The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutREP HSSPSC 001 02/15/2011 2010-2012 OFFICE INFORMATION ONLY Meeting: July 22,2011 —23rd Session Action: Withdrawn by Introducer—Pete Hoffmann Re: Bill 291, Draft 2 (Comm. 925.2)/HSSPSC-1 REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON HUMAN SERVICES, SOCIAL SERVICES AND PUBLIC SAFETY DATE: February 15, 2011 Re: Comm. No. 925.2 Bill 291 Draft 2 PLACE: Council Chambers Hilo, Hawaii TIME: 11:30 a.m. Council Chair and Members Hawaii County Council Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Your Committee on Human Services, Social Services and Public Safety, to which was referred Bill 291, Draft 2, reports as follows: Bill 291 transmitted by Councilmember Peter Hoffman, via Communication No. 925, dated August 25, 2010, amends Chapter 25 (Zoning), Article 4, of the Hawaii County Code 1983 (2005 Edition, as amended), by adding a new division relating to tsunami sirens. The bill ensures that any coastal development meeting the parameters of this ordinance that has not received plan approval prior to the enactment of this ordinance will include a tsunami siren in its design: and construction. This measure was first heard by your Committee on September 8, 2010. At that time, Mr. Hoffman discussed the value of tsunami sirens and expressed surprise to discover during the February 2010 tsunami warning that there are very few located in the resort areas along the west side. He stressed public safety as the need to pass this bill. Even though there are other means to notify the public, sirens should be mandated to provide a uniform method: Discussion among the members of the Committee, Planning Director, and the Civil Defense Administrator included comments both in support and against. Mr. Hoffman transmitted proposed amendment to Bill 291, via Comm. 921.1, dated September 8, 2010, that were crafted with the assistance of Civil Defense Administrator Quince Mento and addressed the issue requiring additional sirens to be compatible and in compliance with the State Civil Defense. The motion to amend to Draft 2 was unanimously carried. Mr. Hoffman concluded by requesting members of the Committee to carefully study the bill and provide him with additional suggestions or concerns regarding policy issues before being forward to the Planning Department. He added that he will invite State Civil Defense to the next meeting for further discussion. A motion to postpone the bill to September 20, 2010 was-unanimously carried. During the meeting of On September 20, 2010, Mr. Hoffman explained that Bill 291, Draft, 2, addresses only one aspect of the siren warning system, and that is to make certain that the County has a specific mandate or guideline for the of tsunami sirens. However, after focusing specifically on tsunami areas;. he discovered that the State mandate covers all developments, even those 40 miles away.. Discussion ensued with State Civil. Defense Telecommunications Branch Chief George Burnett, Civil HSSPSC Report No. 1 HSSPSC -1 Page 2 Comm. 925.2/ Bill 291, Draft 2 . Defense Administrator Quince Mento, Planning Director Bobby Jean Leithead Todd and members of the Committee. Mr. Hoffman expressed hope that any amendments, recommendations, or concerns would have come forward at this meeting. However, he added that today's presentation by the State opened up issues and concerns that were not considered previously and suggested postponing this bill to allow time for further consideration. Mr. Ikeda voiced his objection to the postponement and suggested forwarding it to the Planning Commissions and Department to see what is uncovered during their research, and allow them to make recommendations; the motion to refer was carried unanimously. After review by the Windward and Leeward Planning Commissions and Planning Department the bill appeared before your Committee on February 1, 2011. Communication 60, from Mayor William P. Kenoi, dated January 3, 2011, also came forward which included the Planning Director's background and recommendation report and the Planning Commission's negative recommendation. Mr. Hoffmann expressed his disappointment that no solutions or alternatives were provided in either report. Ms. Smart expressed concern that the siren.costs may be born entirely by a single new development, e.g. a new restaurant, instead of being shared by an entire existing development. Mr. Hoffman replied that impact fees may be used in multiple ways but tsunami sirens are not currently, defined in the process. He also added that this is about establishing the requirement that a tsunami siren be installed and not about who will pay for it. Mr. Mento related that the State Civil Defense has plans to provide more sirens but he did not know if . the plans had been funded. He added that the plans look great but there is no legislation statewide that. requires installment of sirens. Mr. Ikeda shares Mr. Hoffmann's concerns but questioned if adding it to development costs is the correct place. Ms. Ford also expressed distress to learn that private resorts are not required to allow the installation of sirens, stating that something needs to be established to make it a requirement in areas with a large populace. She suggested the establishment of impact fees that help fund installation of sirens beyond what the State may provide. Mr. Onishi inquired if Civil Defense had other means to notify people at the resorts, and Mr. Mento replied that many people are notified by text messages to their cell phone, radio /TV broadcast, and the security departments at the resorts,have their own radio transmitters. This item was postponed to February, 15, 2011, to allow the Planning Department time to provide suggestions for establishing a requirement for installing sirens. At the February, 15, meeting Civil Defense Administrator Quince Mento and Planning Department Program Manager Daryn Arai were present. Mr. Hoffman recapped previous meetings and postponements to seek amendments or comments from colleagues and the Planning Department. He reminded the committee of the recent earthquake in Chile as .a note of the continual threat and the gaps in our warning system, particularly in West Hawaii. He stressed the need to take action because there currently is no requirement to establish a uniform warning'system in populated areas. He added that the bill simply establishes a requirement, it does not address who is going to pay for it. HSSPSC =1 Page 3 Comm. 925.2/ Bill 291, Draft 2 Councilmembers discussed alternative methods of notifying the public during a tsunami,'and thee various responsibilities of the State and County. The overall concern is public safety; all agreed that he warning system must be in place. Ms. Smart requested information from the Planning Department to address comments made in their negative recommendation. Mr. Arai acknowledged the concerns but related that Planning Department approval is at end of its cycle. The way, the bill is currently written, any improvement, such as adding an extension to an existing building, or new development requiring plan approval would trigger the requirement to install a siren. Linking siren, installation to current and future plan approvals will be difficult for the Planning Department to implement. Mr. Ikeda suggested postponing for another two weeks to give Mr. Arai time to familiarize himself with this bill. Mr. Hoffman. stated that this is the third time the Committee has asked for assistance from the Planning Department and he suggested passing it the way it is, and Planning can bring the information requested to the full Council. Your Committee on Human Services, Social Services and Public Safety is in accord with the.purpose and intent of Bill 291, Draft 2, and recommends its passage on first reading. sl Respectfully submitted, COMMITTEE ON HUMAN SERVICES, SO A SER S & PUB SA ETY K. ANGEL PIL O, CHAIR HSSPSC REPORT NO. 1 ADOPTED: AYES NOES A &E EX BLAS X FORD X HOFFM X IKEDA X ONISHI X PILAGO X SMART X YAGONG X YOSHIMOTO X Respectfully submitted, COMMITTEE ON HUMAN SERVICES, SO A SER S & PUB SA ETY K. ANGEL PIL O, CHAIR HSSPSC REPORT NO. 1 ADOPTED: