Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN GREDC 2017/01/04 (2016-2018)Committee on Governmental Relations and Economic Development 1" Session Hawaii County Building 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, Hawaii January 4, 2017 CALL'I'O The regular meeting of the Committee on Governmental Relations and Economic ORDER: Development was called to order at 9:00 a.m.; in the Council Chambers, I filo, by Dru Mamo Kanuha. Chair, ROLL CALL Present: Mr. Dru Marro Kanuha, Chair Ms. Jennifer Ruggles, Vice Chair Mr. Aaron Chung, Member Ms. Maile Medeiros David. Member Ms. Karen Eoff, Member Ms. Susan L. K. Lee Loy, Member Ms. Eileen O'Hara, Member Ms. Valerie Poindexter, Member Mr. Herbert M. Richards, ill, Member STATEMENTS The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, FROM THE Statements from the Public on Agenda Items, PUBLIC ON AGENDA ITEMS: The following individuals registered to speak in support of Comm. 19, and came forward when called by the Chair: Gilbert Benevides. Philip Millett. Jon Olson. Steve Lim. Katherine Garson. Karolyn Nagao. Ricky R. Damerville, representing the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney. Charlene Iboshi. John Wagner. Mike Ben. Romel Deta Cruz. Bob Williams, representing Hi Island Veterans. Wendell Leite. GREDC-1 January 4, 2017 The following individual registered to comment on Comm. 19, and came forward when called by the Chair: Steven Strauss. COMMUNI- The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, CATIONS: Communications. Change Order As directed by the Chair and with no objection from the of Business: Council Members, the following item was taken out of order: Comm. 19: APPOINTMENT OF JOSEPH K. KAMELAMELA AS CORPORATION COUNSEL From Mayor Harry Kim, dated December 7, 2016, submitting for Council's review and confirmation the above appointment. Motion to Close File: Ms. David moved to close file on Comm. 19. Seconded by Ms. Poindexter. CHR KANUHA: Mr. Kamelamela, if you'd like to join us and Mayor Kim, if you would like to introduce your nominee, we'd really appreciate it. (Note: At this time, Joseph Kamelamela Corporation Counsel nominee and Harry Kim Mayor came forward to address the members of the Committee.) CHR KANUHA: Good morning, Mayor. Make sure the microphone button is on. MAYOR KIM: Thank you very much for this opportunity, I was sitting back there listening to the testimony and I assure you that I know there are people that say, "Oh Harry must have asked some of them to testify." I think you can call all of them back and thenI never talked to any of them to support Joe. I just don't do those things. I was just going to come up here and say I felt that this is the best man for this time of integrity and trust. Anyone who has worked for Corporation Counsel, if you then asked them to identify their best 20 years or more, who is the hardest worker of long hours, I think Joe will come up front. I think all those things are known by people who work with him. I really debated whether to say this or not, but because it is public, I will say it. The only thing I heard negative of Joe was because of the so-called notification of people not being reappointed. And to be quite frank, that really puzzles me even for possibility of ordinance submission to make responsibility of hiring or Page 2 GREDC-1 January 4, 2017 dismissal within the Council to prevent, let's say unwarranted type of not being rehired. I think there are a couple of Council people up there right now that know what the truth is. The reason I'm saying this is I think the public should know what is truth in regards to the criticism against Joe Kamelamela, in regards to notifying people that they may not be reconsidered to be back on staff I was quite surprised of that. And then because it became so public, I decided to call a couple of Council people to tell them the truth behind—including the Managing Director. The truth of the matter is that was a problem, the responsibility was mine. Mr. Kamelamela called me and talked to me about—in regards to talking to people, and he said that he had some ideas in regards to people he would not care to be part of the team. He didn't say anything negative about them, he just said, "I'd like to choose my own team." And the choice was this, "Should I talk to them now?" And it was still in October or maybe even late September, but earlier part of the year, way before this period obviously, and the choice was this. If he knew, should he let them know now to give them three, four months of time to prepare for another job, or should he wait until—and give them only a week? I think some of you know that attorneys were released in the past year with just a few days notification. And it was my recommendation, I told Joe if it is my choice, I surely would like to know ahead of time, two or three or four months and at that point, it was close to the four month period where he would be confirmed, if he was confirmed, instead of just wait until then and say, "I'm not going to choose you on my team." And I did not question him specifically on who, except he would tell you I said, "You just make sure in regards to your choices, you know these people because you've been there for a long time." I say again, I repeated this to a couple of Council people, including the Managing Director, that the publicity towards Joe on this one issue, there was only one issue, the publicity towards Joe on this is so unfair because it was me that told him I think it would be best to notify them now. How this could be turned into something negative is beyond me. In regards to the testimonies of this man, I don't think you need my testimony. He was Corporation Counsel with me for eight years and they all know that all the Corporation Counsel, the attorneys are told, "You're not my attorney, you're the peoples' attorney. Your job is only what is right by law, nothing more, nothing less." And he followed that to the hilt. I will close here to tell you this that you've heard. I chose him carefully because I think he is the best attorney to lead us at this time. I think he would be good for you, he'll be good for me, and he'll be good for the County—of the people of Hawaii. So thank you very much for the consideration. Page 3 GREDC-1 January 4, 2017 CHR KANUHA: Mahalo, Mayor Kim for your introduction. Mr. Kamelamela, if you'd like to introduce yourself. MR. KAMELAMELA: Aloha, Chair and members of the County Council. Hau`oli Makahiki Hou. CHR KANUHA: Hau`oli Makahiki Hou. MR. KAMELAMELA: Thank you, Mayor. I'm honored and privileged to have the opportunity again to work for the public. Public service has always been a thing for me since I was a senior in high school. And I think it's only because I got State grants and they said that, "You have to work for the public." But working for the Corporation Counsel's office has always been a joy for me, and I'm going to let you in on something that I rarely told people, and that's why public service is so important, not only because I've worked with the AG's (Attorney General) or Judge Shunichi Kimura. Back in 1992, Mayor Stephen Yamashiro got elected, I was backing up Lorraine Inouye at that time. I didn't know whether I was going to have a job so I had applied to a private law firm here in Hilo. I got an offer, I looked at it and then I thought about it, you know? What was more important? Working private or take my chances working for the public again? You know what I did? I took my chances and I said, "Well, I don't know who's going to be the Corporation Counsel, all I know is that I wanted to serve because that's my commitment." It's been my commitment since high school to work for the people. I took my chances, and guess what? The person that he appointed was Mr. Richard Wurdeman who was at that time, the Corporation Counsel for Frank Fasi. Now why is that important? It's important because of this. Prior to that in 1998, I called Mr. Wurdeman, I needed his help. We had a case where our Police Department was doing an investigation of people selling marijuana and cocaine, and these are people that were selling were employees selling to the guests at one of the Kohala Coast hotels. And so, Honolulu sent two undercover officers. Now I knew I couldn't represent those officers, but I asked Mr. Wurdeman, "Can you kokua, can you help us out?" And he did. And what happened? In 1989, he actually came so I actually got to know Mr. Wurdeman and he brought his top litigator at that time, Rodney Veary. And you know what happened? We won, okay? Just that choice that I made to stay, you know, convinced me even more. You know sometimes faith happens. Good things happen and I'm just glad that when Mr. Wurdeman was appointed, I had eight more years with him. And he was one of my strongest mentors that I had because in him, he not only had the experience and knowledge, but in him was a good man, always saying, "Do the right thing, Page 4 GREDC-1 January 4, 2017 Joe," always saying, "If you're right, you don't back down to any political pressures." That's one of the things that I've learned, not only from Mr. Wurdeman but also from Judge Kimura. Do the right thing and Judge Kimura was one of the hardest working individuals that I know. So public service, that's my commitment to this County. Now why did I choose to work on this island? Part of it is because I was born here. I was born in Hilo, Oda Hospital or Medical Clinic on Laimana Street and that's below Hilo Intermediate School. Not only that, my parents are from the Kalapana area. My mom, Josephine Kaulaikekai Kapahua from the village of Mokuhulu, just above Kalapana. My dad, Jonah Kaleiwainui Akamoku Kamelamela, Moa Mauka in Kama`ili, mauka of Kalapana. So I have deep roots to this island, this island I love. Even when I was in high school when I traveled here, I grew to love this island even more. And that's why I chose to come here back in 1979, because I wanted to move here. And right now, also, I feel like I'm a fortunate man, not only getting the support of the Mayor, the support of many speakers, but my family. I have my wife, Karen Napua Brown here, who is also an attorney, inactive. I have my son, Kamalani, with his girlfriend Jojo here. You know, taking time—you know it's hard sometimes to have your kids come to things that you enjoy, but I'm glad that they're here. My daughter couldn't be here, she's Noelani. She's back at her alma mater working there at MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology), and I have my aunty Kapali Torres Ka`iewe from Mokuhulu. I've asked her to come only because of this one thing. When I needed a place to stay, to be housed and fed, she brought me in, back in 1979. That's when I first came here. Now what do I bring to the office? What I intend to do is to continue to fulfill what I believe is the mission, the vision, with the core values of the Office of the Corporation Counsel. Now one of the handouts that I have given to the Clerk to pass out is the Administrative Manual of the Office of the Corporation Counsel, just a portion of it. It's something that, along with two others beside myself, Cathy Ferreira who was the clerk at that time and Joyce Unoki who was the Accountant and stayed as the HR person there, we helped to put everything that we need to know about our office into an Administrative Manual, and we did it on November 1, 2003. Now what I have provided to you is just a just two pages, just giving you the Corporation Counsel's perspective. Our vision is simple. We actually had worked on a strategic planning under then Lincoln Ashida, the Corporation Counsel. It took us a long time to get it to a point where all of us as an office felt that it was comfortable. We actually got a vision statement and we actually got itactually it was from Gerald Takase who is now the Liquor Department Head, and says we are the answer. It's we, not L We are the answer. Page 5 GREDC-1 January 4, 2017 Now as part of that vision, there's certain core values that we develop as part of the strategic planning session that we had back in 2008, and the best way to remember the core values that we have developed is T.AP.P.S. T -A -P -P -S. Teamwork, Accountability, Professionalism, Progress and Service. It's one thing that we look at, those core values, and we have a mission statement where the Corporation Counsel's office would provide the answers to the County's challenges with professionalism and integrity by ordinary people, achieving extraordinary results. Now what does that mean, ordinary people? It's just that we're attorneys working hard, giving our best efforts. But it's not only the attorneys that are important, it's everyone in that staff that is important. It's the clerks, it's people that you trust in the office, people that you rely on so that we give everybody the correct and accurate answers needed, not only to the Mayors but also to the County Council Members. Now as part of what I intend to do to—I've talked to a lot of people both inside and outside of the office, and I have a little sheet that I had turned over also to the County Council's Clerk. It's just a short office survey because I don't know everything. I may know many things that happened in the office, but I don't know everything. So I want to make sure that when we start getting things rolling more and more, I would count on the people within the office to provide more ideas that can strengthen the office. The last thing that I want to do, and I'm actually going off -script since it's something that Mr. Strauss had brought up and what the Mayor had brought up. When I was appointed in September, I made sure—one thing that was important was that I needed a committee to kind of look at the people who are the attorneys there. These—two of the committee members that I chose, one from within the office and one from outside of the office, these two individuals that I set up, they had over 20 years of experience, not only in public government practice but also in private practice. Because I knew that one day, whatever choices we made maybe questioned, and you know people are going to take exception to what I might have done. But I know I had to form a committee, which I did because I had to look at the performance. Now I know all of the deputies, I know their weaknesses and so when I was appointed in September, I got a lot of information. A lot from all over this island, emails, I start talking to people. They were talking about the office. Things that were good, things that were bad. And all the people that I talked to, I would always tell them this, "If I am confirmed, I will appoint you. If I am confirmed, I will not appoint you." So I wasn't being presumptuous. All I know is that I'm giving these guys choices. Now of those that I said if I am confirmed and I will not appoint them, three of them wanted to talk to me. One wasn't ready, the one that was ready, I talked to him on October 24. I sat with him for over one hour listening to him. After listening to him, I'm thinking, "Wait, let me see if I can really help this person." Because deep down inside, maybe there's things that Page 6 GREDC-1 January 4, 2017 wasn't done in the two years that I was gone to make this person better. Once I reached that point on October 24, I said, "If I re-evaluate one, I'm going to re-evaluate the others." So what happens at the end? The end is this. One of them had left because that person knows that if I'm confirmed, I made the decision he would not be appointed. So yes, I did that. And did I do anything wrong? Not legally. And why is that? Because all of the attorneys are at -will. All of the information that I took, I gave them a performance evaluation. People may disagree with the way that I came out with it, but I gave them the performance evaluation. It was based on everything that I knew, every information that I got. In fact, some of the people that I had some concerns about, there were things that impacted me, or could have impacted the Council. Those are things that I observed. So yes, if I am confirmed, there are certain things that I'm going to do. But what I'm looking for, I'm looking for a team, a real team. I know that there are very talented attorneys there, but when I start hearing things about people missing in action, really missing in action, or people that's not quite up to snuff, it weakens the team. I've coached soccer for over 20 years. I can see who the good players are, who's giving 100 percent maximum. And if those people do not give 100 percent maximum, it impacts the team. So you're either going to be on the bench or eventually you're going to transfer to another team because you're going to be on the A -team sometimes. But you know, you transfer to another team and you'll be on the B -team. And I have to apologize for being kind of frank here, but I'm not here to hurt anybody's feelings, okay? But this is me, okay? So in summary, I've learned to not—like what I said—when I talked to the Honorable Judge Ronald Ibarra, the one who sworn each one of you here, and all the Council Members. He reminded me of the time he hired me. He told me to tell it like it is. My tact is a little bit different. I'm here to present you the law, what you decide to do with it is your prerogative. I'm here to help you and by helping you, we help the people of this County. Now somea judge had told me, "You know, Joe, you're the County's champion." Other people had told me that, "Joe, you're the peoples' attorney." But I tell you for sure is that I'm just an attorney, wanting to be the Corporation Counsel to do the best work for the County of Hawaii so that we can represent the people fairly. Thank you. CHR KANUHA: Thank you, Mr. Kamelamela. Council Members, it is 10:00, I know we have a Finance Committee at 10:00, but if it's okay with all of you, that we continue moving forward. Ms. Eoff—who's Finance? Ms. David, is that okay? Page 7 GREDC-1 January 4, 2017 MS. DAVID: Yes Chair, it's fine with me if there's no objections from the rest of the Council Members. CHR KANUHA: Okay. So we can continue and I'll open it up for debate. Any Council Members that would like to start off? Mr. Chung. MR. CHUNG: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Since I've been the person who's been most critical of Mr. Kamelamela's method of handling the Deputy Corporation Counsel's situation, I may as well lead off, I think that's only fair. Before I go on, let me just read something that I prepared for Joe Kamelamela upon his retirement. I had attended his retirement party and it's just when I got on to the Council. And as I was hearing the speakers, I realized, "Hey, wait a minute, I'm on the Council too, I could have written something for him." And this is something I personally wrote, because I've known Joe actually longer than most people here because I knew him from college. As he was in law school, I was attending college at UH (University of Hawai`i). And I've always had the highest regard for Joe. We played basketball together many years, right? You have that certificate? I have it right here. I'm going to read it for you guys. And all of you signed it but it was never presented to Joe because it wasI had left for a vacation and—but I think it was read to him at his farewell office party, not the formal dinner. But I'm going to read it because this is the kind of regard I have for Joe Kamelamela. I don't want anybody to misunderstand this, the thing that has gone on over the last few months. Okay. "Joseph Joe Kalani Kamelamela in 1981," and of course this is in recognition of your retirement. "You were hired as a Deputy Prosecuting Attorney, thus beginning what would become a 33 year career with the County of Hawaii. Although serving admirably in the capacity for six years, it is your work with the Office of the Corporation Counsel which you joined in 1987 under Ron Ibarra, where your mark as a public servant would be indelibly made. Working under seven Corporation Counsels, Ronald Ibarra, John Wagner, Richard Miyamoto, Michael Matsukawa, Richard Wurdeman," whom you mentioned earlier, "Lincoln Ashida and Molly Stebbins over the course of 27 years, you gained the reputation for being an exceptional litigator, successfully defending the County in a number of high profile civil rights contracts and personal injury cases, most notably in jury trials. Your formula for success has, quite frankly, never been quite fully understood by most, but we can only surmise that it was in part attributed to your attention to detail." And I hope I can get little bit more leeway on the time, Mr. Chairman. "You did, after all, earn an undergraduate degree in Engineering and your many hours of hard work, you're famously known for being the last person out of your office each day. We think, however, that what truly sets you apart from others was your uncanny ability to connect with jurors. One Circuit Court Clerk said it best in declaring that `Joe is a man of the people.' Page 8 GREDC-1 January 4, 2017 Ironically though, perhaps your biggest impact was made out of the courtroom when you negotiated a resolution for the long standing controversy over the condemnation of land for the Mamalahoa bypass road in Kona. Upon its completion, that road will connect the Keauhou region to Napa'opo`o and greatly reduce the traffic strain in that area. Although you'll be missed by your co-workers, friends, and associates in the County, we're happy that you will now have more time to spend with your wife, Karen Napua Brown, son Kamalani, daughter Noelani, and granddaughter Brycelyn, and to pursue your many interests and hobbies, of course one of which is coaching soccer," which I see you at the soccer field quite often. And of course there's a little bit more words there, and I stand by every word I put in there because I personally wrote this and because this is my friend, a person that I've known for many, many years. So you know I wasn't really going to talk about that whole controversy regarding the stuff that happened at the office. I actually promised someone in this courtroom—this council room that I wouldn't do it, but since it came up and since you brought it up, I'm going to touch upon it. And Joe, you and I had a nice meeting, two hours in my office, okay? And at which time, I will say, I committed my vote for Joe Kamelamela. But I'm going to talk about this now. You know, this created a lot of problems for me, as you can well imagine, right? Joe, you talked about you supporting Lorraine Inouye and then you're now going into another administration with Stephen Yamashiro and you then were thinking maybe you got to choose different options already, right? You didn't know how it would work out, but it worked out. You used the word faith. Faith happens sometimes, right? You took chances and it happened. You know Harry, you also stated that you don't know how something like this could turn into a negative, but this is how people look at things differently. And maybe I don't adhere to your philosophies precisely, but I think from what you told me, there's nothing wrong with giving people chances. You know today, and this has been one of the banes of my existence on the many years that I worked on the Council, Department Heads never have a probationary period. They come up here, we hear testimony from the public, we read about him, we hear a pitch from the Mayor, not just Mayor Kim but any Mayor. And we go on faith, and we give these guys a chance and we can never kick them out. It only has to be initiated by the Mayor. Any removal can only be initiated by the Mayor. That's the kind of faith we give all of the people who come up before us. No probationary period, come up for five, ten, maybe in this case half an hour, we vote yes, and give him a chance. And most of the time it works out. I can say I—maybe only one or two times I really regretted voted in favor of an appointee. And that's why this is the philosophical difference that we have. Yeah, Mayor Kim brings up, it's only fair, and Margaret also brought this up, it's fair that you Page 9 GREDC-1 January 4, 2017 give them advanced notice so that they can find other options. Hey, it's tough out there, okay? It's not easy to get jobs out in the public, the private sector, very, very difficult, especially a good paying job like at the Corporation Counsel's office. I would expect you guys to at least give them a chance. See how things go and if it doesn't work out, if they're not part of the team, they don't fit in with your philosophy, then out. Nothing wrong with that. But that's how maybe we differ. Both of you guys are coaches, AYSO (American Youth Soccer Organization), football coach, great coaches the both of you. You talked about people being not giving 100 percent to the team but what does a coach?—you know when you look at professional football for example. You have a lot of malcontents, right? But people always give them a chance. They think maybe we can get the best out of these guys so you always have these super talented guys who are just not giving 100 percent. But you always have these General Managers or these coaches who are going to give them a chance because we would think maybe we can get the best out of these guys. We're going to be the coach, we're going to be the organization that can make this person fulfill their potential. I think you guys are selling yourself short actually. With regard to you asking the public, you know you had your committee and you asked the members of the public what they thought about people in the Corporation Counsel's office. How many of the members of this Council were asked, though? Maybe a few, I don't know, but I don't think a majority of them. And we're being serviced by the Corporation Counsel's office. So I just wanted to state those things so that people don't misunderstand where I was coming from, okay? And it's not just about you, Joe. I mean you were the tipping point I have to admit, but it's been a long standing frustration with the way things are handled in that office. And in that sense, you and I actually have something in common. But I wanted to state that for the public because this is a person that I've known for a long time, and I have a lot of aloha for, so it really was kind of a disconnect when all of this stuff happened. It didn't seem like the Joe Kamelamela that I knew. But Joe, we had a nice talk, I think, right? I told you—we shook hands, I said, "Joe, you have my vote." All I ask is that whatever you said today, you stand by it. You service both the Mayor as well as the Council, yeah? Call it straight and we'll see how things go, right? Alright, Joe. CHR KANUHA: Thank you. Sorry Council Members, I gave a little leeway there, that was okay. Ms. Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Chairman. Mr. Kamelamela, thank you for being here. As one of the freshmen Council Members, I'm just going to start with just Page 10 GREDC-1 January 4, 2017 some foundational questions. I do want to preference this a little bit with—like Mr. Chung, I've known you for a very long time. Also, I've known a lot of the mentors that you spoke about, Mr. Wurdeman, Kathy Garson, Amy Self. I even worked with John, he was the Clerk while I used to work here at the County Council. So I completely appreciate all of the service that you have provided to the County. I just want to start with a little bit of a—some foundational questions about the Office of the Corporation Counsel. And I'm just hopeful that this helps some of our freshmen Council Members too. How many attorneys are in the Office of the Corporation Counsel? MR. KAMELAMELA: 15. MS. LEE LOY: And how many paralegals do you folks have? MR. KAMELAMELA: Paralegals, there would be MS. LEE LOY: Or other staff? MR. KAMELAMELA: There's one paralegal but the rest are clerks. MS. LEE LOY: Clerks? And how many are those? MR. KAMELAMELA: Well there's about—now there's different levels of clerks. So there's about 12 of them. MS. LEE LOY: So you're going to be overseeing about 30 different employees? MR. KAMELAMELA: 29. MS. LEE LOY: 29. Okay. MR. KAMELAMELA: Unless for some reason, they cut more people that I'm not aware of right now. MS. LEE LOY: Okay. And do you know the budget, the overall budget for the Office of the Corporation Counsel? MR. KAMELAMELA: So the budget was around a little over $2,000,000. MS. LEE LOY: And that's for mostly salaries and wages or for? MR. KAMELAMELA: Salaries and wages I think it ran—now the figures might be kind of off, but it's 60 to 70 percent at least. Page 11 GREDC-1 January 4, 2017 MS. LEE LOY: Is for salaries and wages? And then the balance is for their litigation or? MR. KAMELAMELA: That would include litigation. MS. LEE LOY: Okay. And I now want to touch upon a little bit of what Mr. Chung brought up. As a Corporation Counsel, I understand the rule for you is to serve not only the Executive Branch which is the Mayor and the administration, but the Legislative Branch, which is us. And for me, having learned under a number of people who are in this room, there's always a little bit of a heartburn for me and my question is, how does the Office of the Corporation Counsel kind of begin to differentiate between the conflict, if there's conflict between the Executive Branch and then the Legislative Branch? What is that process like? MR. KAMELAMELA: Well we would go straight to the Charter to kind of look at as to how the functions are defined. So certain functions are clear. For example, the power to settle lies with the County Council. I kind of recall a battle in Honolulu with Fasi, and in that Fasi case it made it clear that when it comes to settlement, it's with the County Council. So you look to the Charter and so it's kind of clear as to where the division is, so I always check there and then afterwards, I would look at case law to see if there's more refinement needed. So I don't know if that totally answers your question. Do you have a follow-up to that question? MS. LEE LOY: A little bit. Just because as the legislative body goes through all of their legislative meetings, we are represented by the Office of the Corporation Counsel. And I guess my concern is if there are different opinions between the legislative body and then the Executive Branch, where does the Office of the Corporation Counsel kind of differentiate between who would take the lead on a decision making? MR. KAMELAMELA: I don't know of many conflicts that actually happened in this County, you know? So I would have to look at it to kind of because it has to be kind of specific. All I know is that you just follow the law and then that's it. Because sometimes, I've been involved in cases where I went against Mayors, you know? And I've been in cases with the law, you know, favored the Mayor. So you know it depends what the law is. MAYOR KIM: Ms. Lee Loy, if I may answer you on that. Being the Mayor the previous eight years and at the present time I think if you talk to every attorney, they're given standard rule. You're not my attorney, you're not the Council's attorney, you're the attorney with the laws of this land. And I really believe you will not find during the time of conflict, they are obligated to follow the laws of this land. Page 12 GREDC-1 January 4, 2017 MS. LEE LOY: Thank you. I appreciate that. Just a few more questions. Today we heard a lot of members of the public speak about defense skill sets and I ask this of pretty much everybody. We heard the positives, but I'd also like to know what you think is one of your greatest weaknesses, or one of your greatest challenges for the Office of the Corporation Counsel. MR. KAMELAMELA: Well it's just that being the head of the legal department is a challenge in itself. Like I said, I don't know everything, and so right now, that's something that I see as a weakness. I've been retired for two years and what I've done to try to prepare myself which I had like about three months to do, I looked at the HRS (Hawai`i Revised Statutes) that is related to County business, I looked at the Hawaii Code, I looked at the Charter. But just looking at those things are not enough, but whenever there's a controversy that happened in the newspaper, I read the contracts to like—like what happened at the Ka`u gym. I read the contract just to familiarize myself again with that. I look at the paper and then I'm concerned about police shootings, so then I read up again the law dealing with qualifying immunity and the use of force. And that's just scratching the surface. There's a lot more to learn and that's why one of the things that I intend to do is to get on with an office survey. How to make the office better right now is one of my focus. MS. LEE LOY: And my final question, because I had an opportunity to read through the core values of the department, and I was just was wondering what you thought was the most important core value that you folks have in your mission statement and kind of listed here in your manual? MR. KAMELAMELA: To me, service is the number one because we represent the people on this island. Service is the most important thing. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you. I yield. CHR KANUHA: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. Next? Ms. David. Just let me know—if you guys click on your microphone, I can tell who's going to beI have no idea. Ms. David, go right ahead. MS. DAVID: Thank you for being a gentleman, Mr. Richards. Aloha, Mr. Kamelamela and welcome. I would like to thank the testifiers who have testified this morning on your behalf, giving us a wide perspective of your professional and personal attributes. So my question is basically technical and I think Ms. Lee Loy had touched on—and I'm sorry for my voice, I'm recovering from laryngitis. With regard to the Executive Branch and the Legislative Branch, and representing both interests, most of it will have to do with the community's interests any way that come before us. It has happened before where differing Page 13 GREDC-1 January 4, 2017 positions based on interpretation of the law might have the administration and this body in conflict. So my question is, how do you see, as the Corporation Counsel in resolving situations like that down the road, if it happens where we come to a log jam as far as positions—so I'm just curious as to what you would be advising the office on how to address that, where different interpretations of the law, it does happen, and I just wanted to follow up with Ms. Lee Loy's question about that and just get your feel on how do you see proceeding in a situation such as that. MR. KAMELAMELA: I'll answer it in this way. All I know is that in my time with the Corporation Counsel's office for 27 years, at least on cases that I dealt with, I would just state what the law is and then how the Mayor or the County Council treats it. You know it's really in both of you guys' hands so—and that's what we usually tell the deputies, basically call it like it is and then let the decision makers make the final decisions. I mean that's how we help you. Because sometimes we come here and also ask for help, you know? As the Corporation Counsel, I would ask for help for getting special counsel because I know that there are certain things that we need help on to do a difficult case. Sometime there's a disagreement as to whether there is a need from both sides, but we would just call it and then you guys make the decisions. MS. DAVID: Okay. That's promising to hear. MR. KAMELAMELA: Let me just give you one simple example because I've been there. Sometimes I want to take a case to trial, the Mayor wants to take the case to trial but I got to come before the County Council. And even if we feel that we have a winnable case, I've been there where the County Council says, "No, settle." I've been there. So it's a different kind of interpretation but like I said, this is the call we made, you guys disagree, but I'm going to go with the County Council. They say, "Okay, they don't want to be"—and the reverse had happened where I said to settle, County Council said, "No, go to trial." Now I said, "Shoot, I get to go to trial." And then I just work the hardest I can to get the best deal possible. So we call it like it is and it's up to the decision makers how you want to handle it? And then that's it. MS. DAVID: Okay. Thank you. My other question would be based on the processes that the County has to go through, the departments and when it deals with procedures. Now I know that there's been—historically there's been actions brought by citizens against the County, having to do with procedural issues. And some of them has been successful, we were successful and some of them we were not. I speak that because before when I was a citizen, I was very active in processes and applications of that sort, contested case hearings. Throughout the years, I think we've progressed to the point where I think now we have CDP's (Community Development Action Plan), now we have a lot of community input. The community is engaged in a lot of things that we do as a governmental body Page 14 GREDC-1 January 4, 2017 and the administration. So when decisions come down that basically based on a citizen's efforts to address the process, how in your mind will you capitalize on things that affect how we do things in our procedures that will prevent, or at least minimize, the citizen's need to litigate against the County in applications and processes like that? I know we have the CDP now but you spoke about training or bringing deputies up to speed by going through the legal cases that either we won or we lost. And how do we implement, or how do you see us implementing those decisions that will help us improve our processes from the legal? MR. KAMELAMELA: Well that certainly is a broad question. MS. DAVID: I know, I'm sorry. It's more like in training. I'm very happy that you have the foresight that when different things happen, you do advise your deputies and I'm really grateful to that. But I'm just looking long term that we have a lot of new things that, how are we going to be proactive in implementing those things that are now before us as they happen? MR. KAMELAMELA: Okay. So let me see if I can answer in two parts. You know people have a right to sue. But short of that, what I've always thought that what works best is that people are explained why certain things are being done. Not just simple explanations because sometimes when we go through a process, some of the citizens feel like they are not being heard. And so at times, it puzzles me that people feel like that, and the only answer I have to that kind of stuff is that people are not really communicating well. They're not laying things out on the table. What are all the interests that we are really concerned about and then it's just breaking it down by issues? And then being frank with them because sometimes people ask for things that is unconstitutional and—but we should be there to explain to the public sometimes, this is the reason why we cannot do it. So I always think better explanation is good, and then sometimes when people don't' feel like they're being heard, is because there's no due process. When certain kinds of decisions are made, there's—you don't get input and the lack of getting that input can result in not having a fairness about it because again, due process. I mean I've been involved in a situation during my retirement where somebody changed the rules in the park and then it's kind of like, why? Nobody talked to us about it, right? So you have a sense of leaders not being true leaders. They're just doing things because they have the power to do it so we want to make sure that due process procedures are set up so that people have the opportunity to be heard. That's so important in this community, to be heard. MS. DAVID: Well I think your willingness to be—to hear all sides is very refreshing to me and I think based on that, I don't really have any more questions. I just wanted to know your position on processes and procedures in the County so I'll yield for now. Thank you. Page 15 GREDC-1 January 4, 2017 MR. KAMELAMELA: Thank you. CHR KANUHA: Thank you, Ms. David. Mr. Richards. MR. RICHARDS: Thank you, Chair. Mr. Kamelamela, thank you so much for agreeing to serve in the County. A couple of questions I had for you, and I'll echo some of the words that have been said before and not to draw this out. The statement has been made that you represent the County and the people, which is true and you represent the Mayor, you represent the County Council, but we also represent—and all of us represent the people of our County. One of the things that I've been thinking about going through this process, and I appreciate what Mr. Chung has said about the events of this fall, and we can put that to the side now—I've never met you before until we came into the room today and different than the other directors' positions in the cabinet, whereas you work directly for the Mayor. This one is a little bit different because you work for us too. And I would have hoped that we would have had a conversation coming forward. I think without question your credentials speak for themselves as far as your background and all. My concern is, as I sit here and I think using some of your words, we have leaders that do things because they can, not necessarily in respect to what their constituency is wishing, and I believe it is our job to interview you for us as we're interviewing you for the Mayor as well. So I raise that concern though we haven't had the chance to talk story and get to know each other a little bit because if we get into a scrape—I've been on one of the commissions here, and so I deeply appreciated Corporation Counsel for guiding us through the process to make sure we don't make mistakes because I think that's what your role is, to help us. We make the final decision, you advise us. In private industry where I come from, the—I've always interviewed my people before I decided if this is the person best suited for me, and so I have that concern coming forward. Can you address that for me just briefly? You know Hawaiian style, we talk story and we haven't done that yet. MR. KAMELAMELA: Well I'm willing to do that any time you want. MR. RICHARDS: Okay. This afternoon. MR. KAMELAMELA: Okay. CHR KANUHA: Thank you. Ms. Ruggles. MS. RUGGLES: Thank you, Chair. Aloha, Mr. Kamelamela. Thank you for being here and thank you to all the testifiers who came. I really appreciate you Page 16 GREDC-1 January 4, 2017 being here to answer our questions, I just have a few questions. Is the Deputy Corporation Counsel's attorney status under the Charter in at -will appointee, coterminous with the Mayor, or are they civil servants? MR. KAMELAMELA: They're at -will coterminous with the Mayor. MS. RUGGLES: Thank you. And what is the usual protocol for hiring and terminating? MR. KAMELAMELA: You mean for the MS. RUGGLES: For deputy corporate— MR. KAMELAMELA: For the at -will? MS. RUGGLES: Yes. MR. KAMELAMELA: It depends on the Corporation Counsel's—it's up to them how they want—usually there's a courtesy letter of resignation that is asked for when a Corporation Counsel is appointed. That's the usual method. MS. RUGGLES: And how much notice does it give? MR. KAMELAMELA: It depends on the Corporation Counsel. I mean at -will is at -will. You know, you can be terminated for any reason. MS. RUGGLES: Thank you. So you said that you had hired, or not hired but you had put together a committee to help get you started with your new position and getting the office organized. What standard did they use in determining who they would keep and who they wouldn't? MR. KAMELAMELA: Well the standard that we typically go for would be the performance, whether they can perform. I mean you go to competency, knowledge, experience, what type of skill set they have, their ability to work with others, the ability to basically work. I mean those are some of the things that I look for because I've been evaluated a lot by my supervisors. So I'll be using the same standards. So it would be something of those kinds of performance standards that I will be looking at. MS. RUGGLES: Great. Thank you. That's all I have, thank you. CHR KANUHA: Thank you, Ms. Ruggles. Ms. Poindexter. MS. POINDEXTER: And thank you for coming before us and I've heard many, many good things today. It says, "Joe has a"I read something, "Joe has a heart of gold, very hard worker, loyal, good litigator, a good man, a competent Page 17 GREDC-1 January 4, 2017 attorney," and I have all respect for all attorneys because II have had the opportunity to have worked with you in the past as well, so with that I sayI congratulate you on being such a good litigator and an attorney. That's not where my concerns are. My concerns are administrative skill sets, because it's a large office that you would be managing and I'm trying to find that. Where that administrative skill set, where is it and the decision making as an administrator? Like the Mayor had said, unfortunately what had happened was through his recommendation and this fallout earlier with Council Member Aaron Chung bringing up those communications early on. MR. KAMELAMELA: Do you want me to answer that question? MS. POINDEXTER: Let me just finish and then I can have you answer. My concern was that the recommendation came from the Mayor and you ran with it without looking at the unintended consequences. So when I'm hearing all of the questions being asked and a lot of it is where your loyalties if—not exactly loyalties were said but I know your loyalties right now are heavily with the Mayor and if maybe I was in your position my loyalties of course definitely would be there as well. But when we talk about the fair representation for the Executive Branch and our Legislative Branch and when I know that the Mayor gave you the recommendation and you ran with it without considering the unintended consequences, that is what draws concern for me. So I'm kind of listening to where everyone is going and I'm going to listen more but I have my concern about your administrative skill sets in that regard. So I'm just going to yield at this time and continue to listen to the discussion. I just want you to know where I stand at this time so I'll yield at this time. Thank you. MR. KAMELAMELA: May I answer? CHR KANUHA: Did you want a response? Was that a question or? MS. POINDEXTER: I didn't ask a question, I was saying my concerns, but if you want to address my concerns I would greatly appreciate it. Thank you. MR. KAMELAMELA: Okay. Good. I was a supervisor, not only with the Corporation Counsel's office but also with the Prosecutor's Office. When you talk about administrative skills being part of a management team, we would meet together, we would talk about the budget, we would talk about personnel, and we would talk about everything that comes up. And so I was involved in many of these decisions that were made. Also—for example with the Corporation Counsel's office, I've been a supervisor for a long time there so I have to be aware of the budget, like how much money we need for litigation. I would have to persuade people, the importance of the money. I was involved in audits that were done on behalf of the office. I was involved like what I said in helping to do Page 18 GREDC-1 January 4, 2017 the administrative manual that has the policies all included there. I was involved in the hiring of deputies. I know at times I spend, not 10, 15 minutes with the new hires but sometimes I ask questions that lasts one hour. So that's a skill because we're looking for people who are going to help the office. Not only that, I also help train the attorneys in the office, I also help train the legal staff They're the clerks, they're the paralegals, there's an investigator. I help to train them. So I see that as being administrative skills—develop as being part of the executive committee that I was a part of with Lincoln as the head, and then we would have a second in charge. So those are administrative skills. They have now—you talk about unintended consequences. Actually I've part of the thing that I was thinking about in forming the committee was the possibility of unintended consequences. The reason why you would get a committee to help in the decision to hire and fire is to make sure that whatever decision is made would be fair. And what was unintended wasn't because of what I did, it was what—two things. One, maybe there's a misunderstanding that the attorneys are at -will. I mean I understood that. A lot of attorneys from the office understand that. You're at -will. That's why people submit the courtesy letters, you know? I did it different but is that wrong to do it differently? No, it's going to come to the same result. The last thing that you touched on was loyalty. You know my loyalty, to be honest, is for the people. That's where my loyalty lies. If people truly don't feel that—so I'm not totally loyal to Harry, okay? Sorry Harry. But Harry knows it because he always tells me to keep out of jail or just tell me what the law is. No, so my loyalty is to the County as a whole. You heard Kathy Garson state it. My loyalty is to the County as a whole because my loyalty is with the people on this island, this island that I love and cherish. That's where my loyalties are. MR. KANUHA: Thank you. Ms. Poindexter, did you want to continue? Council Members, I really need to take a five minute recess if that's okay with you. And to everybody, sorry for taking a lot of time but we're going to have a brief recess and then come back to continue. So we're going to be in recess for five to ten minutes. Recess: At 10:47 a.m., the Chair called for a recess. Reconvene: The meeting reconvened at 10:57 a.m. CHR KANUHA: Okay. Everybody ready to get started? You can come in and we can get out of recess. Okay, we are now out of recess if we could maybe close the outside door and we can continue with deliberation. I think next we had Ms. Eoff Go right ahead, Ms. Eoff Page 19 GREDC-1 January 4, 2017 MS. EOFF: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Good morning, Mr. Kamelamela and Mayor Kim, and good morning everybody else here today. It occurred to me that in our democracy that we run our elections and sometimes the person that gets elected isn't your personal choice, but for me, and I think the way the democracy works properly is that we then rally support around that person that's been elected. And our County today, I think that we can look at a lot of issues and there's been a lot of issues raised today and a lot of questions asked and I think you've given some great answers and—but I would like to support you today. I think that looking at the good of the—as we go forward in our County, that it's important that we work together with the administration, that we support one another and one other's choices. Until there's some reason that would maybe tell us otherwise. But I kind of agree that—and I'm glad that Mr. Chung read the certificate commemoration that was written for you when you did retire because I signed that and I was pretty impressed with your years of service. Committing to County and to County government and especially the legal job in County government, that's its own animal, it's different than private practice in all ways. And I think that knowledge that you've gained having stuck with it for, what did you say 33 years or so, has probably given you a lot of skills that I may or may not be aware of but I feel are important. And I may not have always agreed with the position of the County in certain instances. I think as Ms. David stated, before we became County Council members, we were actually suing the County. We were involved in litigation and—but I always held a high regard and a respect for those with opposing views, whether it was us citizens against the County or even throughout the years watching things that have gone down. I'm not as—too arrogant to think, or I'm not arrogant to think that I would know all the right answers, and it's not always clear right and wrong. I feel like there are always a lot of gray areas, nothing's really black and white especially—I've learned that in the last few terms just serving on the Council. So I'm open to listening to all sides. I've heard my concerns of my fellow Council Members, I've heard concerns from my community, and I've heard pros and cons about you being named Corporation Counsel, to be honest. We've had a few months now going through this. But I do agree that my personal philosophy is I would give my faith and benefit of the doubt to your leadership and that whatever skills you do have or may need to improve, I don't know, but I think that you're open and an honest person that would look at that. To me one of the most important things, not so much what happens when the Council or the Legislative Branch is in conflict with the administration over a legal issue, like that was stated, it doesn't happen too often. That isn't really my concern. My concern or my hope is that the office would just be open because we depend on the attorneys there. My staff has had the awesome privilege of being Page 20 GREDC-1 January 4, 2017 able to make a phone call almost any time we need to on my behalf and speak to a deputy in Corporation Counsel and get a dialogue going. Get honest opinion or advice and I would like to ask you whether that would still be open to us and we could feel that. Because I think to me, that's probably the most important function of the office as far as its work with the Legislative Branch. MR. KAMELAMELA: Yes, it will. MS. EOFF: Okay. Thank you very much. And I think a lot of the attorneys probably are staying on. A lot that may be new, but I feel like we may even know from before or would be able to get to know, but I would just really appreciate and honor the opportunity to work with each and every one of the deputies in an open door communication. MR. KAMELAMELA: Thank you. MS. EOFF: Thank you very much. CHR KANUHA: Thank you, Ms. Eof£ First round still. Ms. O'Hara. Make sure your microphone is on. MS. O'HARA: Thank you, Mr. Kamelamela for coming forward in this hearing. I am one of the new Council Members and haven't had the privilege of working with you extensively in the past. And very much appreciate all the testimony that's been brought forward. There is absolutely no question about your superlative character and all the years of community service that you have given, so no questions there. The only concern I have had, and it's been really from sitting at a distance since I wasn't appointed to office until December 5, was some of the events that happened in late September, early October. And whether that was really the best practices at that time, I realize that our deputies serve at -will. But I do believe the rules allow the incoming Corporation Counsel to give up to 90 days for their termination so that consideration could have been extended. And I feel there was a little bit of a rush perhaps that occurred there that may not have been absolutely necessary, and it hung as a bit of a cloud over your confirmation and I'm sorry for that. But I'm very grateful that we're having this hearing today because we're able to ask all those questions and hear all of the concerns as well as all of the testimonies from the public. And that's been very helpful for me in terms of deciding how to move forward. I do appreciate Ms. Eoff's comments about openness of the office and working together because it isn't that you represent us against them or that sort of thing. We are a team as a County and we need that openness and I look forward if you're confirmed, to working with your office. Thank you. Page 21 GREDC-1 January 4, 2017 CHR KANUHA: Thank you. Okay, next. Mr. Chung. MR. CHUNG: Thank you. I have a question for Mr. Clerk. If I ask a question and Mr. Kamelamela answers it, only my question is counted against me for my three minutes, right? MR. MAEDA: That's correct, and you have five minutes. CHR KANUHA: Five minutes. MR. CHUNG: Oh five minutes? Better yet. Okay. Anyway Joe, I mentioned earlier I had pointed out all of the various Corporation Counsels that you had worked for and you know, when you work for individuals, you learn things, right? Sometimes good, sometimes bad. Tell us what you've learned from each of the people you've worked for and how you intend to apply those positive qualities. If you can. If you're able to do that. MR. KAMELAMELA: Just the Corporation Counsel or? MR. CHUNG: Yeah, let's just stick to that I mean MR. KAMELAMELA: Okay. I was grateful that I was hired first by Ronald Ibarra because I actually worked with him in the prosecutor's office and there were several things that I liked at the time that he was there. Besides telling us to tell it like it is, at that time, Dante Carpenter had indicated that there were a lot of lawsuits filed against the County so there were a lot of money involved. And one of the things that Ron Ibarra did, which is say, "No settlement, let's go to trial." Now as a litigator, I go, "Wow, this is good because I actually get to do litigation work." So that's one of the things that I really enjoyed doing during Mr. Ibarra's time. Plus that the last thing with him is that we used to do time logs. You know like in private practice, you would put down how many hours you worked and I think I was one of the last deputies at the corporation counsel that actually kept time logs. And I did that only because, for several reasons. I wanted to make sure that whatever time that I spent would be for County business. Two, sometime it helps me recall events that happened two or three years ago. So the time logs were to me a good practice. And three, as part of the practice, it would help me manage my time the way that I should. So that's Ron Ibarra. And after that, actually was John Wagner. And he just followed through with the policies that Mr. Ibarra had, but he was short timer because to and behold, we had Bernard Akana winning the election. And so at that time I think was Page 22 GREDC-1 January 4, 2017 Richard Miyamoto. He was a federal magistrate for one of the territories. He was a republican so I was kind of nervous serving under a republican Corporation Counsel. MR. CHUNG: Why? Republicans are part of the public, too you know? MR. KAMELAMELA: Yeah, but my MR. CHUNG: Harry was a republican before. MR. KAMELAMELA: My major concern with him was I wondered if he was a—let us have training and then to my surprise, he did. So one of the best training that I had was something that the State AG's at that time had put on and was for several days. And so at that time, I was thinking, "Boy, training us being able to get more training so that we can make ourselves better for the County was great." So that was what I learned from Mr. Miyamoto. And then when Mayor Inouye got elected after—actually after that, we had another Mayor, but—because someone had to take Bernard Akana's last year or two term, but the Corporation Counsel stayed the same. So after that had Michael Matsukawa. Now what I have learned under that time was how important it was to look at all of the issues. I mean although I was a litigator, I could see how Mr. Matsukawa operated. He's one of those people that would graph things out and chart things out and so whatever issue had to be covered, that it was there in black and white. So that's something that I picked up from Mr. Matsukawa. After that was Richard Wurdeman. MR. CHUNG: And you talked about him already. MR. KAMELAMELA: Yeah. So I talked about him. And then the last one was—well not the last one but the one that I learned a lot from too was Lincoln Ashida. I thought that he was an extraordinary attorney. He actually held many philosophies that I believed in. I believe in training, I believe in doing performance evaluations annually because that would help the attorneys. Now the training wasn't only doing training inside the office, but it would be outside the office which would include not only County, but the vision was to help other counties. So with Mr. Ashida, we started to do our Annual Municipal Attorney Conferences and he did it for six years, and I think under Molly Stebbins' term, she did it for two. So those are the lessons that I've learned under all of those Corporation Counsels. MR. CHUNG: Thank you for sharing that, and for those of you who don't know, I also worked with Joe as well, all the way up through Wurdeman. I was hired also by Ronald Ibarra and I'm really glad that you brought up that point about the litigation because I was going to ask you, what's going to be your position? Are Page 23 GREDC-1 January 4, 2017 you going to mirror what Ron had—his approach to aggressively fighting lawsuits? Are you going to take that approach too because I would strongly urge you to do it? I thought that was a very, very good time for the County. MR. KAMELAMELA: Always. You know, whatever Ron had, that's something that Lincoln had too because Lincoln too was a prosecutor. As a prosecutor, we seek justice, not with at all cost, but just seek justice so we will work hard to aggressively defend all lawsuits, small and big. MR. CHUNG: And also another thing that all of the people here didn't have an opportunity to do is to work with Harry. I served four years while Harry was Mayor and I can say this I can say a lot of stuff about Harry, but I know for a fact that he is not one who's going to tell a Corporation Counsel how to, or what how to interpret something in his favor. I don't—he doesn't get involved in that kind of stuff and I've seen a lot of bad stuff in my day. I'll be real honest with you. You know, Joe, I know you hold Richard Wurdeman in high regard but I can say that I've seen him do some things that were almost unconscionable. One with regard to liquor tax clearances, another one with regard to a lawsuit, Oceanside 1250 against pros aid, plaintiffs, very, very bad stuff Highly political, I'm confident it's not going to happen under Harry. But you know, I think it was brought up by several people and you as well, just follow the law. But the law can be interpreted many, many ways and your interpretation is basically what we have—well what we probably should be following so I got to ask you this now Joe, in that regard. One of the reasons why the Councils, past and present, are so reluctant to go against the opinion of the Corporation Counsel is because a lot of times we are told that if we go against that opinion, then we're not going to be protected by you guys in case something comes up, like a lawsuit. What's your position on that? I mean you've said on numerous occasions you're going to follow the law, which I believe is kind of open to interpretation, and that whatever we do with it, it's up to us. MR. KAMELAMELA: Good question because I've heard the other Deputy Corporation Counsel tell Council Members that. That's not totally correct because I'm aware that under certain situations, there are defenses to County Council Members for certain actions they're taking. So I don't really subscribe to those statements that are made. We can advise people. Now as long as it's not criminal, but I've never seen anything criminal done by any County Council Members yet. You know, criminal is different but I give the law, you take an action, and then they are defenses that would benefit it. There might be one exception that I know of, but I've rarely seen anybody, not just elected officials like the Council Members but Department Heads or other people. There might be actions by public officials where ill will is involved and Page 24 GREDC-1 January 4, 2017 that's a very rare situation. In those situations, it's going to be harder to defend anybody, but that's really rare. MR. CHUNG: So I guess indefensible positions notwithstanding, then you whatever this Council decides, you will back that up? Even if it's contrary to an opinion that you had issued? MR. KAMELAMELA: Yeah. Given the conditions that I gave you, yeah? MR. CHUNG: And I don't want this to seem like a vail criticism against our present Corporation Counsel because I really do respect all she's done for us, okay? But during the course of one of our executive sessions, it had to do with the Fire Department disciplinary action against some of the Assistants or Battalion Chiefs or whatever they may be. And I had requested to just get some information and I was told at that time that it was a personnel matter, we cannot get information, in a nutshell. Would you give us information? I think it's very important for us to get information. Information is so important in decision making. What would your position be in that regard? MR. KAMELAMELA: There's always a balancing that's kind of involved when you talk about employee issues. And so a lot depends to me, in a context and I do recall cases of privacy interests that is involved, you know? There may be situations in a closed session on a need to know basis, that you can talk about certain kind of personnel issues. Because I'm not familiar with all the facts of the case, I really cannot say now whether I would do it, but I know that there are some situations where I will feel comfortable in talking about personnel type issues. One situation that I can tell you about is where I will be in close session, it has to do with a settlement involving an employment issue, then I would talk to you about that employee's record. MR. CHUNG: Right. MR. KAMELAMELA: So it kind of is dependent of the context and so—and because I'm not clear on all of the facts in the case— MR. CHUNG: Sure. But I think we all understand that in a settlement situation, you have to give us all of the information. MR. KAMELAMELA: Typically. MR. CHUNG: I think one of the speakers here earlier said that Joe is something—responsible for the public's money or something to that effect, I can't recall what was said. But we are also responsible for that, too. I think directly Page 25 GREDC-1 January 4, 2017 responsible actually. And in order for us to make good decisions, or even to take preemptive steps against bad decisions that may be made at the administration level, we got to get full disclosure. Information is so important, that's the whole concept of transparency. I mean not to say that this is going to be blurted out into the public because it's all done in executive session, but Joe, in order for us to make good decisions, we got to get information. Just remember that. That's my personal feeling. MR. KAMELAMELA: No, and then I do agree with you that we all have a fiduciary duty to the people. And so I do understand where you're coming from and that's—but because I don't know the total context MR. CHUNG: Right. Of course. I just wanted your thoughts because I might be bringing it up again. MR. KAMELAMELA: Okay. MR. CHUNG: Thank you very much. CHR KANUHA: Thank you. Continuing on, Ms. Poindexter. MS. POINDEXTER: I'm still struggling with this. I mean I readI know that we've had a lot of good testimony which is wonderful, but I also had a lot of calls, I've gotten a letter, and I know that this is—we're still at committee, we still have to move forward to Council with another hearing on this item. At which time, I'm hoping sometime in between that I'll get to talk story with you on some of my concerns. Because when I read Mr. Strauss' letter to which I have received calls similar to what his letter states on the concern about, not your ability or your skills and integrity as a lawyer, but the process and how it affects the integrity of the Office of Corporation Counsel. So this is a real tough one for me because I have to feel confident that you will be able to represent us and the people in the way that I think is overall in the best interest of the County. So I'm just going to say this, with no disrespect to you as an attorney, with no disrespect to the Mayor choosing—because I trust that the Mayor has his reasons and his trust in you. I do appreciate that. I just want you to know that, and I'm hoping that I will get a chance to sit and talk with you. I'm still caught in between that and I want to say "kanalua" no at this time because I'm still not confident. I've had so many concerns and things that maybe as a talk -story we can address—I don't want to bring out the letters and stuff that was sent to me or anything, but I need to address that. I need to be able to vote with a good conscience and without compromising on my values but being able to compromise on the issues. Page 26 GREDC-1 January 4, 2017 So at this time, I'll apologize to you but we will have another opportunity at the Council level, but I just want to say where my struggles are at this point. So I'll yield at this time. Thank you. MR. KAMELAMELA: Can I just respond? Just let me know when you want to talk and thenI don't mind talking. I really don't have any disrespect for Mr. Strauss too, but Corporation Counsel's office is a different type of office. It's different from working HR (Human Resources) at a hospital, okay? This is different. I chose to do it different because I had a concern for people that I, if confirmed, that I heard a lot of complaints about. And I made sure that prior to making any type of decisions, I ran it through a committee because I know people may disagree with the way that I do things. But I thought that was the best way to do it so that as soon as they get there, we can do the work of the County. So people are going to have different opinions about certain things and then I disagree strongly with Strauss about a performance review. You know that office hasn't done an annual performance review in two years. And yet somebody like Strauss has the nerve to say that I didn't do one. Well I made sure that I did performance reviews and with many of them, they passed. Some didn't, you know? That's what happened. Now those that didn't, like I said, three of them wanted to talk. One of them I talked on October 14. After sitting with that person for more than an hour, I said, "Wait, because I see that maybe he could've been better with a different type of leader." But I made sure that for those that I was going to keep, that I can work with them. And those that I decided to keep, I felt I could work with them. Now I don't know if those that I have told and gave them my honest evaluation of them would want to stay after what I told them, you know? But that becomes their choice, not mines. CHR KANUHA: Thank you. Ms. Poindexter, I think you yielded. Council Members, any other discussion? Ms. Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: Real quick. So I want to echo something Mr. Chung said. I've sat on a few boards and commissions and I'm a very firm believer that good information leads to good decision making. I'm going to say it again, good information leads to good decision making. And what Mr. Chung is talking about is really, we need as much information as we can get. One, to make a good decision, but two, maybe even start some preemptive legislation that doesn't put the County at risk. And so I do want to know that would be a policy from Corporation Counsel that you would be able to share that type of information when we ask. I think it's a real critical link for us to making good decisions. Would you care to respond, Mr. Kamelamela? MR. KAMELAMELA: Yeah, I think I'm going to answer it about the same way because sometimes there's a balancing that's involved. I know in certain situations I can. I haven't looked at all of the information that Molly had. Page 27 GREDC-1 January 4, 2017 Stebbins. So for me to make an opinion on it right now, I cannot. But I can tell you too that there are situations where you can get that kind of information without any issue. But I do agree with both of you that the more information the better so that any decision that is made is well-founded. MS. LEE LOY: I do have one other question and I apologize to the rest of my colleagues. We kind of keep barking around this bone, which is the Executive Branch and the Legislative Branch. And I guess I'm just trying towonder if there's an opportunity that we might have here where we can get some deputy, maybe not so much assigned to the Legislative Branch, but to give us an opportunity to have a separate opinion. I don't know if that's something we can do here if that requires a Charter amendment, but I do want to use this as an opportunity to look a little further down the road because I've heard a number of my colleagues ask this question, "Who are you going side with?" Is it going to be the Executive Branch, or is it going to be the Legislative Branch? And I've also heard, "We're going to follow the law." But I've worked with a number of attorneys and they have amazing lenses, sometimes very different lenses on what the law is, and different interpretations. So is that something we could explore a little bit more, Mr. Kamelamela? MR. KAMELAMELA: I'm not sure if this is the right place to do it. All I will say is that I've worked with the Mayor before, he just said, "Do the right thing." And that's all that I'm interested in. MAYOR KIM: Could I respond to that? I have eight years as your Mayor and I ask that you ask every single attorney that worked with me, they have never, never been instructed what position to take or not to take. And I really do ask this committee to ask any one of the Corporation Counsels in the eight years. Ask Joe what they're standing working orders are. You just do what is right by law. Obviously there's going to be, as Mr. Chung said, difference of opinion by attorneys. Hell, you get two attorneys together andI better not comment on that one. I promise all of you this. Talk to each one individually, they are never told what position to take. They're told to do what is right by law and realize there's going to be difference of opinion, but they've never come back to me to ask what my opinion of the law is. They know I'm not a lawyer. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I yield. CHR KANUHA: Thank you. Ms. Ruggles. MS. RUGGLES: Thank you and thank you all for your patience. I understand my colleagues' concerns about the administration and the Counsel and how sometimes there can be conflict. I just don't see how we can avoid that concern if Corporation Counsel is always appointed by the administration. And I also understand how Mr. Kamelamela's actions could've been perceived as procedurally unfortunate and possibly inappropriate. However, there is the Page 28 GREDC-1 January 4, 2017 consideration that it could also be perceived as a courteous thing to do if it was going to be inevitable. With these in mind, and also in mind that the Deputy Attorney's terms are at -will and they are coterminous with the Mayor, and that Mr. Kamelamela's track record is promising, there is no question to his honesty, his integrity, and his experience that I will be supporting his nomination. Thank you. CHR KANUHA: Thank you. Mr. Chung. MR. CHUNG: Thank you again. How many minutes do I have this time, Mr. Clerk? Five or less? I mean I don't MR. MAEDA: You have five. MR. CHUNG: Five again? CHR KANUHA: Four minutes and 50 seconds now. MR. CHUNG: Thank you. I keep on bringing this thing up about the time that we have to vet Mr. Kamelamela. And partly out of jest, but really, when you think about it, if you guys were going to hire an attorney, you guys would give them a thorough vetting, right? Not just five minutes and five minutes later, and all together 15 minutes total. Giving a thorough—and that's one of the problems I have with this whole procedure. Really, the bill that I brought up, it was—yeah it tangentially related to Joe and things that happened there, but it was really more than that. It had to do with a structural issue regarding County government. Some of us have touched upon it, this balancing between the appointing authority and the only person that can remove a Department Head versus the Council people, nine people who just confirm and then that's it. Confirm really just after an hour or so of speaking. I had an opportunity, as I said earlier to speak with Joe at length for two hours, you know? And I had hoped that maybe Joe would have spent that amount of time with each of you as well, and I think he's going to have a good sit-down with Tim a little later. But this is serious business. I mean just put yourself in the place of somebody who's going to be hiring—if you were the head of a huge corporation and you're going to be hiring your chief counsel, would you be spending this much time? No, it would be much more. You guys would give a thorough vetting, yeah? But that's why I said it's really all about chance, faith, giving people chances, placing faith in the system, and hoping that things will turn out correctly, all for the good for the public's benefit. Now Ms. Ruggles stated that you did the courteous thing. And that's where maybe we have a little difference of opinion and it's all a matter of approaches, views of the world, I don't know. But to me, I think giving people a chance, Page 29 GREDC-1 January 4, 2017 putting faith in the administration's ability to mold a good team, placing faith in the system, giving chances to people who want to serve the public, just like you, Joe, versus the courtesy of giving them advanced notice before they get fired, I like this one better. I really do. But that's maybe where we differ. But hopefully— at least two or maybe three other members of this Council brought up the issue of the way things were handled at the Corporation Counsel's office. Hopefully you can take that to heart, Joe. I've heard a lot of people say that you're stubborn when you're right, but yet you're open-minded about things. And so I don't want you to think that it's the rantings and ravings of one person who's angry about what's going on over there. It was a legitimate concern. So take that to heart. Let me just ask you this one question, Joe. If you had to reform the system based on what you've heard from all of us today, the system regarding this representation issue, how would you go about it? Do you have any ideas? Or not right now, if you don't have anything. MR. KAMELAMELA: No, no, no. I just think the proper forum to begin with would be to do a Charter review, you know? Is there need to make this system better? I don't know. You do a Charter review, so it's either at a Charter Commission or you do a resolution. MR. CHUNG: No, no. I'm just talking about specifics. For example, like billing specific individuals. Like right now, deputies get assigned to different departments. But what if the departments actually wanted to hire a deputy and pay him accordingly for their time? I mean that would be an out of box kind of approach, but shouldn't people have the opportunity to be able to retain their own attorney within the County for the best interest of the public? I mean I'm just throwing that out there, I'm not saying that I would suggest something like that. MR. KAMELAMELA: And sorry to cut you off but, that's why it's—this is not the right forum to do it because it's going to take a lot of work, discussion. That really doesn't have to do with me, it's something totally different. There is something like that that happens in the Corporation Counsel's Office because one of the attorneys, theI think it's still the same but I have to double check, is that the Water Department pays for one of the attorneys in the Corporation Counsel's office, so it pays. So one of the attorneys there has to service the Water Department, but the Water Department is a semi -autonomous department, they have their own funding, so MR. CHUNG: I don't think this is the wrong forum though you know actually, Joe. MR. KAMELAMELA: But I just think that a more appropriate forum to bring those kinds of issues are Page 30 GREDC-1 January 4, 2017 MR. CHUNG: But all I asked—wait though, Joe. All I asked is if you had any ideas, and if you don't have any ideas, that's fine. And if you want to talk about it later that's fine, but don't say that this is not the appropriate forum, because this is the appropriate forum, okay? MR. KAMELAMELA: I'm not too sure if we're talking about the same thing right now, because the context that I was looking at was hiring a specific attorney for the County Council. MR. CHUNG: No. I asked you this. Based on everything you've heard here today, do you have any ideas on? CHR KANUHA: Excuse me. I hear voices in the back and I cannot even hear Mr. Chung talk, so if you could please keep it down. We're trying to debate right now, it's a confirmation hearing, he asked a question, if he doesn't want to give an answer, Mr. Kamelamela can say he's not ready at this time. Mr. Chung. MR. CHUNG: All I asked is if you had any ideas. MR. KAMELAMELA: And the question again? MR. CHUNG: If you had any questions for reforming the operations of the Corporation Counsel's office. And if you don't have any, that's fine then we can discuss it further, but this is the forum. We're the guys who make proposed Charter amendments, we're the guys who propose laws. So if you don't have anything to say that's fine, but please Joe, don't be dismissive and say that this is not the right forum. MR. KAMELAMELA: I'm not being dismissive, you know? Mr. Chung, maybe I didn't understand your question, okay? This is what I'm going to say. I wanted to clear what you meant by reforming because right now, my intent is to fulfill what I believe is the vision, mission and the core values of the Corporation Counsel's office. That's my intent. I've told the Council that I don't know everything so I'm going to do an office survey. Now, I have ideas on things that I want to do for the office. For example for new hires, I want to make sure that there are orientation binders for the litigation and the C & D. Now I don't know if that's the kind of things that you're talking about. And for litigation, to help the training of the litigators, I was thinking to do certain things in committees, like claims and arbitrations, okay? Now I don't know if that's part of what you're talking about. MR. CHUNG: Well, Joe—and this is something we can talk about later, I have no problem. I just wanted to see if you had any ideas for reforming the structure Page 31 GREDC-1 January 4, 2017 of the way the Corporation Counsel interactsI guess now I have to elaborate with the Mayor and the Council because you heard earlier, that there is this, not a tension but it's a situation where which master do you serve? There is that tension, okay? It exists and it's structural because of what's in the Charter. I just wanted to know if you had any ideas, but it looks like you don't. But what you do have, you have operational ideas and that's fine, you stated it earlier, yeah? I'm okay with that, but—who is talking out there? CHR KANUHA: Please keep it down. MR. KAMELAMELA: Sorry. CHR KANUHA: It's a discussion among Council Members. MR. CHUNG: Yeah, but we can talk about it later Joe. I just wanted to see if you had any ideas, that's all. Thank you. CHR KANUHA: Thank you. Okay Council Member, I think we're ready to move on. I'm going to say just one last thing and cut off debate, and then we can go for the vote, if that's okay? I think we've had ample discussion and I'm really glad we had the discussion, this is the forum to do it. You know we have the committee to discuss our Corporation Counsel and I thought it was a—and this is in no disrespect to the Mayor or the appointee, Mr. Kamelamela and I—you know because Corporation Counsel is such a unique department that it does serve, not only the administration but the Council and the entire County. So I thought it best—and because there was also concerns previously, it's just best to vet nut like you—you even stated you formed a committee to investigate and then make a decision after the committee comes forth with their recommendations. And so I think this is a good thing. I'm glad that we all have the patience to go through with the questions and vetting, and I really appreciate you guys coming here and going through this process. Am I a little disappointed with certain things that happened in the past? Yes. Do I have a different interpretation? Yes, about what could've been done better, but I think you stated that was the way that the Mayor and yourself did it and that could be the best way to do it. Do I think that there are certain Corporation Counsels that should've been left there? For sure, it's just because we build these relationships with awesome people and they did do the best interest for the County that I felt was good. So that's for sure I'm a little disappointed, but I'm looking forward—whatever happens today and the next Council meeting to work with yourself if you are confirmed as Corporation Counsel and the rest of your team. Hopefully there isn't divisiveness within your team, your Corporation Counsels, and everybody can build upon your leadership and build a cohesive environment because that's all we're looking for to—looking towards. Page 32 GREDC-1 January 4, 2017 Ms. Eoff stated the relationships that we have with each other that we can call upon for legal advice pretty often. I don't want to make a bill where I don't have the advice of Corporation Counsel on whether it's legal or not. I really need that opinion to make a good bill, and I really hope we can build those relationships with ourselves, the Deputy Corporation Counsels, and yourself. I don't know how you're going to organize everything. I think you're the Corporation Counsel for us as well when you're here in this room, but I'm looking forward to working with whoever it is. Whether it's you, if you're the Corporation Counsel, I'm definitely looking forward to building these relationships and that's again, like I stated, that's all I really ask as a Councilperson, to have that trust that you're going to be representing the best interest of, not only myself, the administration, but the entire County. So saying that, I know we're going to have another vote in the Council level, but I think we're ready to take the vote today, and we can move forward. And in the meantime, I would love to sit down and talk story and you know my door is always open, I really hope that your door is always open as well. MR. KAMELAMELA: Just let me know when. I'm still retired. CHR KANUHA: But again, thank you both, thank you everybody for being patient today and listening to some of the concerns that were brought up with the rest of the members, and please take it to heart. Vote on Comm. 19: The motion to close file on Comm. 19 was carried by Filed the following roll call vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, David, Eoff, Lee Loy, O'Hara, Ruggles, and Chair Kanuha — 7. Noes: Committee Members Poindexter and Richards — 2. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR KANUHA: Thank you, motion is approved and will move to Council with a positive recommendation. Again, we look forward to seeing you at Council level if there is anything more between now and then that we can bring up for the Council confirmation. MR. KAMELAMELA: When is the date of the? CHR KANUHA: Mr. Clerk? MR. MAEDA: It would be January 25th in Kona. Page 33 GREDC-1 January 4, 2017 CHR KANUHA: Is that okay? MR. KAMELAMELA: Kona? CHR KANUHA: January 25th in Kona. MR. KAMELAMELA: Thank you. CHR KANUHA: Thank you very much. Okay. I think we have one more item. We'll take a brief recess. We're in recess. Recess: At 11:49 a.m., the Chair called for a recess. Reconvene: The meeting reconvened at 11:56 a.m. CHR KANUHA: Okay. We are now out of recess and moving on with our agenda. We're going to go back to the item that was previously—that we previously did not hear yet. So that was Communication 16. Return to Order The Chair directed the Committee to return to the order of of Business: business. Comm. 16: REPORT OF SISTER CITY ACTIVITIES: JULY 1, 2016, TO NOVEMBER 30, 2016 From former Executive Assistant and Sister City Protocol Officer, Charmaine Shigemura, dated November 30, 2016, submitting the above report pursuant to Section 2-166, Hawaii County Code. Motion to Close File: Ms. Eoff moved to close file on Comm. 16. Seconded by Ms. Poindexter. CHR KANUHA: Discussion, Council Members. Ms. Eoff And just for the record, we have Rose Bautista here from the Mayor's office if you have any questions. I know this was done prior to the administration taking office so just as an FYI (for your information), but Rose is here if there are any questions. If I got that correct, Rose. Okay. MS. EOFF: Okay. Thank you. I just wanted to say this is helpful because it gets us all up to speed as to what has transpired over the past year with our sister cities, and I know you've been active with sister cities so I don't know if you wanted to justI know you're chairing the meeting but if you could maybe just summarize a couple of events for us. I think it's important because sister cities is something that we have long established and continue our relationships. Page 34 GREDC-1 January 4, 2017 CHR KANUHA: Yes. And we also have members of the public here that are heavily involved with our sister cities. Mr. Tommy Goya, you know everybody here. So if you have questions for them as well. Are you guys here for the sister city as well? Both? Okay. But a lot of members of this Council has been active in the sister cities. Sister cities have been coming to Hawaii Island for a while. I know Council has supported them. I've always supported the sister cities as when I was the Chair and felt it necessary that we continue these relationships. I have gone to a few sister city—to a few of your sister cities. We had the twenty year anniversary, is it twenty year? 30th year anniversary of Nago City that we went this past September, and I also went to Yurihama. We have these relationships, especially for Yurihama, that was set up by our Mayor Yamashiro I think it was, when he was the Mayor. So that was a really big deal for them. But I'm going to leave it open if you have questions about those relationships and what I did in the past. But I will open it upI know Mr. Chung has really been a supporter of sister cities as well. So Mr. Chung. MR. CHUNG: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm certainly in support of the whole concept of sister cities. And I've said on several occasions that we have a budget for sister cities, and it's not just to host them, but it's for individual Council Members to go and it's not a junket or anything like that. It's just to show our sister cities that our relationship is vital. It's important to us and to show our support because quite frankly, they like to see elected officials whether it be the Mayor or individual Council Members, particularly the Chair people and Vice Chairs. It's very important because they come here so often and they support the concept of the sister city relationships so much, and I think we should reciprocate from time to time. Right now were arranging, with these three individuals actually, Mr. Taniguchi, Mr. Goya, and Mr. Mukai, a 20th anniversary of our sister city relationship with Sumoto, which was formerly Ikaho before they consolidated. And you know Chairman Poindexter, I've been away for the past week and a half, but via text and communication with my Aide, she's been very supportive of that celebration which is coming up on January 20th I think. It's going to be very nice, I think. But Fresh and I went to Sumoto in September, and they were just very appreciative of the gesture. Just a two day trip, but I would really urge you guys—and everybody wants to kind of shy away from these things because of what they view as maybe being public, a negative view from the public. But no, it really is important and it's important to get out there and see different things instead of just staying localized over here. I think travel is so important to good decision making. And so if you guys do travel, you know I'll cover you guys anytime I can. If anybody says they're going on a junket, no, I'll be right behind you guys all the way to explain how important it is, both to us as decision makers and to them as our sister city partners. So this is only reflective of what the Mayor and the administration did the past year. But I really urge all of you to take this relationship seriously because it's very important. It's actually in our Page 35 GREDC-1 January 4, 2017 State Statute, it's not just a County thing, it's in the StateHawaii Revised Statutes. That's how important this thing has been for a long time. So anyway, thank you. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, all of you. CHR KANUHA: Thank you, Mr. Chung. Ms. Poindexter. MS. POINDEXTER: Thank you for the report and the continued support for our sister cities as well. And I look forward to doing more sister cities possibly when we talked about in the Philippines where our Sacadas came from. Looking at in Japan, where did they come from? What prefecture, where did they come from? Are we a sister city in that area? I don't think yet. So the connection of the history that brought us to where we are today because they immigrated to here in Hawaii to work on the sugar plantations. So looking forward definitely to hopefully a visit to Japan to where they're—they first came on the boat to work here on Hawaii island and with the Mayor's office at the Philippines in Kubagao, I think they came from, but looking forward to working with Rose and the Mayor's office in regards to sister cities. So thank you for the report. CHR KANUHA: Mr. Richards. MR. RICHARDS: Just one more as a freshman learning curve. I count 10 cities here, do we have 10 sister cities? Is that how I read that? CHR KANUHA: Yes. MR. RICHARDS: It's a complete list, thank you. CHR KANUHA: Okay, Council Members any?—Mr. Chung. MR. CHUNG: Let me just make one more comment too, just to express to all of you how important it is from our side. Usually the Mayor's office is the one that takes the lead and everybody wants to see the Mayor of course, but bear in mind, sister city relationships are created by the Council, not the Mayor. So in that respect, we're very important in all of this. Thank you. CHR KANUHA: Ms. O'Hara. MS. O'HARA: Again, it's a freshman question. We do have 10 sister cities here but we have at least three that no activity was conducted last year. I'm just curious how long our relationship has been fallow with certain of the sister cities. I'm looking at La Serena, Chile, a place I've actually visited and just curious. Has this been a long term lapse, or have we been active in the past few years? I don't know. Page 36 GREDC-1 January 4, 2017 MR. CHUNG: Maybe I should address that and that's an excellent question, Ms. O'Hara, because I've thought about that many times too. I mean not saying that it's excellent because I thought of it, but it really has bothered me you know, we have a lot of sister cities. If you go on Wikipedia and you look at these little towns, I mean they might have three or four or five. Here in Hawaii County, we have 10 and a lot of them are not active. And I think somewhere in the County Charter or maybe in the Hawaii Revised Statutes, there's something that requires us to stay active with them, you know? I'm pretty sure there is that. So we might want to look into that and maybe disestablish some of those relationships that have just gone south already. But there is this one little city, though, where is it? Somewhere in Chile, I think. MS. O'HARA: That's La Serena. CHR KANUHA: La Serena. MR. CHUNG: You know, this wasI really have no relationship with this city but I think annually, they would send us something because this is the city which they had that tsunami many, many years ago that affected the Big Island, I think. And that's what created the sister city relationship and every year I think they send something, just some kind of gesture of hospitality to our County. So that's something we might want to look into. MS. O'HARA: If I may comment further, with La Serena, they also—that is the location of Gemini South. And so that may have been historically what helped start that relationship. MR. CHUNG: But that's something we should look into because that's a lot. Thank you. CHR KANUHA: Thank you. Ms. Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Chairman. I just want to share this because I just learned this today from Mr. Goya myself. A lot of the sister city relationships, a lot of the funding was in our Department of Research and Development, if I'm correct. Right, Mr. Goya? Yes. So what happened is as we go through our budgeting process, if this really is the will of the Council, these are the areas that we need to start looking very closely at because there's going to be some tug and pull to get monies to different agencies and different departments. And if we truly support these types of relationships, which I do, I think there's a lot to learn from other cities, similar sizes, different environments. I think there's a lot to learn, and if we want to maintain those relationships and learn those lessons, we need to take a good, hard, serious look at how to fund those things and keep that vibrant for us. That's just my general comment, so thank you very much. Page 37 GREDC-1 January 4, 2017 CHR KANUHA: Thank you. Ms. Ruggles. MS. RUGGLES: Thank you. I just had a quick question, I don't know if anyone can answer for me but what is the budget for sister cities? CHR KANUHA: The Council has I think, a $10,000 sister city budget. As she stated, Research and Development—like was stated earlier, the Mayor usually takes—the administration usually takes the lead on the sister city so with the $10,000 budget for Council, it's pretty difficult to take the lead on a lot of these different sister cities. So as was stated earlier, we really got to look at the overall picture of how we're going to be able to support these certain endeavors. And as a Council, it is difficult because you do need certain funds to host and to really be the—if we want to have our Legislative Branch take over or be a stronger advocate for sister cities, it does take a good chunk of money. So currently, there is a $10,000 budget for the Council. MS. LEE LOY: And if I just could help a little bit because I looked into it, in fact just yesterday. So the County Council has a $10,000 budget, the Mayor's office has a $16,000 budget, and then there's a separate budget in our Research and Development. So as Mr. Kanuha mentioned, the Mayor's office usually does take the lead, but we're back to if we really want to make this a vibrant program and learn from other cities. We really collectively need to look at the bigger picture and how we can learn lessons from other cities. CHR KANUHA: Does that answer your question, Ms. Ruggles? Okay. Any other discussion, Council Members before we vote to file? Okay. Just a brief definitely looking forward to working with Rose if you're going to be leading with the sister cities and then of course all these young gentlemen up here that we can really work with. I'm really looking forward to that. Vote on Comm. 16: The motion to close file on Comm. 16 was carried by Filed the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, David, Eoff, Lee Loy, O'Hara, Poindexter, Richards, Ruggles, and Chair Kanuha – 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR KANUHA: That's nine ayes, motion passes. Page 38 GRP.DC-1 January 4, 2017 ADJOURN 'I here being no further business, at t2:10 p.m., Ms. David moved to adjourn MENT: the meeting. Seconded by Ms. Eoff and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, David, Eoff, Vee Loy, O'l lara, Poindexter, Richards, Ruggles, and Chair Kanuha-9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. Cl IR. KANUHA: We are adjourned. Approved: 7 �- JAN 2 5 2017 Mr. Dru Malmo Kd nuha, Chair (Date) Governmental Relations and Economic Development Committee DMK/jm Page 39