Any other law to the contrary notwithstanding, including chapter 91, any contested case hearing under [the State Water Code] shall be appealed upon the record directly to the supreme court for Page 3 of 5 Page 2 final decision. ll. Discussion [I] "The [supreme court and the intermediate appellate court] shall have original and appellate jurisdiction as provided by law[.]" Hawaii Constitution, article Vl, section 1. Before July 1, 2006, the supreme court, pursuant to HRS § 602-5(a)(1) (1993), and the intermediate appellate court, pursuant to HRS § 602-57 (1993), had concurrent appellate jurisdiction to hear and determine "any appeal allowed by law from any other court or agency." Effective July 1, 2006, the intermediate appellate court, pursuant to HRS § 602-57(1) (Supp.2005),F43 retains appellate jurisdiction to hear and determine any appeal allowed by law, but the supreme court, pursuant to HRS § 602-5(a)(1) (Supp.2005),n44 has appellate jurisdiction to hear and determine appeals only "by application for a writ of certiorari to the intermediate appellate court or by transfer as provided by [HRS § 602-58 (Supp.2005) ]" The change in appellate jurisdiction*54 **838 was effected by Act 202. The purpose of Act 202 was FN3. HRS § 602-57 (Supp.2005) provides: Jurisdiction. [Section effective July I, 2006. For section effective until June 30, 2006, see main volume.] Notwithstanding any other law to the contrary, the intermediate appellate court shall have jurisdiction, subject to transfer as provided by section 602-58 or review on application for a writ of certiorari as provided in section 602-59: (1) To hear and determine appeals from the district, family, and circuit courts and from any agency when appeals are allowed by law; and (2) To entertain, in its discretion, any case submitted without suit when there is a question of law that could be the subject of a civil action or proceeding in the circuit court, or tax appeal court, and the parties agree upon the facts upon which the controversy depends. ® 2007 Thomson/West. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works. https://web2.westlaw.comlprintlprintstremn.aspx?sv=Split&rlti=l &prft=HTMLE&fn=_top... 3/8/2007 147 P.3d 836 113 Hawai'i 52, 147 P.3d 836 (Cite as: 113 Hawaii 52,147 P.3d 836) FN4. HRS § 602-5 (Supp.2005) provides: Jurisdiction and powers; riling. [Section effective July 1, 2006. For section effective until June 30, 2006, see main volume.] (a) The supreme court shall have jurisdiction and powers as follows: (1) To hear and determine all questions of law, or of mixed law and fact, which are properly brought before it by application for a writ of certiorari to the intermediate appellate court or by transfer as provided in this chapter; (2) To answer, in its discretion, any question of law reserved by a circuit court, the land court, or the tax appeal court, or any question or proposition of law certified to it by a federal district or appellate court if the supreme court shall so provide by rule; (3) To exercise original jurisdiction in all questions arising under writs directed to courts of inferior jurisdiction and returnable before the supreme court, or if the supreme court consents to receive the case arising under writs of mandamus directed to public officers to compel them to fulfill the duties of their offices; and such other original jurisdiction as may be expressly conferred by law; (4) To issue writs of habeas corpus, or orders to show cause as provided by chapter 660, returnable before the supreme court or a circuit court, and any justice may issue writs of habeas corpus or such orders to show cause, returnable as above stated; (5) To make or issue any order or writ necessary or appropriate in aid of its jurisdiction, and in such case, any justice may issue a writ or an order to show cause returnable before the supreme court; and (6) To make and award such judgments, decree, orders and mandates, issue such executions and other processes, and to such other acts and take such other steps as may be necessary to carry into effect the powers which are or shall be given to it by law for the promotion of justice in matters before it. Page 4 of 5 Page 3 (b) All cases addressed to the jurisdiction of the supreme court or of the intermediate appellate court shall be filed with the clerk of the supreme court as proved by the rules of court. The clerk shall maintain the record of each case whether addressed to the jurisdiction of the supreme court or the jurisdiction of the intermediate appellate court. to change the appellate structure of the state courts to require appeals from the circuit courts and decisions of administrative agencies to be heard by the intermediate appellate court. Under [Act 2021, the Supreme Court will retain original jurisdiction only in certain cases and, in all other cases, will hear appeals only upon acceptance of a writ of certiorari or transfer application from the intermediate appellate court. Hse. Stand. Comm. Rep. No. 672-04, in 2004 House Journal, at 1667. See also Sen. Stand. Comm. Rep. No. 2939, in 2004 Senate Journal, at 1461 (the purpose of Act 202 is "to require that all appeals from trial courts and administrative agencies be submitted to the Intermediate Court of Appeals, subject to review by the Supreme Court through [ ] transfer or application for a writ of certiorari"); Sen. Stand. Comm. Rep. No. 3131, in 2004 Senate Journal, at 1562 (Act 202 amends the appellate process "[b]y assigning .all appeals from the district, family, and circuit courts, civil and criminal, and any agency when appeals are allowed by law to the Intermediate Appellate Court"). Act 202 amended the jurisdictional statutes for the supreme court and the intermediate appellate court ( HRS §§ 602-5 and 602-57, see supra notes 3 and 2) as described above and further amended fifty-three HRS sections F145 that authorize appeals from courts and agencies. Those sections, before amendment, authorized appeals from courts and agencies "to the supreme court" and were amended to authorize appeals from courts and agencies "to the intermediate appellate court", not to the supreme court, in accordance with Act 202. The fifty-three sections supposedly included all HRS sections authorizing appeals from courts and agencies, but -as we learned when this appeal was docketed -did not include HRS § 174C-60 (1993) ® 2007 ThomsonlWest. No Claim to Orin. U.S. Govt. Works. https://web2.westlaw.com/print/printstream.aspx?sv--Split&rlti=l &prft=HTMLE&fn=_top... 3/8/2007 147 P.3d 836 113 Hawai'i 52, 147 P.3d 836 (Cite as: 113 Hawaii 52,147 P.3d 836) that authorizes an appeal from a Water Commission case "to the supreme court." FN5. HRS §§ 11-51, 40-91, 47-46, 53-6, 91-14, 101-34, 101-52, 124A-105, 128-24, 19613-5, 20IG-57, 201G-58, 232-1, 232-19 232-22, 232-23, 235-114, 261-13, 269-15 269-15.5, 269-54, 271-27, 271-32, 271-33 271G-19, 271G-24, 281-92, 286-60, 377-9, 380-10, 38341, 383-69, 383-76, 386-73, 386-73.5, 386-88, 392-21.5, 392-75, 412:2-501, 431:I4-118; 431:14F-113, 482-9, 485-23, 501-63, 571-54, 641-1, 641-11, 641-12, 641-13, 641-17,664-8,664-25 and 664-36. An appeal from the Water Commission is an appeal from an administrative agency for which jurisdiction lies with the intermediate appellate court pursuant to Act 202 and HRS § 602-57(1) (Supp.2005). In enacting Act 202, the legislature undoubtedly intended Water Commission appeals to be heard and determined by the intermediate appellate court, subject to review by the supreme court by transfer or certiorari. In enacting Act 202, the legislature's failure to amend HRS § 174C-60 (1993) to authorize an appeal to the intermediate appellate court rather than to the supreme court was clearly an oversight. The fact that HRS § 174C-60 (1993) authorizes an appeal to the supreme court does not place Water Commission appeals, filed after July 1, 2006, within the jurisdiction of the supreme court. Jurisdiction to hear and determine Water Commission appeals filed after July 1, 2006 is governed by the jurisdictional statutes for the supreme court and the intermediate appellate court, HRS §§ 602-5 and 602-57, as amended by Act 202. HRS § 174C-60 (1993) is inconsistent with those jurisdictional statutes. The inconsistency is resolved by the provision of HRS § 602-57(1) (Supp.2005) that states that "notwithstanding any other law to the contrary," the intermediate appellate court has jurisdiction over appeals from " any agency." [2] Pursuant to the principle of statutory construction of amendment by implication, the legislature will be held to have changed a law that it Page 5 of 5 Page 4 did not have under consideration while enacting a later law when "the terms of the subsequent act are so inconsistent with the provisions of the prior law that they cannot stand together." IA Norman J. Singer, Statutes and Statutory Construction, § 22:13 (6th ed.2002). HRS § 174C-60 (1993) is inconsistent with and cannot stand together with HRS §§ 602-5 and 602-57, as *55 **839 amended by Act 202,FN6 and is deemed amended by implication, effective July 1, 2006, to authorize appeals from the Water Commission to the intermediate appellate court, not to the supreme court. FN6. HRS § 174C-60 (1993) is also inconsistent with HRS § 91-14(b) (Supp.2005), which, as amended by Act 202, provides that in agency cases, " proceedings for review shall be instituted in the circuit court except where a statute provides for a direct appeal to the intermediate appellate court, subject to chapter 602. In such cases, the appeal shall be treated in the same manner as an appeal from the circuit court to the intermediate appellate court[.]" III. Conclusion Based on the foregoing, we hold that pursuant to HRS §§ 602-57(1) (Supp.2005) and 602-5(a)(1) (Supp.2005), jurisdiction to hear and determine appeals from the Water Commission filed after July 1, 2006 is with the intermediate appellate court, subject to review by the supreme court by transfer or certiorari. The clerk of the appellate court is directed to docket this appeal with the intermediate appellate court nunc pro tunc to October 10, 2006. Hawai`i,2006. In re Water Use Permit Applications, Petitions for Interim Instream Flow Standard Amendments 113 Hawaii 52, 147 P.3d 836 END OF DOCUMENT C 2007 Thomson/West. No Claim to Orin. U.S. Govt. Works. https://web2.westlaw.com/print/printstream.aspx?sv=Split&rlti= l &prft=HTMLE&fn=_top... 3/8/2007 (a) Hawaii State Association of Counties p Counties of Kauai, Maui, Hawaii and City and County of Honolulu ' q March 27, 2007 President Mel Rapozo and Members of the Executive Committee Dear President Rapozo and Members: SUBJECT: TREASURER'S REPORT FOR FEBRUARY 2007 Attached please find a report of the Association's revenues and expenses for the fiscal period February 1 through February 28, 2007. _. -a K S G 11 i ? i0d n4 Attachments I WE ocs:proj: hsac: FY2007:071tr:070327tr. ske Sincerely, OSEANILLA HSAC Treasurer ah 4 ? i0d n4 Hawaii State Association of Counties REVENUES COLLECTED AND EXPENSES PAID Period: February 1, 2007 through February 28, 2007 BEGINNING BALANCE ENDING BALANCE ocs:proj:hsac:FY 2007:07tr:0702tr:ske $82,030.43 FY 2007 FY 2007 This Period Year to Date Budget REVENUES Membership Fees $0.00 $42,000.00 $42,000.00 Conference Income $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Interest Income $5.05 $147.01 $115.00 Miscellaneous $0.00 $1,018.50 $0.00 Carryover (FY 2006) $0.00 $0.00 $12,065.00 Total $5.05 $43,165.51 $54,180.00 Total Receipts This Period $5.05 EXPENSES Executive Committee Travel $0.00 $626.00 $5,250.00 Auditing Services $0.00 $0.00 $3,500.00 Stationery $0.00 $0.00 $100.00 Miscellaneous $0.00 $23.50 $250.00 Special Committees Travel $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Miscellaneous $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 NACo Travel $0.00 $1,000.00 $9,000.00 Promotional $0.00 $0.00 $250.00 Dues $0.00 $25,573.00 $25,580.00 Miscellaneous $0.00 $0.00 $1,000.00 WIR Travel $0.00 $0.00 $6,000.00 Promotional $0.00 $0.00 $250.00 Dues $0.00 $3,125.00 $3,000.00 Miscellaneous $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Conferences Miscellaneous $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Total $0.00 $30,347.50 $54,180.00 Total Expenses This Period $0.00 ENDING BALANCE ocs:proj:hsac:FY 2007:07tr:0702tr:ske $82,030.43 Hawaii Stag association of Counties 9 Counties of Kauai, Maui, Hawaii and City and County of Honolulu Y s March 23, 2007 President Mel Rapozo and Executive Committee Members Dear President Rapozo and Members: SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR SEED MONEY FOR THE 2007 HSAC ANNUAL CONFERENCE I am respectfully requesting $1,000 in seed money to begin planning for the 2007 HSAC Annual Conference which will be held at the Makena Resort, Maui Prince Hotel, on June 7 and 8, 2007. T TIT"pu for your consideration of this request. Sincerely vourS_ 4 �h un �W oes:proj: hsac: FY2007:071tr. seedmoney:ske NI'� 0 D rr '? Hawaii State Association of Counties Counties of Kauai, Maui, Hawaii and City and County of Honolulu v DF March 21, 2007 Colleen Landkamer, President National Association of Counties 25 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W., Suite 500 Washington, D.C. 20001 Dear President Landkamer: Subject: Hawai'i State Association of Counties Representatives to Steering Committees I would like to submit for your consideration and approval the following Hawai'i State Association of Counties' representatives to serve on the NACo Steering Committees: Environment, Energy and Land Use Councilmember Shaylene Iseri-Carvalho, County of Kaua'i 4396 Rice Street, Suite 206, Lihu'e, Hawai'i 96766 Phone: (808) 241-6371 scarvalho(@kauai.eov or Staff: cavonon ,kauai.2ov Justice and Public Safety Council Vice Chair Mel Rapozo, County of Kauai 4396 Rice Street, Suite.206, Lihu'e, Hawai'i 96766 Phone: (808) 241-6371 mfrapozo(@kauai.eov or Staff: cayononC@kauai.eov Transportation Councilmember Robert Jacobson, County of Hawai'i 25 Aupuni Street, Hilo, Hawai'i 96720 Phone: (808) 961-8263 iiacoC@co.hawaii.hi.co or Staff: blivelv@co.hawaii.hi.us Councilmember Romy Cachola, City & County of Hononlulu 530 S. King Street, Room 202, Honolulu, Hawai'i 96813 Phone: (808) 547-7007 rcacholaPhonolulu.eov or Staff: asekine(@honolulu.eov Please contact these members to confirm their appointment or if you should have questions regarding this matter. neer ly, MEL RAPOZO, SAC President 4d„ Iry os h1 � K !l � CA/ds.hsac2007-214 Hawaii State Association of Counties Counties of Kauai, Maui and Hawaii, City & County of Honolulu r.. t ( . 73 MEMORANDUM r• TO: Pete Hoffinann, Chair ,�4etabers of the =' County Council 31 cn llVf: bson, Council Member c.� District 6 DATE: March 15, 2007 SUBJECT: HSAC FY 2007-2008 Proposed Annual Operating Budget Attached please find the HSAC proposed annual operating budget kwapproval by the Hawaii County Council. Council approval of the proposed budget is required before the ne7d HSAC $*"ive.Committee meeting on April 12, 2007. By means of this letter I am requesting this be waive thra ioance Committee and placed on the earliest Council agenda possible. If you have any questions or concerns please call me anytime. Mahalo BJ/bl Comm. No. S 6 Ref. To: Ref, nate MAR 2 a 90rt7 MAR, 15. 2001 9:38AM CODUC11 SERVICE V0. 1211 P. 2 Hawaii State Association of Counties Counties of Kauai, ;Maui, Hawaii and City and County or Honolulu March 15, 2007 President Mel Rapozo and Executive Committee Members Dear President Rapozo and Members: SUBJECT; HSAC FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2007-2008 PROPOSED ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET The HSAC Executive Committee approved the attached proposed annual operating budget for FY 2007-2008, as amended, at the HSAC Executive Committee meeting on March 13, 2007. The proposed budget was amended to increase the membership fees for each county by 4 percent, or $1,680.00. Therefore, total membership fees will increase to $43,680, and each county' 'p fees will be $10,920.00. The proposed fund balance carried forward from FY 2 as also amended to $3,020.00 to create a balanced budget. AL 44 Please transmited proposed budget to your respective counties for their approval prior to the next utive Committee meeting on April 12, 2007. MiSSA WN Treasurer Attechmeot aerprnl:tueo:FY 2007:071tr:0709rcvpfopbudgel:sko MAR. 15. 2007 9:39AM COUNCIL SERVICE NO. 7217 P. 3 HSAC FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2007-2008 PROPOSED ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET =a:pmj:hsar.FY 2007:0708proposedbudgetrev:ske FY 2006-2007 FY2007.2000 Budget Budget REVENUES 1. Membership Fees $42,000.00 $43,680.00 2. Conference Income $0.00 $10,000.00 3. Interest Income $116.00 $100.00 4. Corporate Sponsorship $0.00 $0.00 Total Revenues $42,116.00 $63,780.00 Fund Balance, prior FY $12,065.00 $3,020.00 TOTAL REVENUES AND FUND BALANCE $54,180.00 $86,800.00 EXPENSES 1. Executive Committee Travel $5,250.00 $4,600.00 2. Executive Committee AuditinglProfessionai Services $3,600.00 $6,000.00 3. Executive Committee Stationery $260.00 $260.00 4. Executive Committee Miscellaneous $100.00 $160.00 1. Special Committee Travel $0.00 $0.00 2. Special Committee Miscellaneous $0.00 $0.00 1. NACo Travel $8,000.00 $8,000.00 2. NACo Promotional $260.00 $260.00 3. NACo Dues $26,680.00 $26,300.00 4. NACo Miscellaneous $1,000.00 $1,000.00 1. WIR Travel $6,000.00 $6,000.00 2. WIR Promotional $260.00 $250.00 3. WIR Dues $3,000.00 $3,100.00 4. WIR Miscellaneous $O.DO $1,000.00 TOTAL EXPENDITURES $54,180.00 $56,800.00 =a:pmj:hsar.FY 2007:0708proposedbudgetrev:ske VVM� COUNTY OF HAWAII •:' STATE OF HAWAII RESOLUTION NO. 116 U7 APPOINTING THE HAWAPI COUNTY COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE AND ALTERNATE TO SERVE ON THE HAWAII STATE ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES (HSAC) EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE AND THE REPRESENTATIVE TO SERVE ON THE WESTERN INTERSTATE REGION (WIR) BOARD OF DIRECTORS WHEREAS, the Hawaii State Association of Counties (HSAC) is a nonprofit corporation comprised of members of the four county councils of the State of Hawaii; and WHEREAS, each county council represented on HSAC is a member of the National Association of Counties (NACo); and WHEREAS, HSAC is also a member of the Western Interstate Region (WIR), an organization comprised of western counties that is affiliated with NACo; and WHEREAS, HSAC is headed by an Executive Committee of four officers, one from each county council; and WHEREAS, HSAC Bylaws require that prior to April 15 of each year, each county council appoint one of its members to serve as an officer on the HSAC Executive Committee; and WHEREAS, HSAC Bylaws also require that each county council appoint one of its members to serve as an alternate to the council member serving on the HSAC Executive Committee; and WHEREAS, HSAC Bylaws further require that each county council appoint one representative to serve on the WIR Board of Directors; now therefore, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF HAWAII that Councilmember Bob Jacobson be and is hereby appointed as its representative to the Executive Committee of HSAC and the WIR Board of Directors; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Councilmember K. Angel Pilago be and is hereby appointed as the alternate to Councilmember Jacobson as the Representative to the Executive Committee of HSAC; and BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution shall be transmitted by the County Clerk to the President and Secretary of the Hawaii State Association of Counties. Dated at Kona Hawaii, this 4th day of April , 2007. COUNTY COUNCIL County of Hawaii Hilo, Hawaii I hereby certify that the foregoing RESOLUTION was by the vote indicated to the right hereof adopted by the COUNCIL of the County ofHawai`i on nnril d, 9007 ATTEST: VO 2 ROLL CALL VOTE Reference: 0271/Waived—PWIFC RESOLUTION NO. 116 07 AYES NOES ABS EX FORD X HIGA X HOFFMANN x IKEDA x JACOBSON x NAEOLE x PILAGO YAGONG X YOSHIMOTO x 9 0 0 0 Reference: 0271/Waived—PWIFC RESOLUTION NO. 116 07 NACONational Association of Counties The Voice of America's Counties April 3, 2007 The Honorable Robert Jacobson Councilmember County of Hawaii 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Dear Robert: As president of the National Association of Counties, I have the honor and privilege of appointing the members to NACo's standing and ad hoc committees and also confirming your state association's nominations to the NACo steering committees. Thank you for agreeing to serve during my presidential year. Committee membership at the national level is a serious commitment and a big responsibility. Enclosed you will find a list of responsibilities for committee members. We understand that a great deal of NACo's strength is in its committees, and that strength is reflected in the commitment and active participation revealed throughout our committee structure. It is my pleasure to confirm your appointment to the following committee: Member, Transportation Steering Committee Your NACo staff liaison will follow-up with specific details and information regarding your appointments, appointment term, future meetings, and the mission of the committee. This year promises to be an exciting one and I look forward to working closely with you to further NACo's goals which, in turn, will benefit America's counties. Enclosure Sincerely, Colleen Landkamer President March 21, 2007 25 Massachusetts Avenue, NW I Suite 5001 Washington, DC 20001 1202.393.62261 fax 202.393.26301 www.naco.org Lively, Barbara From: Paul Beddoe [pbeddoe@naco.orgj Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2007 3:37 AM To: Jacobson, Bob Subject: FW: WIR Business Items Per the automated response. From: Paul Beddoe Sent: Tuesday, April 03, 2007 9:35 AM To: 'Robert Jacobson'; blively@co.hawaii.hi.us Cc: 'Blattie, L. Harold'; Connie Eissinger; 'Murray, Mike'; Amanda Clark Subject: RE: WIR Business Items I:er Page 1 of 2 Welcome to the WIR Board and thank you for your quick response. I took a quick look at your bio on the Hawai'i County website and based on your background and interests 1 think the session entitled "Path to Eden" might be a good fit. At the moment it is scheduled for Friday, May 11 from 11:00-12:30. The panelists will be some of your colleagues on the WIR Board from the Great State of Montana: Harold Blattie, the Executive Director of MACo; McCone County Commissioner Connie Eissinger, WIR Immediate Past President, and Lewis & Clark County Commissioner Mike Murray. Here's a brief description of the session: Path to Eden Land ownership in Montana has changed dramatically over the past 15 years. Expansive ranch lands and majestic mountains are being recognized by outsiders for their aesthetic and recreational values. With this new popularity come new owners bringing new cultures and new lifestyles. The small, close-knit communities that lie within these portraits of paradise are feeling the pressures of change. Since change is inevitable, what can we do to embrace the differences while, at the same time, maintaining the critical elements that make being a Montanan special? Learn how the Rural Landscape Institute with the support of many statewide organizations including the Montana Association of Counties is reaching out to new comers with an educational DVD called "Path to Eden." "Path to Eden" offers insight as to the opportunities, challenges and responsibilities to the landscape and community that accompany the purchase of property in Montana. Thanks again for your willingness to serve and we'll see you in Fairbanks! Paul V. Beddoe, Ph.D. Associate Legislative Director Western Interstate Region - Public Lands National Association of Counties 25 Massachusetts Avenue NW Suite 500 Washington, DC 20001 (202) 942-4234 - voice (202) 9424281 -fax (202) 550-8946 - mobile NACo - The Voice of America's Counties From: Robert Jacobson [mailto:jacobs@hawa!ianisp.com] Sent: Monday, April 02, 2007 9:10 PM To: blively@co.hawaii.hi.us Cc: Paul Beddoe Subject: RE: WIR Business Items Aloha Paul I support the reso honoring former BLM Director Kathleen Clarke for her service. 4/10/2007 Page 2 of 2 I'm happy to help serve as a moderator for the educational workshops at the WIR Conference. I am planning on attending. Let me know which committee I'll serve. I am a Registered Nurse in my normal life but I also find open space public land acquisition as one of my high priorities in Hawaii. Hope to hear from you soon. Mahalo Bob Jacobson From: Barbara Lively [mailto:blively@co.hawaii.hi.us] Sent: Monday, April 02, 2007 2:02 PM To: 'Robert Jacobson' Subject: FW: WIR Business Items Hey Bob, looks like they there gonna put you to work! Aloha, Barbara From: Paul Beddoe [mailto:pbeddoe@naco.org] Sent: Monday, April 02, 2007 10:12 AM To: Gardner, Alan; Boswell, Benjamin; Vogler, Bill; Wilcox, Bob; Gardner, Brent; Dahle, Brian; Farlee, Clinton; Eissinger, Connie; Sullivan, Craig; Patten, Dale; Chadwick, Daniel; Thompson, Douglas; Klein, Harold; Keene, James; Martin, John; Milton, John; Koster, John; Evans, Joseph; Wasserman, Kathie; Blattie, L. Harold; Kallenberger, Larry; Johnson, Mark; Herrington, Mark; McArthur, Mike; Murray, Mike; Stickler, Nicole; Sprague, Pete; Cope, Robert; Hadfield, Robert; Jacobson, Bob; Mancebo, Roger; Walter, Ron; Brown, Ronald; Comstock, Rose; Kopelman, Steve; WolFley, T. Deb; Jos!, Tim Cc: akarsian@ccionline.org; Gil Riddell; John Hofmann; Joy Esparsen; Karen Keene; Kelci Karl; Kris Jacobsen; mark@uacnet.org; Patricia Megason; Renee Archuleta; Tasia Young; Tom Robinson; Vinson Guthreau Subject: WIR Business Items dIDIN11".Tti111,TiE-Ti,T4V First, your executive committee would like to honor former BLM Director Kathleen Clarke for her service, particularly for her leadership in developing rules requiring BLM to grant counties coop agency status under NEPA. Please see the attached resolution. Without objection, it will be executed by Cope and an appropriate venue for presenting it to Kathleen will be identified. Second, our tradition has been to call on WIR Board Members to serve as moderators for the educational workshops at the WIR Conference. Please let me know if you are NOT planning to attend the meeting in Fairbanks North Star Borough. Third, afterjust over six and a half years as your WIR staff liaison here at NACo, I have accepted a new assignment in a little reorganization of NACo's legislative department. Over the next few months I will be taking on the health policy portfolio and transitioning out of public lands and WIR responsibilities. I am grateful for the opportunity to have worked with all of you and want you to know how much I care about "our" issues. That isn't going to change. In fact, one of my first responsibilities is to help NACo find good candidates for my job. I am attaching the job announcement and should you have contacts that you think may be appropriate, please help us put someone in place who "gets it'. Thank you Paul V. Beddoe, Ph.D. Associate Legislative Director Western Interstate Region - Public Lands National Association of Counties 25 Massachusetts Avenue NW Suite 500 Washington, DC 20001 (202) 942.4234 - voice (202) 942-4281 - fax (202) 550.8945 - mobile NACo - The Voice of America's Counties 4/10/2007