HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN GREDC 2017/05/16 (2016-2018)Committee on Governmental Relations
and Economic Development
6th Session
Hawaii County Building
25 Aupuni Street
Hilo, Hawaii
May 16, 2017
CALL TO
The regular meeting of the Committee on Governmental Relations and Economic
ORDER:
Development was called to order at 1:17 p.m., in the Council Chambers, Hilo, by
281), in support.
Dru Mamo Kanuha, Chair.
ROLL CALL:
205-17
Present:
Mr. Dru Mamo Kanuha, Chair
Larry Brown:
Ms. Jennifer Ruggles, Vice Chair
205-17
Mr. Aaron Chung, Member
281), in support.
Ms. Maile Medeiros David, Member
Res.
Ms. Karen Eoff, Member
(Comm.
Ms. Susan L. K. Lee Loy, Member (came in later)
Richard Bidleman:
Ms. Eileen O'Hara, Member
205-17
Ms. Valerie Poindexter, Member
281), in support.
Mr. Herbert M. Richards, III, 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 and came forward when called by
the Chair:
Toby Hazel:
Res.
205-17
(Comm.
281), in support.
Cory Harden:
Res.
205-17
(Comm.
281), in support.
Larry Brown:
Res.
205-17
(Comm.
281), in support.
Geoffrey Last:
Res.
205-17
(Comm.
281), in support.
Richard Bidleman:
Res.
205-17
(Comm.
281), in support.
Patti Pinto:
Res.
205-17
(Comm.
281), in support.
Joyce Alberta Folena:
Res.
205-17
(Comm.
281), in support.
Gregory T. Smith:
Res.
205-17
(Comm.
281), in support.
Jamie Sweitzer:
Res.
205-17
(Comm.
281), comment.
Jon Olson:
Res.
205-17
(Comm.
281), comment.
Sarah Steiner:
Res.
205-17
(Comm.
281), in support.
Susan Lourne:
Res.
205-17
(Comm.
281), in support.
Nannette Savage:
Res.
205-17
(Comm.
281), comment.
Hannah Hedrick:
Res.
205-17
(Comm.
281), in support.
GREDC-6 May 16, 2017
Aaron Zeeman:
Res.
205-17
(Comm.
281), in support.
Brittany Neal:
Res.
205-17
(Comm.
281), in support.
Mike Ruggles:
Res.
205-17
(Comm.
281), in support.
R. Janis Parker:
Res.
205-17
(Comm.
281), in support.
Ronda Lickfelt:
Res.
205-17
(Comm.
281), in support.
Michele Sheehan:
Res.
205-17
(Comm.
281), in support.
Elisabeth Green:
Res.
205-17
(Comm.
281), in support.
Brad Waibel:
Res.
205-17
(Comm.
281), in support.
Recess: At 2:26 p.m., the Chair called for a recess.
Reconvene: The meeting reconvened at 2:39 p.m.
CHR KANUHA: Okay, we are all back and out of recess. Mahalo for being
patient again. Since we've ended public testimony, we can move on with the
agenda. If it's all right with you, Committee Members, I would like to take up
Resolution 205 first, and we can get to the manini stuff later. So Resolution 205,
Mr. Clerk.
Change Order As directed by the Chair and with no objections from the Committee Members,
of Business: the following item was taken out of order:
ORDER OF The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of
RESOLUTIONS: business, Order of Resolutions.
Res. 205-17: ACKNOWLEDGES THAT HAWAII COUNTY AND THE HAWAII
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION HAVE HISTORICALLY
DISCRIMINATED AGAINST LOW INCOME AND NATIVE HAWAIIAN
COMMUNITIES OF THE PUNA AND KA`U DISTRICTS, AS
ESTABLISHED BY THE OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS' SEPTEMBER 28,
2000, RULING, AND PLEDGES THE COUNCIL'S COMMITMENT TO
ADDRESSING DISPARITY AND PREVENTING DISCRIMINATION
AGAINST DISADVANTAGED POPULATIONS
States that limited police services, substandard roads, and a lack of medical
facilities, water, and sanitation in the Puna and Ka`u districts have been
recognized by the Federal government, and commits the Council to addressing
this disparity.
Reference: Comm. 281
Intr. by: Ms. Ruggles
Motion to Approve: Ms. Ruggles moved to recommend adoption of Res. 205-17.
Seconded by Ms. O'Hara.
CHR KANUHA: Ms. Ruggles, go ahead.
Page 2
GREDC-6
May 16, 2017
MS. RUGGLES: Thank you. I'd like to start off by saying thank you to all of the
testifiers who came out and shared their stories, and participated, and had their
voices heard. Thank you. I'd also like to start off by saying thank you to my
colleagues for taking the time to thoroughly and seriously consider the matter
before us. I'm introducing this resolution because I believe that as leaders and
decision makers, it is our responsibility to understand the needs and the status of
our island's community.
Puna is one of the fastest growing districts in the State. According to the General
Plan, as of 2015, we comprise a quarter of the island's population. According to
the Department of Health, about 30 percent of our population is below the federal
poverty level, making us the most socio -economically disadvantaged district in
the State. The County's current policy on Puna's infrastructure of, "You're on
your own," is not working because we're on our own. We're on our own for our
roads, for our transportation, for our internet, for our cell phone service, for our
economic development, for our police and fire, for our medical services, for our
water, for our drinking water, for our sewage, and our wastewater.
As you can imagine growing up in Puna, it was clear to me that I didn't have the
same opportunities as other people, as other children growing up in other areas of
the island. This resolution references a complaint that outlines historical
discrimination against the low income and Native Hawaiian communities of the
Puna and Ka`u districts. Passing this resolution would establish that as a body of
decision makers and leaders, that we acknowledge the historical discrimination,
and that we will commit to addressing any current disparity. And it's my hope
that if we do this, moving forward, that we'll send a message to current State and
County administrators who are responsible for making the decisions and setting
the priorities for how our resources are being allocated, to follow our example,
and pay more attention to Puna and to addressing disparity for our island and for
our State. So I ask my fellow colleagues to please support this resolution. I'll
yield at this time.
CHR KANUHA: Thank you. Ms. Poindexter.
MS. POINDEXTER: I have the utmost respect for you for bringing this
resolution up. Whether it's the right resolution that I would support, I would
definitely want to hear from the rest of my colleagues. I did hear all of the things
Puna needs, and I appreciate that. The road connectivity, so important for
emergency access. Everything that you have said, that whole road connectivity,
bottom line, that is a critical piece for emergency response. I have that in my area
too, so when Jen speaks about her community, I can relate because I come from
Hamakua.
Page 3
GREDC-6
May 16, 2017
I grew up, like you said, you grew up—so when we talk about equality around the
island, I don't think any place is better than the other because we all have our
shortcomings.
I grew up in an open -ditch water system, that's what I was drinking, up until
1993, when the plantation closed. We had open -ditch, we never had County
water, we didn't have even catchment systems. Our roads, we inherited, we pay
each month, I still pay each month to get my roads—we own our own roads, it's
considered private roads so we have to pay for that. We had to get grants and
loans and pay back to get a water system going that would take care of the
community and dedicate it back to the County.
So I know the struggles of a rural community. Connectivity, I heard somebody
speak of, internet connectivity. Rural communities, we struggle with that and yes,
that may be out of the County's jurisdiction, or our kuleana but yes, we can
advocate for those kinds of services. Bus transportation? I get you. Rural
communities, we struggle with that. That's part of living in that rural community.
I want to definitely support for road connectivity, bus transportation systems. I
agree, Puna is the fastest growing community and I would love to see bus
transportation within Puna just itself and have it—when somebody said they had
to catch the bus to get to Kea`au, the market there and back. I'd love to see and
support all those things for your area, and I would. Put it on the budget, put it on
the capital, the CIP (Capital Improvement Plan) list and all and let's start fighting
for those things.
Senior housing, everybody talked about—definitely. We need senior housing in
each of our rural communities, period. We talk about aging in place, let us live
within our communities and die with dignity within our communities. Let's have
that so we can have this, not a revolving door of people just getting out because
there's nothing to—you got to get out of your community in order to survive
because you need to get into a senior living home or anything, but it can be in
your community.
I agree with everything that everybody said, but I don't know if I could say, "Hey,
I can support that this lawsuit of discrimination," and sayI don't know the
liabilities as a County Councilperson. What would I be doing? I mean we hear
about a lawsuit, a possible lawsuit against the County. Well it was said,
something about we may be dragged into that or our perception thereof. Well
whatever that is, I don't know what my liability is or what I can or cannot say and
at what point do we get into an executive session to start talking about the
legalities of all of this? I don't know. I'm going to wait to hear from everyone. I
just wanted to let the Puna people know and the representatives and my
colleagues that I do support all the things that Puna needs, and I get you because
I'm in the same boat in a lot of areas in my community. It's just called rural
communities.
Page 4
GREDC-6
May 16, 2017
I get the person who says, "Ag, stop doing ag lots already. Stop calling it ag and
all." So is it stop that kind of zoning? I don't know if that's the right thing to do
because you want to have farming, market places, farming—there's a whole lot
that Puna needs, and I get you. So I just want to say that. I'll yield at this time.
CHR KANUHA: Thanks, Ms. Poindexter. And I know you brought up the
lawsuit thing, but I just want Mr.I think it was what Mr. Olson said, the
complaintI just wanted you to clarify exactly what you said so that we just so
that we don't move on that lawsuit page. Just real quickly, I just want to clarify,
if that's okay.
(Note: At this time, Jon Olson came forward to address the members of
the Committee.)
MR. OLSON: Certainly. There was no lawsuit. There is
MS. POINDEXTER: Can I just clarify because I just wrote down what you said,
Mr. Jon Olson? "We are going to be involved in a possible lawsuit." That's what
you said. If we don't support—
MR. OLSON: If we don't that wasn't exactly what I said. We didn't file a
lawsuit, we wrote a letter directly to the Civil Rights Division of the Federal
Highways Administration alleging certain things that the State was guilty of doing
in the planning process. They investigated, it took them two years. When they
came back, they agreed with every point that we had made in the letter. There are
no lawyers, there are no judges, there's no lawsuit. They questioned the County
and the State, the State and the County raised no reasonable argument to their
finding against the State and the County. Again, there are no judges, this is
simply the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the laws that stands federal. If you take
federal dollars, you have to play by the federal's rules.
The State and the County took the federal dollars, they didn't play by the federal
rules. They were found to be in noncompliance. They did the part, the State and
the County did the initial part that they were ordered to do. The State took more
federal dollars and did the planning for Highway 130. The County, under Harry's
first administration, took it and did the community development planning process.
We have a successful plan for Puna, right? That was complete, now we're down
to the County took federal dollars but didn't do the implementation that should
have been done. The State took the federal dollars and didn't do the
implementation that should have been done. That was what the follow-up letter is
going to be. And there are no judges involved in this at all. We're simply
sending a letter to the Civil Rights Division, asking them to review the way the
County and the State had spent those federal dollars based on our first successful
complaint.
Page 5
GREDC-6
May 16, 2017
MS. POINDEXTER: Thank you. And thank you for that clarification because in
your testimony, I thought you alluded to the fact that if we don't do something,
we're going to be dragged into a possible suit or whatever. But I heard lawsuit
you said something about that, too. So when I hear that, we have to be—me as a
government official
MR. OLSON: There's no lawsuit, and the follow-up letter is another letter going
straight to the Civil Rights Division asking for a review of what has happened in
the last 17 years. Now, why did we wait 17 years? That's a good question, and
I'll going to answer it for you. When the investigators came back after our
complaint was accepted, they said, "Okay, we've interrogated you, now you get to
interrogate us." So we asked questions. One of my questions was what happens
if these agencies do not follow up? They will come back and they will ask for the
federal dollars that the different bodies have taken in the past that should have
gone to these projects. So the consequences are quite severe.
So the other thing that I was told, you can ask for a review any time you want but
you will probably get no action until what you're speaking to is no longer
theoretical. I don't live in a rural environment. I don't live in an agricultural
environment. According to the census bureau, I now live in an urban
environment. As of last year, a large chunk of Puna is an urban cluster, by
definition. Do I have urban infrastructure? I don't.
CHR KANUHA: Thank you, Mr. Olson for the clarification. Thanks, Val for
that. Hold on real quickly. Did you need something?
MS: PARKER: Ms. Poindexter, excuse me, but you referenced my testimony
regarding potential liability, and I just want to know if you want any further
clarification on that.
MS. POINDEXTER: I think it's all good right now. We'll just continue to
discuss, but if we do have any more questions, or I need clarification, I'll
definitely call you. Thank you.
MS: PARKER: I used to do risk management and risk avoidance and this was a
continuing, dangerous condition.
MS. POINDEXTER: Thank you very much
CHR KANUHA: Mr. Chung.
MR. CHUNG: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm probably going to have to speak
several times on this issue, if you don't mind. In the newspaper article, which
talked about this issue, my picture was in that article with Jen's. And of course,
we were the only two that were quoted and I took a contrary position to hers, so it
Page 6
GREDC-6
May 16, 2017
would seem that it's her versus me. But I don't know how many people our
reporter called, but as far as I'm concerned, "no comment" is not in my
vocabulary, you got to give a comment. Based on the information that was
provided to me, and I think it's incomplete quite frankly, I only have page four of
six or something like that. But I think this civil rights complaint actually, well the
civil rights report, only concluded that the method by which the Department of
Transportation (DOT) was counting population was not correct and not in a
accordance with federal law, and they use some evidence there, the time spent by
the DOT official and things like that. So they gave them, and this again is in
2000, the year 2000, they gave the DOT 90 days to correct the situation. So you
can see that it's more of an administrative matter where, "Hey look, we have to
change the way we do these things," instead of changing the infrastructure that's
put into place in Puna. Cannot be, 90 days; just change how you're doing these
things.
So let's look at what has happened since that time. And first of all, I want to also
say, and it was quoted in the paper, I agree, I'll be the first to agree that Puna is
being underserved. Any person who doesn't recognize that got to get their head
examined. But does it mean that there's discrimination? Perhaps to some, not in
my book. Everything comes down to perspective, right?
I went back and got some of the old bills and legislation that we had in the past.
This is ordinance 04-59, 2004, four years after that ruling. This was a bond
issuance. I've referenced this before. I introduced this. First time as far as I can
tell that the Council initiated a bond float, usually it's done by the administration,
based on needs and they'll come in. But this one was a Council initiated bond
float and this thing says here specifically for $40 million, and at that time, we
don't have the mega bond floats like we have now, $100 million. $40 million was
probably at the upper end at that time. And this was for "the sale of which to be
expended by the County to finance various road and highway construction in the
districts of North Kona, South Kona, Puna, and South Kohala, and will address
long standing needs for highway construction and road improvements and are in
the best interest of the County." And if you notice, there's a district or districts
absent from all of this. I'm a Hilo Council guy, zero for Hilo. This was intended
to help out, again, as it states in here, long standing problems throughout the
island.
So Aaron, it's easy for me to remember your name, Aaron, right? But you said
that Hilo representatives are screwing you guys over. Well this is kind of in the
past, too, yeah? 2004. But this was an effort—
CHR KANUHA: Hold on. Thank you.
MR. CHUNG: I'll tell you what was said to us by Mayor Kim, who was the
mayor at that time, when he responded to this. He said, "Initially, my reaction
Page 7
GREDC-6
May 16, 2017
was to encourage you not to limit these funds to only roads and also not only to
those districts that I had set forth." I think when it was ultimately passed, if I'm
not mistaken, we can't find the exhibit for some reason, I don't know where it is,
but I think we put $250,000 or something for Hilo because there's something
down at the terminus of the Mohouli Street where it hits Kilauea. But $250,000
in relation to 40 million, you can see where the emphasis went, right? And it
really was an attempt to demonstrate to the rest of the island that you're not
forgotten, okay? I don't know what happened because that was my last year, long
time ago, I was gone after that, but it was left to the administration to further all of
these projects.
I also found this other thing where we, I talked about this before—
CHR KANUHA: And just real quick, your five minutes was up, but I'll give you
an additional minute.
MR. CHUNG: Okay. It had to do with our budget, again, during my last year,
2004, where we had funded, actually about, I think it was 15 new police positions
for the districts of Kona and Puna to be divided equally. But that doesn't translate
into 15 actual bodies on the beat, it translated into something like only about one
person, one and three quarter person per district. But when you think about it, if
we had continued that traction from 2004 to now, I think those concerns about
police protection might not really be there anymore, but somewhere along the
line, I think they stopped. So now when I said you have to look at it from—it's a
matter of perspective, when I see things here, and no offense to you, Jen. She's
been a staunch supporter of connectivity, improving roadways in the Puna area, I
get it. But when I see stuff in there that's almost incendiary in my mind where
Hilo—it's everybody against Hilo.
After all of this kind of stuff, I got to take exception, I hope you guys can
understand where I'm coming from. It's almost like help you guys, but when it's
convenient we're going to slap him around, too. I don't like that, I got to be
honest with you. I don't think this resolution properly characterize what we're
trying to accomplish here. May I?
Actually, before all of this controversy came up, maybe about two and half weeks
ago, I took a ride with my former colleague, Fresh Onishi. We went to Puna two
days, cruising around. I said, "Fresh, let's go to Puna, we're going to check out
some stuff" So we went down Maku`u, Nanawale, to the deepest recesses of
Nanawale, scary down there. We went down Kaloli, went to Pahoa High School,
we didn't go up Eden Roc side, but we went there. All I had to do was treat him
to Filipino food in Kea`au, that was my payment. But it was very enlightening
and we just had an interest in seeing what was going on down there in Puna. And
I told him, "Fresh, we got to come out here more often, just check it out."
Page 8
GREDC-6
May 16, 2017
But having said that, not once has, no offense again, has Ms. Ruggles come to me
and say, "Hey Aaron, you know what, can we sit down, let's talk about this thing?
Let's brainstorm situations in Puna, the road situation, what are your ideas?"
Because I have a lot of ideas, but it's really tough. But right now, we're playing
catch up on Puna. You guys are growing so fast that no matter what we do, we're
always going to be behind. I would go so far as to say maybe you guys even have
to consider a building moratorium in Puna. If not, we will always be playing
catch up. Well that's true, I'm just throwing that out there, okay? But this gets us
to another problem.
CHR KANUHA: Mr. Chung, I'm going to have to
MR. CHUNG: Give me one more minute. Sunshine Law. If we're able to
caucus and talk about this stuff, then we could really make some in roads. But
we're not able to do it. We got to do it here when all of you guys, all you nice
people come and talk and say these are the needs, then we have to listen, and then
we go back into our little holes and do our thing. We can't really work for the
people because we're constrained by the Sunshine Law. I would hope that all of
you can see the shortcomings of that law as it relates to doing the people's work.
So I'm going to stop right now and I'll probably continue later on. Thank you.
CHR KANUHA: Thank you, Mr. Chung and thank you, Council Members for
the indulgence. Ms. Lee Loy.
MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Chair. I read the resolution and I too appreciate the
conversation, but I'm just not sure what we're signing on for in the end. A little
bit of background on me. I worked for a law office and was able, through the
land use process, help a lot of developers on the Kona side and I got paid very
well. Then I had an option, and I made the choice to step back from that and take
on projects that were more meaningful for the community. And when I did that, I
made it a point to make sure education was in those projects. So I helped Arts
and Sciences in Puna, Hui Haumana, Shady Groves, all of those Charter Schools
have been permitted because of the work that I did. And so I understand that
district very intimately, what the community is suffering with, and what it takes to
lift that community up, the roads, the connectivity, the education. I wrote so
many reports, so many special permits to ensure that community was getting just
one small piece of a bigger pie that's necessary.
What I find exception in this resolution is the inferences of the Native Hawaiian
community because they're everywhere. And my concern is that the inference is
that these Native Hawaiian or the shortcomings in the Puna and Ka`u area is just a
springboard for this conversation, and I take exception to that. Native Hawaiians
are not a springboard for somebody else's conversation.
Page 9
GREDC-6
May 16, 2017
I do have a few questions actually, for Mr. Kamelamela, and I too want to
mention when I read the resolution, there's an exhibit, an attachment A, and it
starts at page four and so I had to go dig for pages one, two, and three. So I'm
going to leave that there. Mr. Kamelamela? Thank you.
(Note: At this time, Corporation Counsel Joseph Kamelamela came
forward to address the members of the Committee.)
MS. LEE LOY: The resolution mentions the civil rights complaint and since the
2000 complaint, has the Department of Transportation of Hawaii County been
found in noncompliance of this 2000 complaint?
MR. KAMELAMELA: Joseph Kamelamela, Corporation Counsel. Wow, okay,
that's a loaded question here, so let me take a stab at it, okay? When you look at
the exhibit A, page five of six, the recommendations made by the federal highway
and it tells the State—and the County is a sub -recipient here and there's three
things that needs to be done. So when I first read this, I was thinkingI'm
assuming this was done because you're given 90 days, there was lack of any
further enforcement, so I think that's what you're kind of talking about, whether
we're in compliance or not. But that's kind of an open question. All I know is
that there's no enforcement action by the federal highway.
So then the question that I raise after that is why? And I believe the answer to
that question is because there was a title six implementation that must have been
done at that time. So what I did I actually checked with a friend of mine just to
check whether these plans have actually been updated and although I don't have
the plans, I was informed that these title six plans were updated in 2016 and 2017.
And that's—so then I got my answer, okay, that's probably no enforcement action
now because of that. So does that answer your question?
MS. LEE LOY: Yes, it does because that was my follow-up question, is there
evidence of compliance? If you haven't received a failure notice, do we have
evidence of compliance? And what you just shared right now is there's been a
title six plans submitted in
MR. KAMELAMELA: Yeah, so these are—the HLRP that's the State of Hawaii
Long -Range Plan and so what I had assumed and just listening to the conversation
too, just to add a little bit more information on this is that that's probably why we
saw the widening of the Kea`au road that goes into Pahoa because without a plan
to build, then the federal government is not going to give you money. So what I
know about the construction that, the widening project is that we received money,
the State did, and that's why we have that. So that's part of the plan and then I
heard some prior conversations at some other Council meetings that I sat on
where there was actually $20 million that was appropriated to the State, but for
some reason, the Director, and I don't know what the reason was, chose not to
Page 10
GREDC-6
May 16, 2017
release it. So I don't know whether it's the Director or the Governor who made
the decision not to release the money. But the assumption there too is that the $20
million was to help implement the title six plans.
CHR KANUHA: He did introduce himself
MS. POINDEXTER: Point of order.
MR. KAMELAMELA: Any further questions?
MS. LEE LOY: Maybe a follow-up question. So, based on this civil rights
complaint and the Department of Transportation and the title six, what
responsibility does the County, or who's responsible for ensuring all of this
happens? Is it the County's responsibility? Or is it the Mayor's? Is it our CIP
Project? Where does the responsibility lie?
MR. KAMELAMELA: Okay, so that is kind of a broad statement, but if—let me
just approach it this way. When I see a resolution like this, I see it as aspirational,
it's something for consideration. It talks about acknowledging that there was this
complaint that was filed and that's all it is. So it doesn't, to me, create any kind
of liability, it doesn't create any responsibility. But in listening to Mr. Chung,
when I hear him talk about what he did in 2004, we're kind of doing some of
these aspirational things for dialing as a whole. And then Puna just happened to
be the one where the population had exploded and need more services.
So I look at this, it doesn't create any type of liability that I would be scared of,
like if I sued because somebody, I mean if the County sued because of this. I
don't see this as creating any additional rights. The people can use—to come
against the County. Is that helpful?
MS. LEE LOY: Yeah, it is. I have a few follow-up questions regarding the—
there's—third paragraph, "complainants (the Sustainability Committee)...."
Who makes up the Sustainability Committee?
MR. KAMELAMELA: That's a good question. I haven't looked up into that but
maybe Mr. Olson can speak to that.
MS. LEE LOY: Okay.
MR. KAMELAMELA: Any further questions? Okay. Thank you.
(Note: At this time, Jon Olson came forward to address the members of
the Committee.)
MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Mr. Olson. Can you help me answer that question?
Page 11
GREDC-6
May 16, 2017
MR. OLSON: Certainly. The Sustainability Committee was chosen by the State
Department of Transportation under the federal guidelines that they used to do the
long-range service transportation planning, the community has to be involved.
This plan predominantly involved Puna and Ka`u so at the time, I was the Chair
of the Puna Traffic Safety Committee. We had a person that was, I think the
President of the HPP (Hawaiian Paradise Park) Association, we had somebody
from Main Street. It was just various people who agreed to serve, and we all met
in Kea`au. We went over the various plans that they presented to us and we gave
them our opinion and comment upon what they were doing. At the end of it, we
were very dissatisfied, needless to say, and the federal government's investigators
concurred with our concerns.
MS. LEE LOY: I have a follow-up question. Like I mentioned earlier, I really do
take exception to the inferences of this Native Hawaiian communities.
MR. OLSON: In what ways, specifically?
MS. LEE LOY: I'll follow-up with the question. In the Sustainability
Committee, did you folks get assistance from the Office of Hawaiian Affairs?
MR. OLSON: Directly? No, but they had input separately on the State level. In
other words, this was run by, basically, all of the departments, under federal
guidelines of course.
MS. LEE LOY: But were they members of the Sustainability Committee?
MR. OLSON: They were directly members of the Sustainability Committee?
No, they were considered agencies. The agencies had a review process there, they
looked at what the State eventually did. We had input, they had input.
MS. LEE LOY: Okay. And then same for the Department of Hawaiian
Homelands in Puna.
MR. OLSON: Same thing.
MS. LEE LOY: They were just an agency?
MR. OLSON: They were—
MS. LEE LOY: And not a member of the committee?
MR. OLSON: No, because it was a non -agency body from the community
affected.
MS. LEE LOY: Thank you. I yield.
Page 12
GREDC-6
May 16, 2017
CHR KANUHA: Thank you. Mr. Richards.
MR. RICHARDS: Thank you, Chair. I want to echo Councilman Chung's and
Councilwoman Lee Loy's comments and concerns. Little bit about me, this is my
home, I grew up here many generations. I grew up rural, still drink ditch water,
that's a different story. The infrastructure concern—and if we look at our Council
here, I think in looking for what we're trying to accomplish is to take care of the
infrastructure, but the community as a whole. And thinking back on the
testimony, we talked about how the elections used to be run, and now that we
represent districts. But though we represent a district, my thought process, my
decision, doesn't concern my district, it concerns our community as a whole, our
island as a whole, our County as a whole. And going forward, I hear you as far as
infrastructure.
I have a road in my district that doesn't even qualify as a road in limbo, and I
don't even know what that means because if it's not even in limbo, I'm still trying
to get an answer on that one. So I hear what you're saying as far as that goes. I
agree infrastructure is needed. And one of the comments that was made, and I do
appreciate the fact that what we're facing with in the Puna district is a challenge,
because there's a lot of lots that were sold with no requirement for infrastructure
to be put in place, and people purchased them understanding that, but that was
50 years ago, and it was a different time. And going forward, we've had
conversations about this and conceptually, we have to support infrastructure for
everywhere.
I have areas in my district that we're struggling with the waste water, coastline
areas are struggling with waste water, how are we going to pay for that?
Municipal water is not available in all my district, I get it, I hear what people are
saying. The roads, we can just leave the roads. A comment was made about
going down a one -lane road and going around each other as you go. I grew up
that way, I understand that.
So as our County is growing and growing up, we're going to be facing these
challenges, though I completely agree with the concern, accessibility. It wasn't
too many years ago we actually got high-speed internet. I remember dial up days.
So though I agree with all that, I'm not sure that this resolution supports the
intent, and I was concerned about specifically naming a couple of communities. I
love Ka`u, I grew up in Kohala, I was born in Kapaau. I love Ka`u because
Kohala and Pahala are so similar as far as the same type of people, same type of
feeling. But both sides are challenged with some different things, and so, though
I completely appreciate the intent of what we're trying to say in the resolution, I
don't feel this resolution addresses it in a way that I can support because I'm
thinking about the County as a whole.
Page 13
GREDC-6
May 16, 2017
And the demographics of it, I appreciate what Councilwoman Lee Loy says about
the Hawaiians. I get it, I understand. And so, though I understand the intent, I
understand your frustration. We need more infrastructure and we're trying to
figure out how to get that. In a budgetary time where it's tight, we're trying to
figure out how to keep pushing the envelope a little bit and do that for everybody.
We look at Puna and it's kind of funny, but that's in one sense, a bedroom
community for the west side, some of the resorts and all. Okay, so how do we
address that? Maybe there's a way we can marshal some funds that to help that.
I'm not sure, but like I said, I support the intent but I'm not sure I can support this
resolution the way it's written. And I may have to come back and talk story more,
taking Councilman Chung'sso I'll yield at this point.
CHR KANUHA: Ms. David.
MS. DAVID: Thank you, Chair. Listening to my Council Members, I have to
agree that I support the intent of what Ms. Ruggles is advocating for. And she's
advocating for her community, which I think everybody in this room that is sitting
up here has that deep respect for their community and they want the best for their
communities. What I have trouble accepting is the word discrimination and the
fact that it's used and is inclusive of the Native Hawaiian communities.
Discrimination is a very powerful word that I think everyone who was born and
raised here for generations has experienced one or several forms of
discrimination. It just depends on what you feel and what you've experienced.
Now, as a Native as well as my fellow natives of this Council, we've experienced
a lot of discrimination fifty years ago, before many of you got here. And that's
why I don't like to use the word discrimination, because along with that comes
the cultural part of us that will not use that word, because of our deep connection
to aloha and respect for everyone. So, when I look at this resolution, and I see, in
the same breath references to the Native Hawaiians and discrimination, I have a
totally different view of that. But my job here is to make sure that every
community gets their fair share. And like Mr. Richards said, it's very hard
because it's always easy to look at the things we don't have in our community. I
know when Ocean View, this very subdivision was created. I was very young, I
worked for a law firm and saw the hundreds of deeds that we had to prepare come
through and I'm going, "Are they crazy? There's nothing, there's no roads down
there, there's no water. Why are people buying or why are we actually approving
a subdivision like this?"
So for me, I have some historical, personal interest in not only this subdivision
that Jen's talking about, but the subdivision, the thousands of lots in Ocean View,
in my district. I've watched them develop that and I know that it all boils down to
what you guys are saying. It was the almighty dollar that drove these very
irresponsible developments, okay? I'm not here to point any fingers at anybody,
but I think we need to figure out how to get past this without pointing fingers at
Page 14
GREDC-6
May 16, 2017
any community. So this is what I really think our job is, not to point fingers, and
I'm sorry Jen, because that's how I'm reading this and maybe it wasn'tI know
it wasn't your intention, but as a Native Hawaiian, I really take this seriously
because I can't see the same terminologies using when you refer to natives.
So I don't believe I'll be able to support this resolution in the way that it's written,
but I certainly know what you're talking about, what your intention is because I
think we need to do this in a different manner, not this way. And so, I'm sorry,
but that is what I feel and I hope you folks can understand that because I know
exactly what you're talking about. I lived through your subdivision, creation of it,
and I know that wasn't supposed to be done. I was like 19 or 20 years old. I
knew back then something's wrong with this picture. It took me 50 years to get
here to try to figure out how do we not do these things? And I gave up a really
lucrative paralegal profession to actually be a community advocate to address
these things. And then that brought me here. I'm really passionate, I know what
you're saying, but I hope you can understand where I'm coming from as a
Council Member, now, trying to do what's best for all of our communities. And
so respectfully, I will not be able to support this resolution, and I hope you can
understand because we need to do our work, but we need to do it in a real pono
way, and this is not something that I can feel is a pono approach to solving our
problems that we all have. So, mahalo for your attention, and I yield.
CHR KANUHA: Ms. Eoff
MS. EOFF: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think I'm going to try and further this
discussion by articulating a similar feeling that this has given me personally.
Because although I know everything that you've said is true, and some of the
whereas in the resolution are actually valid, but it just doesn't feel right,
especially in a time when—the time I served on the Council, this is my third term,
we've been moving away from focusing on the disparities and trying to look at
the island as a whole, not going into the east/west or the my district point of view,
but looking at the island as a whole. And I have really enjoyed that change and
that shift because I worked for a previous Council Member and watched Councils
previous to that, and it was much different and so some of the feelings that
generated this resolution were also prevalent in Kona. I mean there was a time
when the west side wanted to split from the east side and form two counties. I
mean that wouldn't work, we didn't have the population, but philosophically, it
doesn't work. This is one island, people have family all around and we want to
see the entire island thrive.
So I believe we moved away from that mood and we tried to embrace a more
holistic approach. And so even though I understand why Mr. Olson and others
filed the original letter and the feeling that was generated back in 2000, but I
believe since then, many things have happened that have tried to address it and, as
Page 15
GREDC-6
May 16, 2017
Mr. Chung said in the paper, play catch up with the infrastructure problems in
Puna, as we have with the rest of the island. Kona pays the highest amount of tax
revenue, and yet I have people saying the same things, that we need this, we need
that, we need a lot of things. Geographically, the island is so big that even though
we are growing all over, especially in Puna, geographically, anything that we try
and do in ways of improving infrastructure is very expensive. The long distances
and the topography, everything contributes.
I love this island, I believe that there are certain sacrifices people make to live
here and those growing up here, and many generations here have sacrificed a lot.
So I don't feel good about the tone of this. I guess if you're going to go forward
with—you know you said you had a follow-up letter to now address what has
been done, I guess that's your prerogative and I think that's warranted as a follow
up. I don't know whether the Council should be dragged into it in this manner. I
think to me, it goes contrary to an idealistic approach that we've been trying to
encourage for ourselves and for the island and our constituents.
So I guess Mr. Kamelamela explained a little bit more regarding whether it's a
liability for us to actually support it. I support some of the intentions, I don't like
the phrasing and I think—my opinion is that you should go ahead with your
follow-up work, and your Council Members in Puna and all of us should go ahead
and continue to push for infrastructure projects that help the community. I mean
in the last couple terms, we've seen an improvement. I believe there's a new fire
station, a police station, a beautiful park. The State park, I know the road isn't
being improved fast enough, but I think Mr. Kamelamela eluded to the fact that
there is now, going to be increased efforts in that regard because the State needs
to follow through with their recommendations here out of this civil rights letter.
So I'm not sure how else to say it, I hope you—Jen will understand where I think
I'm trying to articulate the situation where I just believe the responsibility to take
care of the needs falls on us, but in a different way than being dragged in this
particular framework. Thank you.
CHR KANUHA: Thank you. Ms. O'Hara.
MS. O'HARA: Thank you, Chair. And thank you for those who are still here and
for all the testimonies on this resolution. I am also a representative of Puna. I'm
also a representative of Puna, lower Puna, but it's one district. I've lived there 36
years and in that time, the population of Puna has more than quadrupled. And
back when this action was formulating, I was already working in my community.
I've been part of community associations since I think 1986, and that's one of the
ways I've worked to do things like get cell towers erected.
I remember living in the Wa`awa`a Subdivision, whatever you want to call it,
back in the early 80's and people were using these old bag phones. And I called
Page 16
GREDC-6
May 16, 2017
up and I said, "Wait a minute, cell service is right around the corner." Oh, that
will never happen here, that will never happen in Puna. Well it was there within a
couple of years, and I have gone out and championed a number of cell towers.
We still aren't fully connected throughout lower Puna, but we're getting closer.
And it's through that kind of community activism that we make a difference in
our community. Depending solely on government to come and fix everything is
not, in my opinion, the best way to move.
I commend Ms. Ruggles in putting in some CIP requests, we'll be hearing those
on Thursday. I think she's asked for something like $12 million for additional
road work in Puna. There's already $20 million on the CIP list and another
$11 million for the connectivity in upper Puna. So I know that sounds like a lot of
money but when it gets down to road work, we'll see how far that can take us.
I know she's put in a request for a water spigot improvement up in, I think it was
Mountain View. Those are good things.
I've put in quite a few CIP requests myself. The Leilani Boulevard needs
shoulders. Kahakai needs a sidewalk that extends all the way from the ocean up
to the shopping center because I see people walking down that road with baby
carriages, carrying their groceries down into Hawaiian Beaches, having walked
back from Malama Market. Very dangerous. So those are some of the things I've
been pushing for. There's a nasty rock outcropping on Nanawale Boulevard,
we've had several accidents there, asking for that removal.
So I'm putting in the CIP request to make the changes in the community. Street
lighting in Pahoa Village, I've already gotten permission to use geothermal
money to do that, which will make it safer at night. Extra security guard, working
with Parks and Recreation on those types of things. And the street lighting will
also go down in Kalapana because we've had requests for lighting where Uncle
Roberts is because it's very dangerous at night. So it's about the Council people
taking very positive actions and listening to what the community is asking for.
I heard senior housing, it is a big need. I'm working with a private party right
now who is likely to do a senior housing project right outside of Pahoa. We need
this and he's very excited about it. A legal clinic. I could host that at my office in
Pahoa if that's the kind of thing that's needed. I'll follow up on that. But when I
hear the needs of my community, I go out and try and make them happen
without—as somebody was saying, pointing fingers. I don't disagree with this in
any way, we all realize that Puna was developed in an odd ball manner. I mean
we have got these substandard subdivisions and if anybody's ever read "The
Orchid Thief," this has happened in other parts of the country.
So we were kind of late in the bloom of land speculation scams but Puna really
suffered from that, and so has Ka`u. Can we rectify it? I'm working as hard as I
can to change it and that's why I ran for Council. I gave up a lucrative teaching
Page 17
GREDC-6
May 16, 2017
position in order to do this because I want my community to be the best it can be
so that I can remain here, retire here, have decent roads, and have good police
service. And I work with the police regularly. The captain and the lieutenant
were in my office yesterday, discussing some of the community relations
problems that we have with our police in Puna.
The woman that was here, I think her name is Michele Sheehan, from Kapua
Farm Lots. I'm well aware of the rip-offs that are happening in upper Puna.
Guys are being robbed blind and it is a gang, and we're working on it. Excuse
me, if I can just finish up. My family's been directly affected. We've lost
$20,000 in materials stolen from Kapua Farm Lots, and I got some good news, I
think we might have a suspect and maybe they're moving on it. So I work really
hard in the community to make the changes that are needed. I know I've worked
with you, Hannah, on a situation between Fern Forest and Eden Roc and I
commend you tremendously for just hammering on that because it's an important
thing. We need access, we need the connectivity for our emergency vehicles and
for ourselves.
Just this Sunday night, if you don't know, Highway 130 was closed for another
five hours due to an accident. I have gone in and met personally with Mr. Walter
of Shipman. I'm not afraid to engage in those conversations and I will continue to
advocate for my district as hard as I can. I don't know that we need a piece of
paper that really doesn't give as much in the way of therefore, it's a lot of
whereas, and it's stuff that I'm well aware of and most of you are too, and the
Council is as well. It has some phrases I agree can be interpreted a bit offensively
and I'm sorry about that. But what we need to do as Council Members, and I
invite my other Puna Council Member in this, is to move forward with positive
actions to bring the projects that Puna needs to Puna, and work creatively to find
the funding, because it's not going to be out of the County coffers. It's not going
to be out of the State coffers, we've got to work creatively and with private,
public partnerships to make the things happen in our district that we all want to
see happen. So that's my feeling about it. I'm still not decided on how to go on
this resolution. Thank you.
CHR KANUHA: Thank you. Okay, first round pau. Ms. Ruggles.
MS. RUGGLES: Thank you. Thank you everybody for your honest feedback.
I'd first like to start off by saying thank you for your honesty and I do feel that the
intention of this resolution is being gravely misunderstood. First of all, we're not
supporting a lawsuit, we're acknowledging a complaint that stated that there was
discrimination, historical discrimination. And the purpose of this resolution is not
to argue whether or not discrimination exists, it's acknowledging that it did exist
in 2005 and that a federal agency ruled that it did. What this resolution is saying
is that we acknowledge that it existed.
Page 18
GREDC-6
May 16, 2017
The current complainants that did file this original complaint are alleging that the
discrimination is ongoing. It's not up for us to decide that but what we can do is
take an honest look at whether or not there's current disparity and it appears that
there is. When I look at the numbers, we just looked—we received a graph from
the complainants that did an analysis of the past 16 years since the complaint, and
it appears Puna is not getting its fair share. Five percent of the CIP budget, yet
when we look at how much we're paying in property taxes, it's almost 10 percent.
And even with the current CIP, I don't even know if I should get into that
Council Member Chung acknowledged or stated that this is an administrative
matter. However, the resolution, not the resolution, the lawsuit lays out the
complaint, in its findings states that it's a lot more than that. Excuse me.
We do need to play catch up for Puna, and while there are other districts that lack
infrastructure, there's no other district that has the amount of substandard roads
that Puna does. We have 80,000 lots that are on substandard, private roads.
While the goal in my office is to improve infrastructure and to increase services to
Puna, I feel that it is pertinent that we recognize current disparity and I would also
take exception that it would be assumed that I would be using Native Hawaiians
as a springboard. I take exception to that. It's veryI'm not saying that. The
federal agency ruled that there was discrimination against Native Hawaiians of
the Puna and Ka`u district. I didn't say that. It's important that regardless of how
pretty and—it's a sensitive issue, it's the reality. In 2000, a federal agency ruled
that it was a reality, and moving forward, let's make sure that it's not happening
still.
The specific solutions don't need to be identified today, but I do hope today that
we can commit to working together to addressing this disparity. And there's been
a long rhetoric that Puna pays less than other districts and thus should expect less.
And at this point in time, that assumption is not accurate because we are paying a
comparable amount in property taxes.
I'm sorry, but for Hamakua, the poverty level is at 13.8, ours is at 30 percent.
And you don't have catchmentsno, no, here, I could show you the—according
to the Department of Health study, in 2016, that's what it says. And maybe you
don't have catchments, you don't need catchments, you have access to water. If it
stops raining, you still have running water, we don't have that in Puna. In fact,
our water standards, we have to drive for more than up to 40 minutes one way to
have access to water. And according to the U.N. (United Nation), that's a
violation of human rights, access to clean and sanitary water.
And the complaint referenced in the resolution points to Hilo because the federal
agency ruled that Hilo was the primary financial beneficiary of tax subsidies
provided by Puna since 1955. And because the population sizes comparable from
Hilo to Puna, the most accurate comparison for taxes paid and services received
Page 19
GREDC-6
May 16, 2017
would be that comparison. And when we look at that comparison, Hilo altogether
is paying 2.1 percent more than Puna, yet is receiving more than double the CIP
benefit.
District two is paying .9 percent more than Puna and is receiving more than 100
percent of the services that we are. When we look at the entire CIP budget, we've
got the 20 million for our connectivity. If you split that between four and five,
that's 1.5 percent for my district out of the entire CIP budget for the next six
years.
This does not seem fair, and I believe that there is current disparity and it is my
job as a representative to make sure that the needs of my district are being met,
and their concerns are being heard. And I feel that moving forward, it is pertinent
that we recognize disparity and we commit to addressing it because I know it's
not just us that are making these decisions. There's the State Department of
Transportation and there's also the administration that are setting the priorities,
and we need to send a message to them that they need to pay greater attention to
allocating resources more equitably.
CHR KANUHA: Jen, I know you want to say some more. I want to try to keep
at least this round to five minutes per person so if you want to just conclude, and
we can go as many rounds as we want as long as we keep on
MS. RUGGLES: Sure, I'd be happy to. As far as likeI'm hearing that it's the
feeling of the resolution that my colleagues do not like or support, and I
understand this is a sensitive subject and this resolution contains only the facts.
I'll yield.
CHR KANUHA: Thank you. And we can come back around too, so thank you.
Mr. Chung.
MR. CHUNG: So as Fresh and I were coming out from the darkest and deepest
recesses of Nanawale, we came across this hitchhiker and so we picked him up, I
figure I'm safe, got Fresh in the car. And so we're going out and he needed a ride
to some bakery that's by Kaleo's, I had never seen it. Kind of interesting place
though, very busy. I can't recall what the name is but I'm sure it's very famous.
Then he was telling us though about the transportation problems that they're
having over there because we got into a conversation, a nice little conversation
with him. Then it got me back to thinking because it was kind of ironic that Fresh
and I should be in there, because we were the two guys pitching the half percent
GET (General Excise Tax) increase a few months earlier.
And I got to say, we talk about poverty, we use that as an excuse. I think, because
I'm segueing now into the GET, but I'm trying to find different ways of funding
stuff, right? And you know that GET increase would provide a marvelous
Page 20
GREDC-6
May 16, 2017
revenue generating mechanism for those poverty stricken areas, quite frankly.
Because transportation is so important, just like that guy told us. I would strongly
urge all of you guys to really seriously consider revisiting that, if the legislature
allows us to look at it again.
But again, it all comes down to perspective. I know Jen, maybe is taking offense
at some of the things that we're saying and maybe we're misunderstanding what
she's trying to convey. Okay. But at the same time, I really don't know what this
is achieving. Ms. O'Hara put it as good as anyone can do, I guess, just get it
done. I'm going to get back to this ordinance that I had introduced many years
ago with regard to the bond float, and I'm going to explain why I did it. This was
during my last year, I term limited out so I'm going to do this already. I'm not
trying to offend any of my former colleagues, but I had heard so much rhetoric
over the years relating to how some of these districts were underserved, nothing
done. So I figured okay, even if nobody's asking me to do it, I'm going to do it
already, I'm just going to come up with this bond float and address all of these, as
many issues as we can.
But the ideal way would have been this: Jen come to Dru or Maile or myself,
"Hey, can I talk? How can we get this done?" Jen, you know what? We're going
to introduce you to some people up at the legislature, maybe we can talk to people
at the Department of Transportation. I told you that before when we had that
other resolution, right? You got to understand the importance of relationship
building when you're in government. If not, it's only talk. That's what it comes
down to, but you got to be able to deliver, not just talk. And I think that's what
some people—it takes a while for people to evolve their thinking into a more
result -oriented type of attitude and it becomes very frustrating for me when I
watch this. I've never turned away any person who's asked for help and I don't
think anyone here would do the same. We're all here to help, but single member
districts are a two-edged sword. Yeah, it took away maybe the power base of
Hilo and distributed it island wide. But at the same time, it made us only look at
our districts. So to hell if I'm going to be looking out for Puna when I have the
responsibility for my district, but if someone asked me for help, I'm not going to
turn him away. Never did, never will.
That's the reality of the situation. I hope that Ms. Ruggles can find this
discussion today as being instructive going forward because I think it was. I think
it's very helpful, but we all recognize the needs of Puna. Not only Puna, other
districts throughout the island have those same problems and we all got to work
together in getting them done and addressed. Thank you.
CHR KANUHA: Ms. David.
MS. DAVID: Yes, just really quickly. In response to recognizing the disparity
that Jen talks about, I did contact the civil rights program manager for the Federal
Page 21
GREDC-6
May 16, 2017
highway Administration Division regarding this complaint because I thought it
was very unusual that a complaint filed in 2000, there's no action or basically,
what is happening? What is the process once a complaint is filed? It's been over
17 years. So she was gracious enough to tell me that since then, she sent me a
copy of the HDOT's (Hawai`i Department of Transportation) current Title VI
Implementation Plan. She said the development of the plan was one of the
recommendations that resulted from the complaint that was filed. And then, on a
yearly basis, HDOT prepares such a Title VI plan and it's on the website. So
every year, they do come out with a plan that addresses or lets us know how
they're addressing these things.
So I just wanted to make that statement in recognizing the disparity. I think the
DOT, the State DOT is making an effort to address these disparities, but not to
your liking. But they do have a plan that supposed to address all of these things.
How you take it further than that, if it's not adequate, I think is what you're trying
to accomplish and that is in a different arena than this. So I was just making a
comment.
I understand, Mr. Olson, why you asked her to do this, but I believe what I'm
saying is I feel that my role on this Council is separate from what your intention
of moving this forward. That's my opinion and I respect that, and I yield.
CHR KANUHA: Jon, sorry, I don't want to cut you off I appreciate—thank
you. Ms. David, did you want to continue?
MS. DAVID: No, I yield. Thank you.
CHR KANUHA: And if anybody has questions for Mr. Olson, he can always
come up, too. Mr. Richards. Sorry, I missed Sue.
MR. RICHARDS: No, go ahead.
MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Chair. A lot has been said and I'm going to go back
to what I know. A lot of the leadership books and mentors that I have had in the
past talked about having disciplined people, with disciplined, thought creating
disciplined action. And what Ms. O'Hara is doing is just that. She is not looking
for blame, she is jumping in and looking for solutions and opportunities, and
that's why this resolution takes us down a road that pulls us away from
disciplined people, with disciplined thought, providing disciplined action.
The reason why I take exception is because of the Native Hawaiian subtleties in
here is because the attachment failed to provide pages one, two, and three. So I
went and got it and I want to read into the record what it actually found. And it's
being taken out of context that there's been discrimination for Native Hawaiians
and low income because the finding actually reads, "The Hawaii Department of
Page 22
GREDC-6
May 16, 2017
Transportation and the Hawaii County draft long-range transportation plan and
final plan discriminates by failing to recognize actual land uses and population."
That's the entire context, which then leads into affecting low income and Native
Hawaiians in the long-range transportation planning. And because of that and
those cherry picking of those types of words, is what I take exception to. I feel
mislead, I think the information contained in this resolution is misleading,
inaccurate, and I cannot support something like this. I can help work hard and
help Ms. O'Hara, Ms. Ruggles, anyone of these Council Members, any of the
people I can network with, I am willing to share those resources with the rest of
my colleagues.
I've been open and honest about how to get things done and how I want to see
things move forward, and I want to move our entire island forward, not on the
backs of any other district, because frankly, I'm sure any other district can make
argument that they're all not getting. What I found extremely interesting is that
these rural communities, people drinking ditch water, they're sitting right here on
the Council right now. So if they're being discriminated against, we have
representation from those rural communities who drank ditch water right here. So
I am not going to be supporting this resolution and I'm actually going to ask later
on if Ms. Ruggles would consider withdrawing it because it's just going to send a
bad signal all the way around. Thank you.
CHR KANUHA: Well the first thing you can share are pages one to three for
since I don't have that either. Anyways, Mr. Richards.
MR. RICHARDS: Thank you, Chair. Once again, I have to echo Councilwoman
Lee Loy's discussion and conversation. Councilwoman Ruggles, I appreciate
what you put forth and when you say the intent, I think we actually get the intent,
and I think it's been stated numerous times that we actually do support the intent.
How it's phrased and how it's characterized, and I won't rehash what's been
stated already—what I am concerned about is the cohesiveness of this group
going forward and standing as a group while we try and take care of our
community and our community as a County, not a community as a district.
We have enough problems nationally, what's going on in our political and the
divisiveness going on and maybe we can actually be that model you were talking
about by not being divisive, and supporting each other and seeking the solutions.
It's not easy. We have cost ahead of us that are staggering and I'm not sure how
we're going to address those yet, but as some of these other Council Members
have said, we've got some ideas and going forward, I look forward to working
with the group as a whole and seeking those solutions. Not on any one group or
any individual's back, we want the success for the whole community. It's going
to come down to economic success, which comes down to economic growth and
we have to support that and that's going to help us answer these problems.
Page 23
GREDC-6
May 16, 2017
I don't disagree, and no one does that there's a lot of issues in the Puna district
that we need to attend, but there's a lot of issues in a lot of districts that we need
to attend. We're going to have to strike the balance. So I will support
Councilwoman Lee Loy in trying and encourage Councilwoman Ruggles to
consider withdrawing and we can work on going forward with cohesiveness. You
have my support in trying to figure out how to get the infrastructure for Puna, but
I don't think this is the way to get it done. I fear it's too divisive. I yield.
CHR KANUHA: Thank you. Council Members, anybody else on the second
round before I go back to Ms. Ruggles? Ms. O'Hara.
MS. O'HARA: Yeah, I just want to reiterate what Mr. Richards just said in that I
do understand the intent and I actually am on board with the intent. For me, it's
some of the words that are called out and we've already discussed it. Disparity
rather than discrimination might be a better way to approach it. But it also
references the discrimination so that's kind of what triggers some of the response
but as people pointed out, we have needs and inequities in every district. And
when it comes down to tax dollars and what percentage Hilo pays, well Hilo's
now paying about 6.5 million more than the Puna district. I agree that in the
overall picture, that's maybe not significant, it's like two percent, but it's still a
little bit more. But back when this civil rights suit was filed in 1999/2000, Puna
was about half the size as it is now, and it was contributing much less in the way
of tax dollars, relative to Hilo, which hasn't really changed all that much in terms
of the growth rate compared to Puna. So there was a much greater disparity at
that time. Puna was paying quite a bit less, but it's not about where the tax dollars
are collected, we are a community as everybody here keeps saying.
I'd like to remind people that Puna and Ka`u house the economic driver of this
island. We're based on a tourist economy and what is the destination that most
tourists come to the Big Island for? The volcano and Pele lives in Puna and Ka`u.
So maybe we don't pay as much in collections because we are mostly a bedroom
community in Puna. We don't have any resorts and hotels paying taxes, we don't
even have any apartments paying taxes. But we support that main destination and
so there's reason for the rest of the districts to want to spend money in Puna and
Ka`u.
It's not that we're in disagreement, and I agree, we don't want to get divisive on
this issue, I think we all understand the issue. So that's all I had to say. Thank
you.
CHR KANUHA: Thank you. Ms. Ruggles.
MS. RUGGLES: Thank you. So I do understand this is a sensitive topic and like
I said, it was not my intention to be divisive or to point fingers. I'm just a little
confused because, well first of all, I would like to address the exhibit situation and
Page 24
GREDC-6
May 16, 2017
also why the resolution includes some things and not others and that is, we were
advised to keep it as short and succinct as possible and there's only so much you
could fit in there. And from the exhibit, it would have been a forty to sixty page
document that we would have attached to each one and we were advised to not do
that and just take out the raw, highlighted points. And if the Council Members
wanted more information, they could get the full complaint.
Okay, so moving on, yes, any district can make the argument that they're not
getting enough in services. And if you look at the facts and if you look at the
history and the amounts of resources allocated to districts, I'm sorry, but no
district can argue that they're not getting it, not like Puna is.
Even with Puna historically paying a bit less, we were getting much less more
than the bit less that we're paying, disproportionately. To sum that up, we're
getting disproportionately less than what we're paying into, especially compared
to other districts. And that's really just the numbers, that's just the facts.
As far as the wording of the resolution, I'm just confused as far as what is actually
inaccurate in the resolution? I welcome that if anybody would like to answer
that.
MS. POINDEXTER: I'll take a stab at it, Council Chair.
CHR KANUHA: Do you want to yield to Ms. Poindexter?
MS. RUGGLES: Yeah, I'll yield.
CHR KANUHA: Ms. Poindexter.
MS. POINDEXTER: You say that in the resolution, thank you Chair, and
"Whereas complainants (the Sustainability Committee) alleged that State and
County officials deliberately undercount residents to favor large landowners....'
I cannot support a statement like that, I cannot. I honestly cannot support
something like that. And I know each—and again, you had stated Hamakua
didn't do this, we all have things in our own districts that the people feel
sometime their needs are more than others. Some people in Hamakua may feel
their needs are more than what Puna people feel their needs are. So it's—you
cannot, again, create this division of who gets more, who gets less. Like Council
Member Eoff had stated, we work so hard, even from the time I got onto the
Council to look at this island as one island and not an east and west divide. And
now I don't want to get into the district divide of who gets more, who gets less.
I can complain about roads in limbo that I have more than 50 percent in just
district one alone, but I haven't beenI just got to go fight my own fight with
that, with DPW (Department of Public Works) or however the methodology is to
Page 25
GREDC-6
May 16, 2017
get the equal amount of funding to take care roads in limbo, whatever it may be in
my district. But I just don't want to go into that divide and I thinkI always said
I always like to look at the glass half full not half empty. So whenever I go
forward with stuff, I really want to go forward in a positive way and this
resolution brings up so much negative things that I cannot say I would support
how it's written. So those are my thoughts and I'm hoping that you will withdraw
this, whether you come up with something else or we start working on supporting
you in other efforts with the Puna district. I'm hoping that you can move in that
direction, but I would ask that, not to cause a divide and withdraw this resolution.
But again, that's your call, so I will yield at this time.
CHR KANUHA: Thank you, Ms. Poindexter. Ms. Ruggles.
MS. RUGGLES: Thank you. I just want to point out for the Hawaii Long -
Range Plan or the findings of this complaint. It says that issue number one is that
the Hawaii Department of Transportation and Hawaii County's draft of long-
range transportation plan discriminate by failing to recognize the actual land uses
and populations affecting low income and Native Hawaiians in its long-range
transportation planning.
Issue number two is that HDOT and Hawaii County failed to take into
consideration economic development and multi -modal transportation needs of
low-income communities, specifically of those of Puna and Ka`u. Since these
findings were established by this federal agency, nothing much has changed. We
are still low income, we still don't have roads, and we still don't have ways to get
around. And I could go on and on and I don't need to do that now. But to look
at—because this resolution points to facts that are negative doesn't mean it's not
positive. In order to address a situation, we must first understand it and
acknowledge that it exists. Understanding, that injustice anywhere is an injustice
everywhere. And these are just facts, we're not accusing anybody of anything, it
only points to the facts. The complaint point to the facts that Hawaii County did
undercount populations deliberately and this was a long time ago, that wasn't us,
but historically, we should acknowledge this and moving forward, make sure that
this doesn't happen. I was hopeful that as a body of decision makers and leaders
today, that we could together, commit to making sure that disparity does not
continue. That's all. Thank you, I yield.
CHR KANUHA: Okay, thank you. Council Members, any other discussion? I
mean I think I heard from everybody about how they feel about this. I don't
know if this is going to be withdrawn, so if we want to continue and take the
vote—Ms. Ruggles, hearing from the Council, how do you feel you want proceed
with this specific resolution? I mean we're here to make it all work and honor
your community in what they came to testify on. How do we move forward on
that?
Page 26
GREDC-6
May 16, 2017
MS. RUGGLES: Moving forward, I believe it would be a disservice to my
community if I were to withdraw this resolution.
CHR KANUHA: Okay. Mr. Chung, anyI just was—okay. Just briefly, I hear
where everybody is coming from. I understand the complaint that was made and I
wish it was addressed in a different resolution, could have been areally, this is
something, as you were stating, we all could have supported in a different mode.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think this resolution is perfect in any way, so it's
hard to vote on the entire thing when there's certain issues that not only I have,
but I heard from the rest of the Council. Have we been working towards making
the more equitable communities throughout this island? Absolutely and I would
never state that we haven't been doing that because that's what we have been
working towards, that's what I ran on the Council for, to be working together on
exactly that.
Okay. Know that we're listening; I mean Mr. Olson has brought this up several
times during his testimony in the past so I absolutely agree with certain aspects of
what has been going on and hopefully, we have been trying to address certain
needs. I guess we're going toMs. O'Hara; would you like to say something?
MS. O'HARA: Just one last thing.
CHR KANUHA: Sure, go right ahead.
MS. O'HARA: As the other Puna Council person, I'm totally conflicted here
because I really want things to change for Puna and I'm working really hard to
make those changes or try to make those changes. I can't personally make them,
but I'm trying really hard to work within the community, with the private sector,
with the public sector. And Mr. Chung says it very clearly, it's about building
relationships, and my concern with this resolution is it has a little bit destructive
nature to it. It's demanding something that actually any of our districts could
actually demand.
Sue over here represents Pana`ewa and Keaukaha and that community has had all
kinds of discrimination, for lack of a better word, in terms of the location of the
landfill, the sewage plant, without their approvals, okay? There are all kinds of
disparities throughout this island and I understand my district and I understand the
history and I want to work to correct those deficiencies, but I also realize the
importance of positivity and I feel this resolution fails on that positivity note.
This could have been worded in a very positive way and I could have really
supported it but the way it's worded, it kind of feels punishing to other districts on
the island, and I can see why other districts are taking some offense to it.
So I'm very conflicted in this. I do not think I'll be supporting it because I want
to work on building relationships. I would love the fact that this is a highly
Page 27
GREDC-6
May 16, 2017
unified Council. We can get a whole lot done guys, even regardless of the
Sunshine Law. We could get a whole lot done here working in a unified manner
and I encourage you, Ms. Ruggles, to do even more amendments to the CIP,
because you still have time, I think until Thursday, maybe today, I don't know the
dates.
CHR KANUHA: You can amend all year long, too.
MS. O'HARA: You can amend all year long, okay, that's wonderful news. We
can amend all year long and just keep driving it because it's through that positive
type of action that things will change. I really feel you would do a great
disservice to that relationship building to push this resolution forward. Everyone
on the Council, almost everyone on the Council has asked you to consider
withdrawing it because we get it, we understand the intent, but there's just
something with the language here that is unacceptable to many of the members
here. So I put that plea before you one last time to please consider that and thank
you.
CHR KANUHA: Thank you, Ms. O'Hara. Ms. Ruggles.
MS. RUGGLES: Thank you and thank you Ms. O'Hara. I understand that
there's something with the language with the resolution that everyone here is not
comfortable with, and I understand that this is a sensitive subject, and I really
appreciate everyone taking the time to take an honest look at the matters that I'm
bringing up. If anyone were to bring an issue of disparity to the Council here as
far as acknowledging it and addressing it, I would be with them. This is the first
step, it's only acknowledging the facts and I just don't understand what exactly
the down side is in acknowledging the facts and pledging to address disparity
anywhere on the island. And I understand there's something that's uncomfortable
about the language but so far, I have yet to hear what exactly that is. What
exactly is inaccurate in this resolution? It seems like it's just a feeling of there
was discrimination going on and it appears that there might be current disparity.
Let's make sure that we address it.
That's what the resolution is stating, I don't see how that's a negative or terrible
thing. We're recognizing this is a need, this resolution was a conversation starter,
I do believe it was productive and I don't intend to be divisive and I don't think
that it wouldI don't think me not withdrawing the resolution would somehow
destroy this Council's ability to work together. I have to stand with the people of
Puna on this one and I'm not going to withdraw the resolution.
CHR KANUHA: Okay. Mr. Chung.
MR. CHUNG: Thank you. This on my third time, Mr. Chairman, right?
Page 28
GREDC-6 May 16, 2017
CHR KANUHA: It's all good. We got to stay here until five anyways.
MR. CHUNG: Actually, I was just shutting up because I thought I had to pick my
boy up at the high school, but now it seems everything's okay so I can talk again.
With all due respect to Ms. Ruggles, she keeps on saying she doesn't understand
what's offensive. Everybody has explained to you, and I think I get it, but really,
I talked about the divisiveness of using Hilo in there, but I'm not using that as the
reason for me voting against, which I will be voting against this of course. This is
what I'm worried about and I touched upon it earlier, I don't like rhetoric, I like
action, and what worries me about this is if this is passed, when you are gone,
let's say in eight years, and let's just say nothing has improved in your district,
then you can always say it was because of discrimination, right? Everybody has
to be held accountable. If I don't follow through on something, if I fail on
something that I wanted to have happen, I'm going to be the first to say I failed, I
couldn't deliver. I'm not going to use any crutch whatsoever. I'm not saying that
you would, but this opens the door for that. So that's why I find this as being
offensive.
It doesn't offend me personally, I don't care about the references to Hilo,
whatever, it's just a terrible message all together and it provides the fall back for
some excuse later on, not saying that you would use it. That's what I believe.
CHR KANUHA: Okay, thank you. I think we're ready to take the vote.
Mr. Clerk, roll call please.
Vote on Res. 205-17: The motion to recommend adoption of Res. 205-17 failed
Failed by the following roll call vote:
Ayes: Committee Member Ruggles — 1.
Noes: Committee Members Chung, David, Eoff,
Lee Loy, O'Hara, Poindexter, Richards,
and Chair Eoff — 8.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
CHR KANUHA: Thank you. Motion fails and will move to Council with a
negative recommendation. Okay. Let's move on to our last item, or our second
item, excuse me. Communication 46.4.
Return to Order The Chair directed the Committee to return to the order of business.
of Business:
COMMUNI- The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business,
CATIONS: Communications.
Page 29
GREDC-6
May 16, 2017
Comm. 46.4: HAWAII STATE ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES' MARCH 17, 2017,
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES
From Council Member Dru Mamo Kanuha, dated April 19, 2017.
Motion to Close File: Mr. Richards moved to close file on Comm. 46.4.
Seconded by Ms. David.
CHR KANUHA: Discussion? Briefly before—maybe I'll bring up currently.
So during—this is for—Ms. Lee Loy, go right ahead.
MS. LEE LOY: I actually had a question and maybe you were about to expand
upon that, but in the minutes, it looks like the HSAC (Hawai`i State Association
of Counties) Committee started a report that focused on the Transient
Accommodation Tax (TAT) and the tort liability issues, and I actually just
focused on the word report. I was wondering if some white sheet, some
background information, some approachI mean we know now that the
Legislature is not giving us the TAT as provided, so if you don't mind expanding
a little bit on that.
CHR KANUHA: Sure, and I don't understand why a lot of that paperwork is not
a part of this communication, but I guess the communication is just about the
specific minutes. I can ask them in the future to provide with the minutes,
exhibits of these reports and all the information that's attached to what we
discussed. So I can do that for the future. But specifically towards the work that
we were doing to basically lobby the Legislature about transient accommodations
and the tort liability, as we know, both completely failed. It was a big
disappointment and we really tried hard to work with the legislature to get them
on board, but it seemed to me that this session was very rough on the counties.
And maybe we're doing it wrong, I don't know.
I don't know what's on their minds so I can have a different message from every
single legislator about why, but in terms of the reports and how they're presented
for HSAC, I can try to get them to give those reports and bring them to the
Council for discussion purposes.
MS. LEE LOY: Thank you for that. Maybe not so much to attach it to all of this
because it's just going to grow our clipboard. But yeah, I would want to
understand the rationale behind the approaches as far as us speaking with one
clear message. And we talked about building relationships and I know the other
counties do the exact same thing, but it would be helpful for me, if I'm having
conversations with counterparts at the legislature if that particular issue came up,
to understand so we have the same talking points. I mean the goal for HSAC is
really to speak with a unified voice and we all have our own circles we travel in
so that would be rather helpful. Unfortunately, the minutes come out late, after
the action was already done, but I would want to see it and you don't have to
Page 30
GREDC-6
May 16, 2017
maybe add it to our board, but maybe just an electronic version so we can pick
and choose if we want to read it. That might be helpful because going forward,
now that the Legislature is closed, we got to get ready for next legislative session
and what can we be doing better?
You just mentioned that right now, how do we approach this? Is there a different
approach? Those are the things I'm thinking about getting ready for the next
legislative session, and I don't want to go down a path that's been explored by
other members in other counties and it didn't work. Mr. Chung just mentioned
we don't want rhetoric, we want action. So why are we going to take the same
course of action if we know how it's going to end up, especially with our TAT
tax? So yeah, if you could provide that, maybe in an electronic version, that
would be helpful.
CHR KANUHA: Can do. Ms. O'Hara.
MS. O'HARA: As we spoke about earlier, there seems to be some errors in the
report from County of Hawaii on page five and I know thatI don't believe that
the Hawaii County Administration opposed the styrofoam measure because of its
fiscal challenges, that really wasn't demonstrated in testimony. And we were not
sued when the Mayor cancelled the compost contract. We were threatened with a
lawsuit, maybe, but we didn't get sued and we did not issue a new contract. So I
just wanted to make sure that those corrections get made, if we could. Thank you.
CHR KANUHA: Sure, and as I spoke to you earlier about some of this, it's not
verbatim, so it might not come out exactly like how we meant it. And if we
could, and I'm going to bring this up during the next HSAC meeting to clarify
exactly what we meant by certain one of these, and I do want to get a clarification
about the administration's—for the styrofoam especially, with Mr. Kucharski's
submission of his testimony about exactly what he meant by the department's
challenges in implementing the styrofoam bill that was currently
MS. O'HARA: I believe what he meant was in the timeframe, he had no way of
demanding money if we had moved with the 2018 implementation date. That's
why we're now considering rolling out to 2019, so he can actually plan for the
next budget.
CHR KANUHA: Okay, so there were some fiscal challenges within
MS. O'HARA: With the money he didn't have.
CHR KANUHA: Okay. And definitely, there wasn't a lawsuit filed, there was a
potential for, or put us at risk for a potential liability issue. We can clarify that
during the next meeting as well. And of course, there wasn't issued a new
contract, there was an RFP (Request for Proposal) that was proposed in front of
Page 31
GREDC-6
May 16, 2017
the Council. Thank you for bringing that up, we can definitely clarify that during
the next meeting.
MS. O'HARA: Don't count on me to read them every time.
CHR KANUHA: You should read them because I want to make sure that
everything's all correct that I'm—that we're getting it all correct when we do
these. Thank you for doing that. And again, just for an FYI (For your
Information), how we do the meetings, every County gives an update about
basically what's been happening, a brief update about what's been happening
during the previous months. So if you guys have any additional things that you
want me to provide information for the other counties of what we're doing, that I
may not know about, please just send it to me any time and I can put that towards
the report. So just for an FYI and I'd really appreciate that.
MS. LEE LOY: I have a follow-up question to that. What's the timing of all of
the committee's work? I know you just suggested if you want to have a
conversation, but you guys are going to start having conversations for the next
legislative session or you guys talk about how all the different counties handle
their budget and their budget process and what works for them. What's the best
timing, especially as it relates to topics or issues for our next legislative session?
How do we get that to you? When is the most right time so that you can start that
conversation?
CHR KANUHA: Now. It's tough because not only do we have to approve this,
it has to go through the process, but every other County has to approve of any
decision that wants to be part of HSAC. So it takes a lot of time, but in terms of
the next—and I can get you guys the dates of—because within HSAC, there's
bylaws of dates of when we have to submit things to HSAC by, per the bylaws.
But we really need to start this early, we really need to talk to the legislators way
before the legislative session starts.
It's very difficult to tell them HSAC's priorities and the counties' priorities on the
day the Legislature opens. We're already way too late. So start now. If there's
anything that, for the rest of the Council Members, if there's anything that you
guys see that we should be advocating for, that we want to be on the HSAC
priority list and on the agenda for the rest of the counties to vote on as a package,
start thinking about that now and how I can best advocate on behalf of this
Council. So now is a great time. Any other discussion on the minutes?
Page 32
GREDC-6
Vote on Comm. 46.4:
Filed
BILLS FOR
ORDINANCES:
ADJOURN
MF.NT-
Approved:
May 16, 2017
The motion to close file on Comm. 46.4 was carried by
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.
The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of
business, Bills for Ordinances.
(There were none.)
There being no further business, at 4:35 p.m., Ms. Poindexter moved to adjourn
the meeting. Seconded by Ms. David and carried by 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: We are adjourned.
Mr. Dru Mamo Kanuha, Chair
Governmental Relations and Economic Development Committee
DMK/jm
JUN X120?1
(Date)
Page 33