Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN FC 2017/02/07 2016-2018COMMITTEE ON FINANCE. 3rd Session Hawaii County Building 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, Hawaii February 7, 2017 CALL TO The regular meeting of the Committee on Finance was called to order at ORDER: 3:01 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Hilo, by Ms. Maile Medeiros David, Chair. ROLL CALL Present: Ms. Maile Medeiros David, Chair Ms. Karen Eoff, Member, Vice Chair Mr. Aaron S. Y. Chung, Member Mr. Dru Mamo Kanuha, Member Ms. Susan L. K. Lee Loy, Member Ms. Eileen O'Hara, Member Ms. Valerie T. Poindexter, Member Mr. Herbert M. "Tim" Richards, III, Member Ms. Jennifer Ruggles, 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 POEMS: the following individual registered to speak, and came forward when called by the Chair: Abel Simeona Lui: Comm. 72, in opposition. COMMUNI- The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, CATIONS: Communications. Comm. 7.3: FINAL MONTHLY BUDGET STATUS REPORT FOR THE MONTH ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2016, FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE From Finance Director Collins Tomei, dated January 5, 2017, transmitting the above report pursuant to Hawaii County Charter Section 6-6.3(h). FC -3 February 7. 2017 Vote on Comm. 7.3: Ms. O'Hara moved to close file on Comm. 7.3. Piled Seconded by Ms. Eoff and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, EoB, Kanuha, Lee Loy, O'Hara, Poindexter, Richards, Ruggles, and Chair David - 9. Noes: None, Absent: None. Excused: :Done. Comm. 74.5: REPORI OF CHANGE ORDERS AUTHORIZED: DECEMBER 16 - 31 2016 From Finance Director Collins Tomei, dated January 112017, transmitting the above report pursuant to I lawai'i County Code Section 2-12.3. Vote on Comm. 14.5: Ms. O'Hara moved to close file on Comm. 14.5. Filed Seconded by Mr. Richards and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, O'Hara, Poindexter, Richards, Ruggles, and Chair David - 9. Noes: None, Absent: None. Excused: None. Comm. 69: SECOND QUARTER CLAIMS REPORT: OCTOBER I - DECEMBER 31 2016 From Claims Investigator/Adjustor Clifford D. Victorine III, dated January 6, 2017, transmitting the above report pursuant to Section 2-9 of the Hawaii County Code. Vote on Comm. 69: Mr. Richards moved to close file on Comm. 69. Filed Seconded by Ms. O'Hara and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee !Members Chung, Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, O'Hara, Poindexter, Richards, Ruggles, and Chair David - 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. Page 2 FC -3 February 7, 2017 Comm. 72: 2016 ANNUAL REPORT OF THE PUBLIC ACCESS, OPEN SPACE, AND NATURAL RESOURCES PRESERVATION COMMISSION From Mayor Harry Kim, dated January 12, 2017, transmitting the above report pursuant to Hawaii County Code Section 2-217. The Mayor provides a detailed summary of the purchasing history and status of the lands purchased with the fund, an accounting report, a statement on management and stewardship of the lands, and requests that the Council accept the updated prioritized list as provided by the Commission. (Note: Comm. 72.1, from Property Manager Hamana Ventura dated February I, 2017, transmitting Appendix Two to be included with the above report.) Motion to Close File: Ms. Eoff moved to close file on Comm. 72. Seconded by Ms. O'Hara. (Note: At this time, Property Manager Hamana Ventura came forward, via videoconference from Kona, to address the members of the Committee.) CHR. DAVID: Discussion, Council Members? Mr. Kanuha. MR. KANUHA: Thank you, Madam Chair. I don't see Barbara Bell here. But, 1 know they gave a great, you know, this pamphlet that we always get each year, but it would be nice to maybe hear from the Chair of this Commission to give a presentation of why they chose the priorities. I know, 1 understand; it's all in here, but just to hear from her perspective instead ofjust reading about it. It would be nice to hear that perspective, maybe for a future time, because one reason is we could ask them why there are eight priorities in Kohala, which 1 already know. It happens every single year. They're pretty active in Kohala with putting a lot of these priority things. Certain questions, I think, it would be good to maybe ask. I know we can show up to their meetings, when they do decide on these, but just in terms of maybe in the future. CHR. DAVID: Mr. Hamana Ventura is in Kona. MR. KANUHA: Oh.. aloha, Hamana. MR. VENTURA: Aloha. Hamana Ventura, Property Manager. MR. KANUHA: Humana, can you just maybe, 1 know you're at these meetings, give like a brief summary of the priorities and how the Commission came to prioritizing, not each one but as a whole. 1 don't want to take, for myself, too much time on it, but just in your terms. You were at the meetings. Page 3 FC -3 February 7, 2017 MR. VENTURA: Sure. But to clarify, the commission takes a look at the applications throughout the year, and then based on ad hoc committees', their investigation and so forth, they've come up with a prioritized list based on criteria that were set down and a ranking system, and this is the result. MR. KANUHA: Okay. Did the any of the commission members ever want to come before the Council during this time? Was that ever brought up before, or no'? No, you should do that'? MR. VENTURA: Well, we have the opportunity now. We can ask them and see if they'll show up and be able to give a better explanation on how they came to their conclusions. We can definitely ask them to do it. MR. KANUI IA: Okay. No, but it's not something, you knowso now we have the priority list, what's the next steps? MR. VENTURA: The next step is for Council to accept it, and then it's up to the districts, the Council Members from the districts. to come forward with the resolution to proceed with purchase. MR. KANUHA: Okay. I yield. CI IR. DAVID: Thank you. Mr. Kanuha. Ms. Eofffirst and then I'll go to you. Ms. O'Mara. MS. EOFF: Okay. Good afternoon, Ilamana. Just to follow-up on Mr. Kanuha's thinking. 1 know the projects are rated by an evaluation, and then the highest percentage is number one. But could you explain to us, when properties may maybe on the list but there may not be a willing seller, then do thoscjust stay in their priority ranking, but can a Council Member still do a resolution and itjust could start that process there were ever to be a willing seller? MR. VENTURA: I believe so. There may be opportunities that arise, where the seller may have indicated during the application process that they intended to sell and then circumstances change, but that shouldn't preclude a Council Member from bringing forth a resolution. And if down the line seller does change their mind and decides to sell, then the resolution is already in place and it gives us the ability to move forward in a timely manner. MS. EOFF: Okay. Would you know how much money we have in the fund right now? MR. VENTURA: I do. The fund iswe have $10488. Page 4 FC -3 February 7, 2017 MS. BOFF And of that, is there any lands currently under negotiation that would be using some of that money'. Or, where are we? MR. V FNPURA: Well, we're looking at a few options right now. But we don't have any short-term purchases that we anticipate coming through the system within the nest three to four months, possibly by the end of the year. MS. EOFF.: Okay. Okay, thank you. I yield at this time. CHR. DAVID: "thank you, Council Member Foff. Council Member O'Hara MS. O'HARA: Thank you, Chair. I just wanted to address Councilman Kanuha's comment. Part of the reason that Ms. Bell probably isn't present is that she resigned from the committee because she moved out of her district that she was representing; so they're in the process of appointing someone new to represent District 4, which is my district. So. I just wanted to let you know that I am in touch with her, though, and if you have questions I'd be happy to get answers. Anyhow, I did have one question, and it came up when I was reviewing the report. We make purchases sometimes not out of the Open Space fund of properties that are put on the priority list. I noticed, for instance, there was a property purchased, well. it's adjacent to Hawaiian Paradise Park (HPP), along the ocean. It was purchased and it was known as the Gap property so that might key you in as to which property. But it didn't come out of funding from the Open Space fund, it came from other sources. Is that because we get private donations, or grant monies? Or, what other sources are used to purchase some of these properties? MR. VENTURA: In regard to that particular property, what transpired is that we actually used CIP (Capital Improvement Project) funds to purchase that property. There was- a settlement between County and the owners, so we used a different fund to purchase that property. MS. 0*1 ARA: Okay. And that property is now in the invemory of the Open Space, or is it purchased for other reasons? The reasons Pm asking is I've had questions from realtors who are representing the owner of the adjacent properties, and they wanted to know what might be happening with that property. MR. VEN'IURA: That particular parcel doesn't fall under the Open Space fund. It falls under County inventory. MS. O'HARA: Okay, thank you. Page 5 FC -3 February 7, 2017 Cl IR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. O'llara. Any other questions from Council Members? Ms. Lee Loy, go right ahead. MS. LEE LOY: Aloha. Mr. Ventura. MR. VLNIURA: Aloha. MS. LEE LOY: As I was going through the different properties that are on the list, one particular one, the Amy Greenwell properties, they're not contiguous pieces of property, so 1 was just wondering what the rationale was for that particular item because it is number one on the priority list. MR. VENT URA: Okay, that particular application is actually contingent to the acquisition by Hawaii Island Land Trust. In this particular case, we're looking at actually purchasing a conservation easement to purchase the development rights, and keep Amy Greenwell guardians, per se, in its current state. 'the reason that we couldn't go after fee acquisition in this case is those parcels are deed restricted. It has to be sold to another nonprofit. But we wanted to be supportive of that particular venue and keep it in Open Space, and so this gives us an opportunity to assist. MS. LEE LOY: Okay. And then for the other parcels or the other properties that are on the priority list, some of them are all different tanks (tax map keys), what happens when one of the owners want to sell but not the adjacent one? Do wejust go after who's willing to sell, or do we take it as a whole package as it's listed on the priority list? :MR. VENJ FRA: that's a good question. We have to treat each purchase specifically as an individual purchase. We have multiple tanks and not all of the owners want to participate, we may have the opportunity to doing a partial purchase. Yeah, we would actually go after a partial purchase, if possible, to pick tip what we could. And in the event that the owners, who didn't want to sell that die in the future change their mind, like we had talked previously, is we have the ability to go back and do that. But, we could parcel it out. MS. LEE LOY: Okay. And then my final question, especially as it applies to those that are on our shore lines, what I've seen is there are a number of archaeological features or maybe a trail that they're trying to preserve, you know, that exists across the whole shoreline; if we were to purchase a parcel, but not the adjacent parcels, when is the trigger for the archaeological study? Do we want to get all the parcels lust, or are we going to do the archaeological piece on the parcels that we have? MR. VENTURA: Well, our participation would be specifically to what we own; so once we acquire, then we have the ability to go in and initiate the request for the studies. Now, if the adjoining owners have already done Page 6 FC -3 February 7, 2017 archaeological studies on their properties and they want to provide us with that information, we'd like to have that as well, but the acquisition triggers the process for us to actually go and do the studies on the parcels that we've acquired. MS. LEE LOY: Great. Alright, I yield. Thank you. CHR DAVID: Thank you. Ms. Lee Loy. Any other questions from Council Members? Okay, hearing or seeing none, all those in favor of filing Communication 72 please say "aye." Vote on Comm. 72: 'the motion to close file on Comm. 72 was carried by the Piled following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, O'llara, Poindexter, Richards, Ruggles, and Chair David - 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. Cl IR. DAVID: Mr. Clerk, please, Communication 82. Comm. 82: FAIR SHARF ANNUAL REPORT AS OF JUNE 30. 2016 From Planning Director Michael Yee. dated January 17, 2017, transmitting the above report pursuant to I lawari County Code Section 2-162.1(a). Motion to Close File: Ms. O'Hara moved to close file on Comm. 82. Seconded by Ms. Poindexter. (Note: At this time, Deputy Corporation Council Amy Self and Long Range Planning Program Manager April Suprenant came forward to address the members of the Committee.) CIIR. DAVID: Council Members, discussion. please? Ms. O'Hara. MS. 0'1 [ARA: I'm actually somewhat familiar with the Fair Share Contributions, but I don't know if all of our Council Members are. Maybe if you could just really give a brief summary, April, if you would, please? Thank you. MS. SUPRENANT: Aloha, Council. Apologies that director could not be here today, so I am here in his stead. So, a very brief history of Fair Share is it started in about 1990, early 1990s, with Council starting to add in conditions to rezone ordinances for Fair Share. At the time, Council had commissioned a study to be done regarding impact fees, which Page 7 FC -3 February 7, 2017 did not pass; and so in lieu of the impact fees, Council started doing the conditions on rezones for Fair Share based on some guidance from the Impact Fee reports. Then most of you are probably aware that there was also a 2006 study done, regarding Impact Fees. At that time, another ordinance was presented, I think, twice from that time between now, in which case the Council did not pass an Impact Fee ordinance. So, it s been used as a process, again, initiated by Council at the time. At some point, along the way, the Planning Department took it on to include the conditions upfront in the rezone ordinances in order to provide some consistency with how it was worded. In the rezone ordinances, there were some issues with a few from the past that we sort of had to clean up, which we did. So, we started just including them upfront for Council's consideration in order to provide consistency with how the conditions were worded and implemented. MS. O'HARA: And in that process there's something of a formulated approach to allocating Fair Share Contributions for essential services? MS" SUPRENAN"1 Correct. MS. O-HARA: Correct. So, it's based on per unit basis for redevelopment or that kind of thing? MS. SUPRENAN F Of residential development, yes. MS. O'HARA: Yes, of residential development, okay. CI IR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. O'Ilara. Anyone else? Ms. Eoff. MS. EOFF: So the way that we impose the Fair Share, it's done similar to an Impact Fee upfront? MS. SUPRENAN"f: It is similar. Ifs not exactly the same, but it is similar. MS. EOFF: I know I—m}first term I ambitiously thought I would work on an Impact Fee ordinance. I haven't come through it that yet, but I'm still interested in—would you be the person to talk again to? Because I kind of let it slide. I know it's complicated, but if it would help us, because I know there's some problems with the Fair Share and some mystery about it. Some of the developers wouldjust assume have us pass an impact fee ordinance and some wouldn't. I had gone to the Kona CDP (Community Development Project) Action Committee meeting, beginning of my first tern, with all intentions of thinking this would be something I would tackle, but yeah, I ran into a lot of, kind of hard Page 8 FC -3 February 7, 2017 questions that sort of put it on hold. So, is it something that you think we should look at again, or is the system working for us now'? MS. SUPRENANT: I don't know how to exactly to answer that question. MS. EOFF: Its just something I've been thinking about. MS. SUPRENANT: Right, right. I would be one of the --if you wanted to work with the Planning Department, l would be one person to work with; but also the Planning Commission Division, so Jeff Darrow and probably Darren Arai, in terms of revisiting that. Corporation Counsel would be critical to that conversation_ as well. Whether or not it's working, 1 think is a better question, perhaps, for the individual departments, and how they're able to utilize or what challenges they may have in terms of utilizing those funds for the purposes intended. MS. LOFT: Okay. And as with impact fees, the Fair Share is used within a certain MS. SUPRENANT: Judicial district. MS. EOFF: Judicial district, okay. MS. SUPREN'ANf: From which they came. MS. EOFF: Right. Okay, thank you. MS. SUPRENANT: You're welcome. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Eoff. Anyone else? Ms. Lee Loy, go ahead. MS. LEE L.OY: Hi. You know, that was some great foundation. But my question is, you know, the Fair Share contributions, if you could help tell me how—what they can be specifically used for, because there are buckets of money here but that doesn't necessarily mean it can be accessed all that easily. MS. SUPRENANT: Right. Well, specifically they need to be used for a capital improvement, so not operating budget items for the most part. So, it needs to be a capital improvement. It needs to be new construction or in some way expending capacity; so that's the rationale nexus that is critical, that a development is having some impact that is the cause of the Fair Share being put into the ordinance. Therefore, the use of those funds needs to impact that development as well as a regional area, so it's both local and regional within that judicial district. MS. LEE LOY: So new facilities, yes? Page 9 FC -3 February 7, 2017 MS. SUPRENANT: Mhmm. MS. LEE LOY: Yes. But you also mentioned increasing capacity. MS. SUPRENANT: Mhmm. MS. LEI: LOY: So if we had a facility, like a park, which is open space, but we added a restroom, would that be considered increasing capacity? Capacity use of the park'? MS. SUPRENANT: Potentially. I think that's a piece that we would need to include Corporation Council perhaps in that conversation? Because if the park is already in full use and that added facility doesn't actually expend the capacity, then perhaps not, but that is a capital improvement. So if it does reach that tag but if it's a park that's vacant land it's not really being used as a park and is theretore developed so that it can be used as an active park in that way, then that perhaps expending capacity. So, you're not having to purchase the property but you're developing the park. MS. LEE LOY: Great. So then, when I go to the table of contributionsI know Ms. Sako and Mr. Tomei are also here. I'm looking at page nine, on the Table of Contributions and Appropriations. MS. SUPRENANT: Okay. MS. LEE LOY: So, for example, under South Hilo. one bucket of money that we have is for Fire. This itty-bitty numbers over here, there's about $93,000 for Fire. MS. SUPRENANT: Mhmm. MS. LEE LOY: You know, recently we got in that specific district, a I laihai Street fire station. So, could we grab that money and move it? MS. SUPRENAN'l: That is a new facility? MS. LEE LOY: Correct, MS. SUPRENANI': So, they're also expending capacity. It's capital project. MS. LEE LOY: Okay. MS. SUPRENANT. Has regional benefits'? MS. LEE LOY: Yes. Page 10 FC -3 February 7, 2017 MS. SUPRENANT: Absolutely. MS. LEE LOY: Okay. MS. SUPRENANT: And it's within that district. MS. LEE LOY: And within that --so same, like for Parks, we have 600 plus. We havc that new Kuawa field in the district. We have phase -1 think we're going into Phase 3 with the Bayfront Parks and "Trailways. Arc all those kind of qualified projects to access this money? MS. SUPRENAN"I: For sure Kuawa Park. We'd have to revisit the Bayfront Trails. But definitely Kuawa Park would qualify for that as long as the funds have not already been expended. So if it currently falls under a bond float, any expenses that hasn't yet been paid out, assuming that an ordinance is passed to appropriate the funds and an allotment put in place, then those funds could be used towards that project. MS. I.F.F. LOY: Like for example, we have the Waimea District Park, and they're all done, but there was an opportunity I -or them to grab some of the monies from theI guess, would that be considered North Kohala or South Kohala'? MS. SUPRENANT: So. Waimea Park? Is that what you're looking at? MS. LEE LOY: Yes. I mean the park's done, I'm assuming, but that was an opportunity for us to grab some of this Fair Share money to help assist with the park. MS. SUPRENANT: Could have MS. LEE LOY: Could have, okay. Then there's another piece to all of this, Which is the in lieu contributions. I just wanted to hear your thoughts on that, how well that piece is working. Clearly, we have people writing checks, right, and depositing into the fund, but other landowners will contribute land. MS. SUPRENAN"T: Right. MS. LEF LOY: And I just wanted to hear your thoughts on how well that in lieu piece is working. MS. SUPRENANT: 1 think generally, this is my personal opinion, but I think in general the in lieu opportunity works. I think in many cases we get more with in lieu contribution then what would he owed, as a dollar figure: and in that way it's typically either property gained immediately, if it's a park land for example, or a road put in place. 1 think in many cases the in lieu contributions work very well Page 1 I FC -3 February 7, 2017 for immediate return, more immediate return. Not always immediate, but more immediate. MS. LEE LOY: I do have a follow-up question, and this might be better for Ms. Sako or Mr. Tomei. Please, thank you. (Note: At this time, Deputy Finance Director Deanna Sako came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MS. SAKO: Good afternoon. Deanna Sake, Deputy Director of Finance. MS. LEE LOY: Thanks. Thank you. So, back to page nine, the funds for Haihai Street fire station or the parks. If we grab this money out of the Fair Share bucket, does that adjust our debt service to some of the—you know, we did bond floats for some of these projects. MS. SAKO: In some of these cases, we haven't actually issued the bonds yet. Because we don't issue the bonds until we actually make the payments, that's why do the bands first. So, it would either free up the money for other projects or reduce what we would have to borrow, yeah. MS. LEE LOY: Excellent. Thank you. That's excellent what I wanted to hear. Thanks. CHR. DAVID: 'thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. Council Members, any other questions for either Ms. Suprenant or Ms. Sako? No? Well, I guess we can MS. O'HARA: One last comment, not really a question. CHR. DAVID: Oh, okay. Ms. O'Hara, go ahead. MS. O'HARA: It's just an observation. There are a couple of districts, Ka'u and Puna, where the balance is of contributions are zero. This is one of the problems with Fair Share contributions, is they only apply in the case of commercial developments: so when you have districts that have very little commercial development, yon gel very little fair share, as in zero. MS. SUPRENAN f: It actually applies to residential development. MS. O'HARA: Well. it can apply to residential. Well, yeah, for rezoning of residential, like subdivisions. VIS. SUPRENANT: If it's specifically attached to a number of units. MS. O'HARA: Yeah, number of units but not individual house -building, as is often occurring in these two districts. The subdivisions that were created in those Page 12 FC -3 February 7, 2017 two districts preceded their Fair Share contribution regulations of 1990 so that's why they're zero. I just wanted to point that out so that we can better understand what were looking at in terms of the big picture. Thank you. Thank you, April. Thank you, Chair. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. O'Hara. Oh, Ms. Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: Yeah, exactly. That's exactly it. But if we can grab money for a district, which freezes up what I heard today, it freezes up motley for other areas. So, there's a piece that's sort of working. Maybe not the best, but there's room for improvement, right? We heard that the in lieu piece works. But maybe there is an opportunity here to redefine or relook at the definition of capital improvement, what enhance capacity looks like, or added value, maybe, where we can wiggle out more of these funds, and then free up more of our funds that can go to other more rural districts that aren't seeing these buckets of money. So, thank you. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy and Ms. O'Hara. Anyone else? Okay. I just wanted to say thank you, April, because that was very informative. I do havejust one question. I'm looking at all these tables of contributions, are the columns as listed, Fire, Parks, Police, Solid Waste, is that like a priority or it's just buckets. MS. SUPRENANT: Yes. those are buckets. CHR. DAVID: Okay, so that has no meaning to that Fire's listed first. MS. SUPRENANT: Buckets. So they're buckets on those—right, yeah, they're not in any particular priority. Cl IR. DAVID: Okay. Yeah. Okay, great. That's it. And thank you very much, everyone, for coming today. MS. SUPRENANF: You're very welcome. MR. CHUNG: I have a question. CHR. DAVID: Oh, I'm sorry, Mn Chung, Go ahead. MR. CI-IUNG: I know we had this discussion a few months back. What's the statutory authority for Fair Share appropriation? MS. SUPRENANT: The statutory authority comes from the Zoning Code. We have Zoning Code 25-2-44; it's Conditions of Change of Zone, so that is part of what gives the authority to the County for Fair Share on a rezone. And then the Page 13 FC February 7, 2017 other piece of that is County Code 2-162.1, which has to do with community benefit. MR. CHUNG: Is it specifically referenced "Fair Share"? MS. SUPRENANT: No. MR. CIII-NG: Yeah, so it's not amwhere, right? MS. SUPRENANT: We consider Fair Share as a community benefit assessment. MR. CHUNG: But it's— MS. S1 JPRENAN1 : It doesn't use the word "Pair Share." MR. CHUNG: Right. Okay. sothenunder any of those ordinance, do they reference the rational nexus test'? I'm just kind of learning, right, on the fly here. MS. SUPRENANT: Right. In the conditions on Change of Zone, it references not the terminology rational nexus but it does reference the conditions which Council has to consider, when adding conditions to a change of zone. MR. CHUNG: No, but the rational nexus has to do with the expenditures, not what we're including in the zoning ordinance, I mean that's what I have here on this piece of paper. MS. SUPRENANT: Right. MR. CHUNG: You're relating to what we can do. Amy, you wanted MS. SELF: It's essentially conditional zoning; so the authority for it is that the Council can put conditions on rezones, which arc spelled out in the code. MR. CHUNG: Right. MS. SELF: And what happen is that rather than having—there has to be a nexus. In other words, whenever a developer comes into a project, there's an impact from that project. It may be impacting roads. It may increase traffic on the roads. One improvement would be adding a traffic lane, or widening the road, or doing road improvements. Another could be that it increases thebecause it's a subdivision, so it may increase the need for a park. MR. CHUNG: Yeah, I think, you know, we know all of that. But, my initial question was where is it referenced in the code? It's not referenced. MS. SELF: It's conditional zoning. ICs per 25-2-44. It's a conditional zoning. Page 14 FC -3 February 7, 2017 MR. CI IUNG: Right, it's part of the condition. But there's no reference to the term "Fair Share," right? MS. SELF: No, that's just what Planning has called it. MR. CHUNG: Yeah, okay. I'm not against the Fair Share concept because we've been implementing it for many, many years, but I just wanted to know you know, we're kind of like building our own interpretation based on what we have in the County code to get to this Fair Share and rational nexus test. I'm okay with the rational nexus test, but I don't really see it codified: so if it's not codified, we can do whatever we want with that money, conceivably. I'm just opening the door to more uses to this thing, but we can talk about this. I just wanted to bring that up. Okay, we can actually more Flexibility in its use, yeah? So that's enough on that, thank you. CHR. DAVID: Ms. Self, could you please identify yourself? I'm sorry, 1 didn't remind you. MS. SF,I,F: I'm sorry. Deputy Corporation Counsel, Amy Self. CHK. DAVID: Thank you very much. Ms. O'Hara. MS. O'HARA: Thank you. Just to follow-up on Mr. Chung's comments, which were really excellent and need further consideration. This is a debate that I've been partied to for as long as I've been involved in the County, whether or not this is the appropriate way to be collecting reserves for the use of essential services roads and so on. Ft's absolutely the case that the way we have set up, where it can only be spent within the district, almost prohibits use funds because there's never sufficient funds in any given district to spend it on a worthwhile project that benefits the public. So. it is something that we have to consider for public benefit if we're going to enhance our police, enhance our fire services throughout the island. We have districts that are growing rapidly, like my district, Puna, and you can sec that the accumulation is zero. there is nothing that we can get from the Fair Share approach at this point and time. So, it is something that we need to consider. I'm happy to hear that Councilwoman Eoff is considering getting to work on an impact fee ordinance, yet Once again, and I know this has come before the Council several times in my history here at the County. So. I hope that we can come up with the system that works- better to provide public benefit. Thank you. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. O'Hara. Oh, Mr. Chung, please? Oh, I'm sorry. Alright, anyone else? Seeing none, all those in favor of filing Communication 82 please say "aye." Page 15 FC -3 February 7, 2017 Vote on Comm. 82: The motion to close file on Comm. 82 was carried by the Filed following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, O'Hara, Poindexter, Richards, Ruggles, and Chair David - 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. DAVID: And thank you, Ladies, very much. ORDER OF The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, RESOLUTIONS: Order of Resolutions. (There were none.) BILLS FOR The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, ORDINANCES: Bills for Ordinances. (There were none.) CHR. DAVID: I think that concludes. May I have a motion, please, to adjourn? ADJOURN- There being no further business, at 3:42 p.m., Ms. Eoff moved to adjourn MENT: the meeting. Seconded by Mr. Richards and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, O'Hara, Poindexter, Richards, Ruggles, and Chair David - 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. DAVID: We are adjourned. Mahalo, Council Member. Approved: Ms. Maile Me epos avi ,air Finance Finance Committee MD/na (� 7a (D tc) Page 16