HomeMy WebLinkAboutREP CofWH 030 06-02-83 (1980-1984) 411
REPORT OF THE
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
June 2 , 1983
Chairman and Members
Hawaii County Council
Hilo, Hawaii
Your Committee of the Whole to which was referred:
Ordinance: SALARY ORDINANCE FOR 1983
Bill 969 Establishes the number and rates of
compensation for all positions in departments ,
offices and other agencies of the County of
Hawaii under the legislative control of the
County Council, designating payroll periods,
pay days , prescribing certain requirements with
respect to overtime, perquisites and official
fidelity bonds, and repealing Ordinance 797 ,
and all amendments thereto; said ordinance to
be known as the Salary Ordinance of 1983 .
Intr . by: Mr . Fujii
1st Reading: May 4, 1983
recommends Ordinance Bill 969 be amended as circulated; further
recommends Ordinance Bill 969, Draft 2, be adopted by the Council on
second and final reading.
TOM FUJII, CHAIRMAN.
CW REPORT No . 30
ADOPTED: FUN 8 1983
Jo
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
Thursday, June 2 , 1983
Hilo, Hawaii
The meeting of the Committee of the Whole was called to order
at 10 :05 a.m. in the Councilroom, Hawaii County Building by Mr . Tom
Fujii, Chairman.
PRESENT: Mr . Tomio Fujii , Chairman
Mr . James L. K. Dahlberg
Mr . Frank De Luz , III
Mrs. Helene H. Hale
Mr . William S. Kawahara
Mr . Spencer K. Schutte
Mr . Stephen K. Yamashiro
ABSENT & Mr . Takahashi Domingo
EXCUSED Miss Merle K. Lai
Also present were:
Mr . Stanley Nakamae, Finance Director
Mr . Gary Takemura, Controller
Mr . Gary Kiyota, Real Property Tax Administrator
Mr . Harry Takahashi, Legislative Auditor
Mrs. Connie Kiriu, Legislative Assistant
Miss Jane Araki , Council Services Secretary
Mrs. Alberta K. Nicolas, Senior Clerk-Stenographer
STATEMENTS The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the
FROM THE next order of business, Statements from the Public.
PUBLIC
There being no statements from the Public, the
Chairman proceeded to the next order' of business .
REFERRED The Chair directed the Committee to take up
ITEMS: Referred Items.
JUN 21933
411
Comm. 706 .4 : IMPROVED SIDEWALK-KEALAKAA STREET TO THE
CREATIVE DAY CARE CENTER
From Mayor Herbert T. Matayoshi dated January 26 ,
1983 informing the cost estimate for improvements
to Palani Road (Phase I request) is $252 ,000 for
which the Conty has no capital funds. Recommends,
should further improvements requiring additional
right-of-way acquisition be pursued by the School
Advisory Council, that consultants be hired to
have the work done after setting up appropriate
planning funds through the State. Under the
State-County Highway System Agreement of 1968 ,
Palani road was to be taken over by the State
Department of Transportation under the Phase III
program. (PWC-206-Refer to the Committee of the
Whole for consideration in the 1983-84 CIP budget. )
CHR. FUJII : The Chair recommends that
Communication 706 .4 be received and filed.
Mr . De Luz moved to receive and file
Communication 706 .4 . Seconded by
Mr . Yamash iro.
(At 10:08 a.m. , Mr . Domingo arrived at the
meeting. )
CHR. FUJII : There' s a motion and a second to
receive and file Communication 706 .4 . Are there
any discussion? Mrs. Hale.
MRS. HALE: You referred this to the Committee of
the Whole for consideration in the budget, aren' t
you going to give it any consideration?
CHR. FUJII : Would you like to discuss it, Mrs.
Hale, you have the floor?
MRS. HALE: You're recommending that it not be
approved or what?
CHR. FUJII : That's correct.
MRS. HALE: Well then why don' t you make a motion
not to approve it and not just receive and file it.
2
•
tOk 21383
O •
MR. YAMASHIRO: Essentially it' s the same .
MRS. HALE: Yes, I realize that. But I think that
something should be done to improve that roadway.
Some of us walked up there last year with the
people there and it' s very dangerous.
CHR. FUJII : That's right.
MRS. HALE: You know, gad, but some of the things
that I see in this budget, we can' t find, can' t
even direct Public Works to do it out of their R&M
or anything, we' re not going to do anything with
it? When the public comes to us with a concern
about their children and we can' t do anything
about a very dangerous situation? I had an
accident on that road a few years ago so, I 'm very
aware of the difficulties of being on that road.
CHR. FUJII : You have the floor , Mrs. Hale, you
want to make a motion?
MRS. HALE: Yes. .
CHR. FUJII : Fine.
MRS. HALE: You know, I 'm just appalled that it' s
just automatically going to be received and
filed. But isn' t there any report from the Public
Works Department as to what they recommend?
CHR. FUJII : Look, Mrs. Hale, the question here is
money. There ' s $252,000 involved here. You come
up with a proposal of $7 .94 and you haven' t given
us your proposal as to where the budget cuts
should be. We try to see here what we can do with
tax rates so that the people will be satisfied.
We can' t serve everything. We can' t give them
all those services that you ask for right now and
at the same time try and cut the tax rate. It's a
tough decision to make and we have to make it
today. This is open for discussion you can
discuss all what you want even if it goes until
tonight.
- 3 -
1 _ _
111
•
MRS. HALE: Yes, well, Mr . Chairman, I 'd like to
if I may have the floor .
CHR. FUJII : Sure, you have the floor .
MRS. HALE: Number one, I think it' s ridiculous
that we're having a discussion the very last day
to decide a $63 million budget. Why didn' t we
have this discussion on Tuesday and Wednesday when
we had some time?
This agenda didn't even get to us until Monday. I
didn' t even see the agenda until Monday, so I
don' t even know what' s on here.
My proposals that were made in writing to your
Committee, Mr . Chairman, I have backed up and I
have told you that I will discuss them in an open
meeting .
CHR. FUJII : It can be discussed.
MRS. HALE: And I am ready to discuss them today.
CHR. FUJII : It can be discussed today. It' s on
the agenda, Mrs. Hale, you can discuss it today.
MRS. HALE: Yes, okay fine.
CHR. FUJII : This proposal is not---
MRS. HALE: All I 'm saying, Mr . Chairman, is we
discussed this with the Public Works Director when
we took this trip that he could do something out
of R&M. I 'm not saying that we give $250 ,000
actually the recommendation I think is ridiculous
to spend $250 ,000 on that road. What we did ask
was that the Engineer come up with some
recommendations as to how he could do some of this
work out of R&M. I see no recommendation from the
County Engineer about this and I don' t think that
we should just dismiss a very critical,---
CHR. FUJII : Mrs. Hale
4 -
JUN 2 1 9
1111
MRS. HALE: And safety thing. I think it would be
at least referred back to the Public Works
Director to tell us how he can handle this problem
little by little out of his R&M fund.
CHR. FUJII : Mrs. Hale, even if we received and
filed that communication, we can always bring it
up again. You know at this point in time, we' re
looking at the budget and we have to say that we
cannot approve this at this point in time because
we don' t have the moneys. If you come up with
some good recommendation in the future, bring it
up in the Public works Committee and let' s pursue
it that way.
MRS. HALE: Mr . Chairman, I will vote because I
don' t think that we should just do this. I think
we should send it back to the Engineer , get a
report from the Engineer , and then we should put
it out. Because I 'm not going to make a motion---
CHR. FUJII : Mrs. Hale, everyone has one vote.
MRS. HALE: Yes, fine. I 'm telling you why I 'm
voting no, okay?
CHR. FUJII : Good enough . Councilman Kawahara.
MR. KAWAHARA: Chairman Fujii, couldn' t we at
least refer that to the Chief Engineer? That way,
it will be kept alive. If we just file it away,
it' ll get lost. So, I would like---
(At 10 : 10 a.m. , Mr . Domingo left the meeting. )
CHR. FUJII : Mr . Kawahara, there' s no big secret
in receiving and filing and you can always bring
back anything back onto the floor when you think
something can be done.
Now there is a motion on the fllor , if the maker
of the motion would like to leave it as is, then
that' s the motion and we can take a vote if
there' s no further discussion. Mr . Yamashiro.
- 5 -
111
MR. YAMASHIRO: Thank you, Mr . Fujii. I think we
should properly receive and file this
communication at the present time as this is part
of our budget consideration and we are not
intending to implement this in the budget.
However , Chairman of the Committe of the Whole ,
Mr . Fujii , I think you could by communication just
send a letter to the Public Works ' Director on
your own outside of this communication.
CHR. FUJII : That' s no problem, Mr . Yamashiro.
Mr . De Luz .
MR. DE LUZ: Yes, I was going to say that similar
to Mr . Yamashiro, that Bill Kawahara could write
as a new business, on R&M funds to see what the
Department or the Chief Engineer could do and that
could come up under New Business in the Public
Works Committee.
CHR. FUJII : Any further discussion? None.
Vote on the motion: . Carried.
Opposed: Councilwoman Hale.
Comm. 993 .1: KAIEIE STREAM BRIDGE
From Mayor Matayoshi dated November 19 , 1982 ,
giving a ball park estimate of the cost of
improvements of Kaieie Stream Bridge.
(PWC-195--Refer to the 1983-84 budget for
consideration. )
CHR. FUJII : The Chair recommends that
Communication 993 .1 be received and filed.
Mr . De Luz moved to receive and file
Communication 993 .1. Seconded by
Mr . Schutte .
CHR. FUJII : There ' s a motion and second to
receive and file Communication 993 .1. Are there
any further discussion? Mrs. Hale.
MRS. HALE: Yes , Mr . Chairman. This has been done
the way I suggested that we could do the other
because Councilman Frank De Luz wrote a letter
about the Kaieie Stream Bridge. We have an answer
from the Mayor about how this is going to be
handled under R&M funds. So the administration
now is on note that if we receive and file, we're
taking the Mayor ' s recommendation. This was my
only suggestion that should have been done with
the other . Okay, enough said. Thank you.
- 6 -
JUR 21933
410 110
CHR. FUJII : Any other discussion?
Vote on the motion: Unanimously
carried.
Comm. 1073 .1: EFFORTS TO PROMOTE TOURISM ON THE BIG ISLAND
From Councilwoman Helene H. Hale dated February 1,
1983 , regarding her concerns of efforts to promote
tourism on the Big Island. and submits several
proposals
(Finance Chairman Fujii refers to the Committee of
the Whole for consideration. )
Mrs. Hale moved for the approval of the
proposals
CHR. FUJII : There' s a motion on the floor , is
there any second? If not, the motion dies for a
lack of second.
Mr . De Luz moved to receive and file
Communication 1073 .1. Seconded by
Mr . Yamashiro .
CHR. FUJII : There' s a motion and second to
receive and file Communication 1073 .1. Are there
any discussion? Councilwoman Hale.
MRS. HALE: I expected it to be received and
filed, Mr . Chairman, and that' s why I made my
budget without this $200 ,000 in it. To me , in a
year when we should be thinking about looking for
ways to reduce our budget, one of the obvious
ways, and I said very little really during
Research and Development Department' s public
hearing, but I heard a great deal from my
colleagues. And then I read in the paper this
morning with all the talk , we' re only going to
take $5 ,000 out of their budget and we' re still
going to let them go ahead and give $250 ,000 to
United Airlines to publicize this island in Time
and Newsweek and magazines all over the United
States.
7 _
JUli 21993
110
•
I had a very concrete proposal that I thought
should be tried or at least should have been given
some serios consideration and discussion.
Obviously, nobody wanted to discuss it because I
wrote this letter to the Chairman and members of
the Hawaii County Council. It was not even, I
don' t know how it got on Committee of the Whole
agenda because according to this communication
number it says to Finance Committee. You know, it
was never taken up in your Committee, Mr .
Chairman, never . You never bothered to even put
it on the agenda to discuss it and the letter was
written on February 1, 1983 . Now all of a sudden ,
I find it on the Committee of the Whole agenda
just to be thrown in the wastebasket like
everything else. I 'd like an explanation as to
how you when the Council Chairman refers this to
your Committee how you have the authority on your
own, without your Committee to refer it to the
Committee of the Whole?
CHR. FUJII : Mrs. Hale , I think the chairman of
any committee has some prerogatives. My
prerogative at that time was because this was a
budget matter , it, which was a budget matter in
the Research & Development Program, I felt that
the Committee of the Whole in the discussion of
budget was the area that it should be referred to
and that' s what I did.
MRS. HALE: Yes, well I don' t think you had that
power , so I shall vote against it. Obviously, I
don' t have the votes, so I 'm not going to spend
all my morning arguing. I 've got business to do,
too, you know.
But Finance Committee Chairman Fujii refers to the
Committee of the Whole for consideration, I think
that' s entirely illegal.
CHR. FUJII : You have all the time now to discuss
this situation, Mrs. Hale. The motion is to
receive and file. We are in the area of
discussion, you can further discuss it. Are there
any further discussion?
Vote on the motion: Unanimously
carried.
- 8 -
JUR 21983
S S
Comm. 1077 .1: HAKALAU RECREATION COUNCIL CONCERNS
From Mayor Matayoshi dated February 10 , 1983 ,
informing that there are no funds available for
the improvements as requested by the Hakalau
Recreation Council.
(PWC-209--Refer to the Committee of the Whole for
consideration in the 1983-84 budget. )
CHR. FUJII : The Chair recommends that
Communication 1077 . 1 be received and filed.
Mr . Schutte moved to receive and file
Communication 1077 .1. Seconded by
Mr . De Luz and carried.
Opposed: Councilwoman Hale.
Comm. 1181: MIDDLE KEEI ROAD
From Councilman Frank De Luz , III dated March 16 ,
1983 , transmitting a letter from Fred and Alice
Schattauer regarding the need to pave portions of
the Middle Keei Road in South Kona.
CHR. FUJII : The Chair recommends that
Communication 1181 be received and filed.
Mr . De Luz moved to receive and file
Communication 1181. Seconded by Mr . Schutte .
CHR. FUJII : There' s a motion and second to
receive and file Communication 1181. Are there
any discussion? Is that another no Mrs. Hale?
MRS. HALE: No, Mr . Chairman, because this was
done properly. There is a letter from Mayor
Herbert T. Matayoshi dated April 26 , 1983 saying
that he will take part of this out of resurfacing
out of R&M and this is all I 'm suggesting that
this be done with all of them. And it is done
with this one, so why should I vote no?
CHR. FUJII : Okay, then it' s unanimous.
MRS. HALE: Some you do right and some you do
wrong .
Vote on the motion: Unanimously
carried.
- 9 -
JUn 21963
• •
Comm. 1181.1: MIDDLE KEEI ' ROAD ® RESPONSE FROM MAYOR MATAYOSHI
From Mayor Herbert T. Matayoshi dated April 26 ,
1983 , responding to Communication 1181.
(PWC-226--Refer to the Committee of the Whole for
consideration in the 1983-84 CIP budget. )
CHR. FUJII : The Chair recommends that
Communication 1181.1 be received and filed.
Mr . Yamashiro moved to receive and file
Communication 1181.1. Seconded by Mr .
De Luz and unanimously carried.
Comm. 1182: IMPLEMENTATION OF A RUNNING-JOGGING LANE ON
ALII ' DRIVE
From Councilman James L. K. Dahlberg dated March
28, 1983 , transmitting a letter from Mr . George R.
Schumann, regarding implementation of a
running-jogging lane on Alii Drive.
CHR. FUJII : The Chair recommends that
Communication 1182 be receivedand filed.
Mr . De Luz moved to receive and file
Communication 1182. Seconded by Mr . Schutte
and carried. Opposed: Councilwoman Hale.
Comm. 1182.5 : IMPLEMENTATION OF A RUNNING-JOGGING LANE ON
ALI I ' DRIVE' - RESPONSE FROM MAYOR MATAYOSHI
From Mayor Herbert T. Matayoshi dated May 2 , 1983 ,
responding to Communication 1182 . Suggests the
paving of the makai shoulder of Alii Drive to
accommodate joggers to begin in the vicinity of
the Kona Hilton Hotel and extend to the end of the
road in Keauhou, approximately six miles. Since
funds ($150 ,000) are not presently available,
recommends that the improvements be done in phases
under the highway R/M program when funds are
available. If the project is to be completed at
one time, then inclusion as a CIP item would be
necessary. (PWC-227--Refer to the Committee of
the Whole for consideration in the 1983-84 budget. )
- 10 -
JU1983
4 •
CHR. FUJII : The Chair recommends that
Communication 1182 .5 be received and filed.
Mr . De Luz moved to receive and file
Communication 1182.5 . Seconded by
Mr . Schutte and unanimously carried.
Comm. 1208 : CERTIFICATE OF NET TAXABLE REAL PROPERTY
From Finance Director Stanley Nakamae dated April
27 , 1983 , showing the values at full market value ,
as compared with 60 percent the previous year and
that Improved Residential and Unimproved
Residential classes of property have replaced
Single Family Residential and Two-or-More Family
Residential classes; informs in making the
conversion in classes of property, some
reclassification was necessary; also transmits
details of assessed valuations by zones and
classes, exemptions and appeal information.
CHR. FUJII : The Chair recommends that
Communication 1208 be received and filed.
Mr . Schutte moved to receive and file
Communication 1208 . Seconded by Mr . De Luz
and unanimously carried.
Comm. 1214 : FIS STATEMENTS FOR PROPOSED CIP PROJECTS
From Finance Director Nakamae dated April 29 ,
1983 , submitting for information, the Financial
Impact Statement for projects proposed in the
Capital Budget for FY 1983-84.
CHR. FUJII : The Chair recommends that
Communication 1214 be received and filed.
Mr . Schutte moved to receive and file
Communication 1214 . Seconded by Mr . De Luz .
CHR. FUJII : There' s a motion and second to
receive and file Communication 1214 , any
discussion? Councilwoman Hale.
- 11 -
JO 2193
•
MRS. HALE: Mr . Chairman, if we' re on the
Financial Impact Statement, you' re going so fast
that it' s almost impossible because I have lots of
notes here to keep up with it. Evidently
everybody else has already made up their minds how
they' re going to do everything, but I haven' t. I
want to know why our Financial Impact Statements
are not improved.
(At 10 :18 a.m. , Mr. Domingo returned to the
meeting.)
Last year , we criticized the Financial Impact
Statement because it really doesn' t tell us in
terms of the new positions that are going to be
required for these projects that we're doing. And
it, also, doesn' t tell us, this Financial Impact
Statement is different from last year ' s Financial
Impact Statement because it doesn' t even give us
the appropriations here that---
MR. YAMASHIRO: Mr . Chairman, I suggest that we
have Mr . Nakamae come forward if Mrs. Hale has
some specific questions with regards to specific
projects, so we don' t waste a lot of time and do
proceed with it.
(At this time, the Chair called Mr . Nakamae to
come forward to answer Mrs. Hale' s questions. )
MRS. HALE: Mr . Chairman, the cheapest thing we
have is time. If we aren' t willing to spend our
time in this County Council, I don ' t know why the
rest of you spend so much time trying to get
elected.
CHR. FUJII : Mrs. Hale,---
MR. YAMASHIRO: Point of personal privilege. Our
time should be valuably spent. We should not
squander time like some people accuse us of
squandering money.
- 12 -
JUN 21983
•
CHR. FUJII . Councilman Schutte, you have the
floor .
MR. SCHUTTE: Mr . Chairman, my suggestion is if we
can' t bear the business here and quit this petty
nonsense, I suggest we recess until everybody can.
CHR. FUJII : Councilman De Luz .
MR. DE LUZ: I would like to say that if time is
the cheapest we have, if we spend time and do our
research , we'd be ready to vote. So, my time is
well spent, I must say.
CHR. FUJII : Thank you, Mr . De Luz.
Mr . Nakamae , will you answer some questions for
us? The question was posed and I think you heard
the question, would you like to answer that?
MRS. HALE: I have some questions, Mr . Nakamae.
In last year ' s Capital Improvement Budget, the
projects, I thought that you had the Financial
Impact Statement in the budget but I guess you
didn't, it was separate last year , the Financial
Impact Statement?
MR. NAKAMAE: Yes, it was separate.
MRS. HALE: Okay. This Financial Impact Statement
does not give us, I guess it' s possible to do it
but in as much as this came very late for our
review, I 'm confused about it. It seems as though
you' re proposing for the next six years, a Capital
Improvement Program. But for instance in the
Kailua Police Station, which is proposed that we
float in this year ' s CIP, it' s proposed that we
float $2,750 ,000 worth of bonds. You' re not
proposing to set that on a Financial Impact
Statement until 1985-86 , which is two years from
now, is that the wy I read that?
- 13
JUN 21983
111
MR. NAKAMAE: The appropriation request is made
for the current CIP, the 1983-84 CIP for the
authorization to use for planning purposes, land
acquisition and so forth and that' s going to be on
the way. As to the actual construction date at
this point, I 'm not sure. The actual funding of
the project itself is for the 1984-85 year , I
believe, and that is the year that we have kind of
scheduled out a bond sale at---
(At 10 :22 a.m. , Mr . Domingo left the meeting. )
MRS. HALE: We gave $150 ,000 last year , is that
what we gave for the Kailua Police Station?
MR. NAKAMAE: No. I don' t have those figures with
me, Mrs. Hale, but there were prior appropritions ,
yes, last year plus previous years.
MRS. HALE: So, the project is authorized?
MR. NAKAMAE: The project is authorized.
MRS. HALE: We can go ahead and plan.
MR. NAKAMAE: We can go ahead and plan, apply
lands---
MRS. HALE: I don' t understand then why we ' re
proposing, is this for political purposes to put
$2 ,750 ,000 in this year ' s budget if you don' t even
intend to spend it until 1985-86?
MR. NAKAMAE: Well, we' re still trying to
accumulate the funds through this method.
MRS. HALE: Well, I realize that but we have no
plans to really float those bonds this year , do we?
- 14 -
J M 2 1P
411
MR. NAKAMAE: Not---
MRS. HALE: I see nothing in the budget for a bond
expense money.
MR. NAKAMAE: No, not this year .
MRS. HALE: Mr . Chairman, my personal opinion is
that we are fooling the public. Under Hawaii
Communicatioin System Network , however , there' s
$200 ,000 , which we have in this year ' s budget,
$200 ,000 . Are there prior appropriations because
we ' re not going to float bonds he said but we ' re
going to spend $200 ,000 in fiscal year 1983-84 ,
how are we going to spend it if we don' t float
bonds?
MR. NAKAMAE: That' s an authorizatioin and that
doesn' t mean that there will be an expenditure in
this particular year .
MRS. HALE: But in our Financial Impact
Statements, you have it down here that we' re
expending it in 1983-84 , not 1984-85 . You know,
1983-84 , you' re going to expend it. We' re not
going to float bonds and we ' re going to have the
$200 ,000 . Is the Police Department going to have
$200 ,000 in their budget surplus that we can
borrow from the General fund or are we going to
have enough moneys to borrow from the General
funds, so that the Police Department can expend
this $200 ,000 this year? Because the $2,750 ,000
in this same bond issue is not proposed to be
spent until 1985-86 , but this $200 ,000 is proposed
to be spent this year . I can' t understand where
the $200 .000 is going to come from because if we
aren ' t going to float the money, we aren' t going
to float the bonds, we aren' t going to have the
cash , where' s the $200 ,000 going to come from to
expend it in 1983-84? I 'd like to ask you, Mr .
Committee Chairman of the Finance Committee and
the Committee of the Whole, can you answer that or
did you not have anything to do with this
Financial Impact Statement? You didn' t review it?
- 15 -
JUN 21983
110 •
MR. YAMASHIRO: Mr . Chairman, I think if Mrs. Hale
would review, we have before us another ordinance
for plans to reappropriate certain funds that has
not been utilized in the past bond
appropriations. Perhaps Mr . Nakamae can indicate
whether or not any of those funds are going to be
used for this purpose or whether or not they' re
going to use cash General fund transfers?
MR. NAKAMAE: I believe there is that
appropriation ordinance. I don' t have those
details with me but I believe that there is some
moneys over there set aside for that Kailua
station. But that again is more for the planning
of the facility rather than for the actual
construction of it.
As far as the---
(At 10 : 25 a.m. , Mr . Domingo returned to the
meeting. )
MR. YAMASHIRO: What about the $200 ,000 for the
communication network?
MR. NAKAMAE: That $200 ,000 , I 'm really not sure
whether that' s in part of that $1,080 ,000 ,
Councilman Yamashiro. I don' t recall if it's in
there or not.
But the point is that, yes, I think I explained on
the bond issues that if the bond issue is
authorized and actually placed or sold during the
second half of the fiscal year , then there will be
no debt service charges required for the current
year . However , there would be a requirement for
the expenses of issuance and I admit that I have
not budgeted those expenses of issuance, which for
a $7 million issue if that is the case would come
to about $35 ,000 . I think that there ' s certain
other decisions that' s going to have to be made,
plans made in order to decide whether we are going
to go out at this time or not. And if the bond
market deteriorates, then there' s certainly going
to be some consideration of that fact as to
whether it would be a timely issue or not.
- 16
JUN 2 1983
CHR. FUJII : Any further discussion?
MRS. HALE: Mr . Chairman, my point and this will
hold true to all of you, except for the Police
Station which obviously you can' t spend that much
money this year because it isn't even planned, we
don' t ever have the land you know, the Land Board
hasn' t even given us the land for that Police
Station but except for that, everything else in
this Financial Impact Statement is proposed to be
spent this year , but we are not going to float any
money or bonds. So, either one of two things:
Either we are going to float money for bonds that
we haven' t budgeted any bond expense for or else ,
we do not intend to do these projects this year at
all, they could be floated in the bond issue next
year . Or else, we have surplus money some place
in the General fund that we 're going to transfer
so we can get some projects underway in some areas
wherever the powers that we think it's important
that these things be done. I maintain that if
there is surplus money in the budget that we
should appropriate that surplus money for CIP out
of cash . We should not fool the people that we' re
going to float bonds that we don' t intend to float
and that we' re going to do projects that we don' t
have any money to do, but just because they are
down here. If there is surplus money, then we
should look for ways in which we could further
reduce real property tax with that surplus money.
I really don' t think we ' re doing responsible
budgeting and I will just have to add this as one
of my reasons as to why I don' t think we are.
CHR. FUJII : Mrs. Hale, I feel also that
eventually if you can have moneys, cash moneys
rather than floating bonds, I think this is the
ultimate aim. Councilman Schutte.
MR. SCHUTTE: Mr . Chairman, the property that
Councilwoman Hale speaks of for the Police
Department, will have to come from the Department
of Land and Natural Resources. That will come
around when there is a sufficient amount of
funding for the project. They won' t release the
land until we do have the appropriation ready for
the project.
17
JUN 2 1983
O •
CHR. FUJII : Councilwoman Hale.
MRS. HALE: Does that mean funding, meaning money
or does it mean words on a piece of paper?
MR. SCHUTTE: I think what they are looking at is
the actual funding be made available.
MRS. HALE: The money to float bonds?
MR. SCHUTTE: Once that's available, then that
will, no, once there ' s the money for the project
to begin, then they will release the land.
MRS. HALE: Thank you.
Vote on the motion: Unanimously
carried.
Comm. 1218: FUNDING TO CONTINUE DEPUTY POSITIONS IN THE CAREER
CRIMINAL UNIT OF THE PROSECUTING ATTORNEYS OFFICE
From Mayor Matayoshi dated May 3 , 1983, regarding
a letter from the Prosecuting Attorney requesting
funds to continue two deputy positions in his
Career Criminal Unit.
CHR. FUJII : The Chair would like to state that
this position is in the budget, the Chair
recommends that we receive and file this
communication.
Mr . De Luz moved to receive and file
Communication 1218 . Seconded by Mr . Schutte.
CHR. FUJII : There's a motion and second to
receive and file Communication 1218 , any
discussion?
MRS. HALE: Yes, Mr . Chairman.
- 18 -
JUN 21983
411 •
CHR. FUJII : Councilwoman Hale .
MRS. HALE: Am I to understand that this is in
your amended budget---
CHR. FUJII : That is correct, Mrs. Hale.
MRS. HALE: That I saw this morning? Thank you.
I don' t know whether I 'm for or against it, but I
won' t vote against it. We 're only taking up the
communication at this state. Thank you.
Vote on the motion: Unanimously
carried.
Comm. 1223: APPLICATIONFORGRANTS BYNON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS
From Finance Director Nakamae dated May 9, 1983 ,
submitting for information, a list of the
organizations chosen to receive grants set aside
from the Federal Revenue Sharing Funds .
CHR. FUJII : The Chair would like to state that we
have included all this sum that have been
recommended by the administration to the
non-profit organizations. We also added an
additional $44 ,000 for OEO, Transportation and the
bulk buying program.
Mr . Yamashiro moved to receive and file
Communication 1223 . Seconded by Mr . Schutte
and unanimously carried.
Comm. 1232 : REQUEST FROM SEXUAL ASSAULT SUPPORT SERVICE TO
CONFIRM PROPOSED BUDGET FOR THIS AGENCY INCLUDED
IN THE MAYOR'S BUDGET
From Sandra Kiyota, Director , dated May 13 , 1983 ,
asking Council' s confirmation of the $32,000
included for this program in the Mayor ' s budget
proposal.
- 19 -
JUN 21x9 w°
S 410
CHR. FUJII : The Chair would also like to state
that this was part of Communication 1223 and we
recommend receiving and filing it.
Mr . De Luz moved to receive and file
Communication 1232. Seconded by
Mr . Yamashiro and unanimously carried.
Comm. 1242: INCREASE POLICEMEN IN KONA
From Mr . Rodney Leicht, President, Kona Crime
Prevention Committee, dated March 3 , 1983 ,
requesting additional police manpower for the Kona
area.
(Finance Chairman Fujii refers to the Committee of
the Whole for consideration. )
CHR. FUJII : The Chair recommends that
Communication 1242 be received and filed.
Mr . De Luz moved to receive and file
Communication 1242. Seconded by
Mr . Yamashiro and carried.
Opposed: Councilwoman Hale.
Comm. 1243: EAST HAWAII CULTURAL COUNCIL - PROPOSALS FOR
REVENUE SHARING FUNDS
From Mrs. Frances Sherrard, Chairperson East
Hawaii Cultural Council, dated May 17 , 1983 ,
requesting the Committee of the Whole to consider
the recommendations for revenue sharing funds for
non-profit organizations from this agency as they
deliberate the Mayor ' s proposed budget for 1983-84 .
CHR. FUJII : The Chair recommends that
Communication 1243 be received and filed.
Mr . De Luz moved to receive and file
Communication 1243 . Seconded by
Domingo and carried .
Opposed: Councilwoman Hale.
- 20
JUN 2 'i9$
411 411
Comm. 1245: REQUESTS CHANGE IN PROPOSED BUDGET FOR MAYOR' S
OFFICE
From Mayor Matayoshi dated May 25 , 1983 ,
requesting the following change in the budget for
the Mayor ' s Office: "Delete account 5111.33
(Section 504 Advisory Council) . Transfer $200
from 5111.33 to 5111.18 (Mayor-Comm/Handicapped
115 Miscellaneous Contract Services) and $1,600 to
5111.18 (Mayor-/Comm/Handicapped 112 Mileage and
Auto Allowances) . Eliminate the balance of $653. "
CHR. FUJI : The Chair would like to state that
these changes have been made. The Chair
recommends that Communication 1245 be received and
filed.
Mr . Yamashiro moved to receive and file
Communication 1245. Seconded by Mr . De Luz
and unanimously carried.
Comm. 1246: MAYOR'S REQUEST TO ADJUST THEIR PROPOSED BUDGET TO
REFLECTTHE CHANGES OF THE OFFICE OF MANPOWER
From Mayor Matayoshi dated May 25 , 1983 ,
requesting the proper changes in their budget to
reflect the phasing out of the Office of Manpower
Resources.
CHR. FUJII : The Chair would like to note that
these changes were made. The Chair recommends
that Communication 1246 be received and filed.
Mr . Domingo moved to receive and file
Communication 1246 . Seconded by
Mr . De Luz and unanimously carried.
Comm. 1247 : RECOMMENDS CHANGES TO THE MAYOR'S PROPOSED 1983-84
BUDGET
From Councilwoman Hale dated May 25 , 1983,
submitting proposed changes to the Mayor ' s 1983-84
budget.
- 21 -
JUN 21
• •
Mr . De Luz moved to receive and file
Communication 1247 . Seconded by Mr . Schutte.
CHR. FUJII : There ' s a motion and second to
receive and file Communication 1247. Any
discussion? Councilwoman Hale.
MRS. - HALE: Yes, I 'd just like to make a comment,
Mr . Chairman. I followed up this letter of
May 25 , 1983 , which was done after the budget
hearings, with a letter on May 30 , 1983 , which was
done after the tax rate hearings, and I have
additional proposals. But I understand that you.
could not put my letter of May 30 , 1983 on the
agenda because it didn ' t meet the 72-hour limit.
However , the budget itself, the revised budget
which didn' t meet any kind of limit I found it on
my desk this morning, is on our agenda to be
discussed.
I
CHR. FUJII : Mrs. Hale,---
MRS. HALE: I felt that that would happen,
Mr . Chairman, and so I gave the letter to the
Press because I feel the people should know what I
have proposed.
In this, I would like to point out that I can back
up everything that I have proposed with figures if
you are willing to do it in an open meeting. If
don' t want to discuss it, if you've already made
up your minds that you' re going to do "Exhibit A"
the way you have it, then there' s no point in my
wasting my time. But I can assure you that I have
spent many hours on this budget and that I have
worksheets and that I have figures and I can back
up every proposal that I have made. I have
alternatives for you. You don' t have to choose
one, I can give you three or four alternatives
This last letter , Mr . Chairman, is based on the
fact that my feeling from those public hearings
was that the variable tax rate is unfair and
discriminatory and I would just like to make it
clear because I doubt that most of my colleagues
have read my letter to the effect that what I was
- 22 -
• 411
trying to say was that we set value of real
property in the assessments and that the tax rate
should be something that we 're pu
tting against
property for one rate for all classes of property,
which had been differentiated as to their value by
the assessment. That was brought home very
clearly to us at the public hearings and I think
these examples that were used were very good. And
as a result, I became convinced that the Mayor ' s
variable tax rate was not aood thingand
g I
cannot support a variable tax rate without some
more justification than what the Mayor has given
us.
I think we ' re doing a great disservice to the
people who live in agriculturally zoned
subdivisions to give them a different rate on
their property that is assessed according to
market value. If we don' t correct that inequity,
Mr . Chairman, I think we are just giving an excuse
for the people to take budgeting and the tax rate
into their own hands as I 've warned you in this
letter and so, that is my position.
CHR. FUJII : Mrs. Hale, I just want to say that
your communication has been circulated to all the
members of the Committee of the Whole. We have a
motion on the floor here but under discussion, you
can talk as long as you want.
MRS. HALE: Thank you.
CHR. FUJII : If you want to discuss yor proposal,
fine, we' ll sit here and listen to you, okay?
Councilman Yamashiro.
MRS. HALE: I 'm not going to discuss my proposals,
Mr . Chairman, unless somebody can ask me some
intelligent questions and you' re willing to sit
down and listen. But it appears to me from what
farce has gone on this morning, that---
CHR. FUJII : It' s It s a sad situation for you to say
that there won ' t be intelligent questions from the
members of this Committee of the Whole.
Councilman Yamashiro.
- 23 -
JIM 2 1883
• 411
MR. YAMASHIRO: Thank you, Mr . Chairman. I would
like to comment on Mrs. Hale' s rejection of the
diffential tax rates. She is correct, the
differential tax rate does discriminate. It
discriminates in favor of the residential property
owner andwas a conscious decision on the part of
the Mayor and this Council to discriminate in the
past in behalf of the residential homeowner . It
is not only the people that's agriculturally zoned
that are forced to pay a higher rate of land under
their residences, there are residences in
industrial areas, there are residences in
commercial areas and even the residences in the
large track agricultural areas that are
attributable to their houses are taxed at a higher
rate.
I think what we' re trying to do is to recognize
the fact that our residential property owners have
paid a good portion of the tax base in the past
and they need some relief at the time. We are
trying, therefore, to give them that relief
through this method. The fact that we cannot give
relief to everybody does not mean we should not
give relief to anybody. I think we are taking a
step in the right direction. If she feels that we
should raise the tax rate, the $10 .00 for
everybody that' s, it can be her prerogative so
everybody will be treated the same.
But I feel the differential tax rate is a policy
statement on behalf of the Council that we feel
that residential property owners should be given a
break at this time. It is unfortunate we cannot
take care of all residences in all classes of
lands but that is beyond our control at the
present time. I feel that just because certain
people are not getting the total benefit, that
does not mean that we should not give any benefits.
It' s almost like your homeowner ' s exemption, your
multiple exemptions, every one of these
discriminates to a certain extent against certain
categories of people. But the overall goal should
be to try and give as broad a relief as we
possibly can and this is one step in achieving
that goal.
- 24 -
JLIM 21983
• 411
CHR. FUJII : Councilman De Luz.
MR. DE LUZ: Yes, Mr . Chairman, on the
r 1 r l-
ag icu to a residential, I have a house and two
acres in Paauilo. I dedicated the land. I get
50 percent, so I come out cheap. In some areas,
the ag zone is rated real lower , lower than
residential, too. So it varies in degrees, so in
some areas , I know the residential-ag, like I know
I have one, it is cheap. ,It' s not as high as the
other areas.
CHR. " FUJII : Thank you, Mr . De Luz for that
comment. As a farmer , I also realize that if you
dedicate your land for 20 years, you can get
50 percent lower assessment values and all
buildings, whether they' re agricultural or
otherwise, are all under the same range.
Councilman Dahlberg .
MR. DAHLBERG: Thank you, Mr . Chairman.
Mr . Chairman what you and Councilman De Luz point
out is true for a percentage. I 'd like to ask
Mr . Kiyota if he has any figures that can break
this down, I 'm anxious to see them.
As I look at the differential between $10 .00 and
$8.60 , we' re talking approximately $1.6 million.
What I 'm concerned about is out of this $1.6
million, how much of those tax dollars are paid
for or , what portion of the $1.6 million in tax
dollars is paid by those individuals that live on
lots that for the ag districts would be one acre
or less; for the industrial areas and commercial
areas of this island such as Waiakea Houselots or
Villafranka, up here where in those cases, they do
not share the benefits that you, as a farmer ; I ,
as a rancher ; Frank , as a rancher , share? In
order for them to take advantage out of an acre
. under the present laws, one-quarter acre house
site has to be set aside, the rest of that acre or
three-quarters of an acre is not an economic
unit. So to tell them, you can go fence up your
backyard or you can put in a garden in Palisades
or Puna, in any of the subdivisions in Puna or any
of the subdivisions in Ka'u such as Hawaiian Ocean
View Etates, is not practical. I believe we have
to separate those two because what you and Frank
- 25 -
JUN 2W ;
are saying is true and it helps the landowner that
is either a part-time farmer or a full-time farmer
and has enough land area to make an economic
unit. But to those individuals who live in these
Puna subdivisions or that live in Kona Palisades
and other subdivisions in Kona or that live in
subdivisions in my ditrict, and I 'm sure there ' s
some in Councilman Schutte ' s district and
Councilman Domingo' s district, it's not fair . I
hear what you guys are saying and it' s true. But
for an x-percentage of people and an x-percentage
of that $1.6 million, it' s not true.
Before I give up the floor , I 'd just like to ask
Gary, Gary, do you have any figures---
CHR. FUJII : Excuse me, Mr . Dahlberg.
MR. DAHLBERG: All right, I ' ll ask the Chair .
(At this time, the Chair called Mr . Gary Kiyota,
Real Property Administrator , and
Mr. Stanley Nakamae, Finance Director , to come
forward to answer questions from the Council. )
MR. DAHLBERG: Gary, as I calculate it, and I
could be wrong so correct me if I am, the
difference between the $8 .60 rate and the $10 .00
rate for what are classified as agricultural
district lands under the land use classification
on the State level, it' s a $1.6 million
difference. In those districts, do you have any
figures that would separate the residential areas
of one acre or less from the other areas which I
would call the bulk of the farming community,
whether they be two acres or a thousand acres or
what have you?
MR. KIYOTA: Those figures aren 't available right
now.
MR. DAHLBERG: Would you be able to separate
within that land use classification these two? Do
you understand the distinctions I 'm making,
residential versus agriculture within the
agricultural land use classified areas?
- 26 _
N 1983
• •
MR. KIYOTA: My understanding is you want all the
agricultural zoned lands set up in terms of size
by those one acre or less and greater than one
acre. Additionally, all of those properties that
have improvements on them?
MR. DAHLBERG: Yes, you could separate them just
by those properties that are improved.
MR. KIYOTA: You know, I can tell you the number
of improvements that we have on the total number
of parcels within the ag class. But, we don' t
have the information segregated by size of parcel.
MRDAHLBERG: Isoss 'blfor
it possible e you to do that?
MR. KIYOTA: Right now, we aren' t programmed to do
that. You know, I don' t want to say, no, we
can' t. We can try and look at something to see
what we might be able to do to generate the
information but we' re not ready with that type of
information right now.
MR. YAMASHIRO: Mr . Chairman.
CHR. FUJI I : Yes, Mr . Yamash iro.
MR. YAMASHIRO: Mr . Chairman, I think what they' re
looking at, there are several and there are not
that many, I think Kona Palisades is one, Hawaiian
Beaches is another , they' re pre-existingplan
conforming subdivisions where they' re agricultural
classification of lands was retained. The
boundary change was never done to make it urban
and it was left as ag although lot sizes were down
to 10 ,000 and sometimes even 7 ,500 square feet.
These are the areas that are causing us the
biggest problems, it's because they retain their
agricultural designation. What rate are you
applying to them? You would be applying the
$10 .00 rate or the $8.60?
- 27 -
JUN 1983
r 411
MR. KIYOTA: The agricultural rate.
MR. YAMASHIRO: The agricultural rate, that' s the
problem we have.
MR. DAHLBERG: And then that' s the inequity. Now,
couldn' t you give the material to Rocky and
couldn' t we pump that out, couldn' t we program it?
MR. NAKAMAE: No, it' s not in our computers,
Councilman Dahlberg. But I think we can draw up
the values of---
MR. DAHLBERG: Yes, but the computer does what you
program it to do, so couldn' t we program it?
MRS. HALE: You got to put the information in
before you can take it out.
MR. NAKAMAE: Yes, but then you got to do that and
you know, you have to do this through Honolulu
because they' re the ones performing our computer
services and our data processing for us. But I
think we can pull out the values of single family
residential units in ag lands. Or if not, if we
can identify the subdivisions like---
MR. YAMASHIRO: Can you run it by districts and
you take whatever the Hawaiian Beaches tax key is?
MR. KIYOTA: I mean if you identify the
subdivisions that you want,---
MR. DAHLBERG: Yes, sure.
MR. KIYOTA: We can go that way. But just to say
the agricultural class, you know there are
approximately 80 ,000 agricultural classified
properties.
- 28 -
JUN 21983
• •
MR. DAHLBERG: I 'm sure planning could do it, you
know. They know where the boundary lines are for
the ag use classification by subdivision or by tax
map key.
MR. YAMASHIRO: Could you get us an average value
of a lot like in Paradise Park or Hawaiian Beaches?
You got your bench mark for those areas, do you
offhand know what the bench mark is for Paradise
Park and Hawaiian Beaches?
MR. KIYOTA: No, I don' t.
MR. YAMASHIRO: Then if that is the question,
you' re talking about a difference of $1.40 times
the land value. If your bench mark lot in
Hawaiian Beaches say is $50 ,000 , you' re talking
about $70 difference in rate. If it's more, it' s
$1.40 per thousand.
MR. DAHLBERG: Okay, I would be interested in us
pursuing this to see if we can break it down
because unless we go to a fixed rate
across-the-board, you know there ' s an inequity
here. And, yes, some will say there' s inequity in
the industrial and commercial. But the way I
would answer that is that you know, usually land
values will be, if you ' re looking at these
classifications, ag is on the bottom, then
residential, then industrial then commercial, then
hotel resort. So the real inequity is within this
ag proposed rate of the Mayor ' s or our proposed
$10 .00 rate. I 'd like to know how much of that
tax revenue of what I 've figured out, $1.6
million, you know, would have to be made up in the
budget to accommodate these people that are not
being treated fairly. So anyway, we could pursue
this after the meeting, but I would like to try to
get some handle on this inequity.
MR. NAKAMAE: Plus, you understand that the rate
would apply across-the-board by classes. So even
if you identify those properties, that you
couldn' t do anything about the rate system anyway
unless as you have mentioned that you are going to
equalize the rates .
- 29 -
JUN 21983
• 411
MR. DAHLBERG: Well, I think we could pursue a
special exemption.
MR. NAKAMAE: Well, this is the thing that, I
think if you want to target relief to the
homeowners, the best way to do that is through the
home exemption method where you just increase the
exemption. But that avenue is not open to us at
the present time. And so, the only way if you
want to try some relief at least to some
homeowners is through this method of the variable
tax rates. But unfortunately, as you say, it
applies to classes.
MR. DAHLBERG: Well.
MR. K.IYOTA: I would like to offer that, you know,
of the 80 ,000 agricultural-classed properties ,
there are approximately 14 ,000 to 16 ,000
residentially-used buildings or classified
buildings.
CHR. FUJII : Do you have more questions, Mr .
Dahlberg?
MR. DAHLBERG: No.
CHR. FUJII : Okay, I ' ll give the floor to
Mr . Schutte.
MR. SCHUTTE: Mr . Chairman, I ' ll yield at this
time to Councilwoman Hale.
CHR. FUJII : Mrs. Hale.
MRS. HALE: Mr . Chairman, I would like to thank my
colleagues for at least discussing the matter of
variable tax rate. I wouild like to say, however ,
that I agree with the Tax Department. They have
constantly told us the easiest and best way to
assist the homeowner is increase exemptions.
- 30 -
JUN 21983
111 111
I haven' t seen any proposal come before this
County. .for that and I would like to suggest that
we seriously consider this next year , pursuing the
increase in the homeowner ' s exemption. I , too,
would like to give relief to homeowners but I
don' t think we can do it by discriminating against
one class of homeowners against another .
I would like to ask auestion of Mr . Kiyota
q Y
In say the Hilo area, there are some agricultural
areas in Hilo up in Waiakea Uka, say one-acre
subdivisions---
MR. KIYOTA: Yes .
MRS. HALE: Would this tax rate on agriculture be
against those one-acre subdivisions? Would they
be taxed urban because the Land Use says it' s
urban and the County says it' s ag or would they be
classed ag? Because the Land Use Commission, and
that' s what you' re saying you're using, have
classified those areas as urban but the County
classifies them as ag because they are over ,
they' re an acre or more.
MR. KIYOTA: We continue to follow the Land Use
Commission Districts.
MRS. HALE: You classify a one-acre lot in
Waiakea Uka as urban, as residential, is that
right? They would be in the residential, improved
residential area?
MR. KIYOTA: If that is the case, they would fall
either within the improved or the unimproved.
MRS. HALE: Yes.
MR. KIYOTA: Yes.
- 31 -
JUN . 19:t
411 111
MRS. HALE: Okay. If they have a subdivision, I 'm
thinking of a subdivision at the end of Kawailani ,
that' s.. a one-acre subdivision with very, very
expensive homes on it. Those homes then, that
land will be taxed at the improved residential
rates because it' s complete with underground
utilities and water and electricity and
everything , even though they are one acre in
size. Yet something out in Nanawale which is only
7,500 sq. ft. in size is going to be taxed as an
ag rate because the Land Use Commission had said
that that' s an ag zone, or Hawaiian Beaches. This
is very unfair . We are not taking care of a large
proportion of our young people and our retired
people who have gone into these rural areas and
they didn' t know. Somebody, I saw some reference
and a public thing that they knew what they were
getting into. They didn' t know what they were
getting into, we didn' t even know what we were
getting into. Because until this year , when the
Mayor proposed the differential rate on land of
residential--- . See, he didn' t propose this last
year , he had the rate on buildings and the same
rate on land all over .
I proposed that we take something off the land
without realizing that at the time that we were
making this proposal that there would be this
problem with agricultural subdivisions. I just
thought a residential subdivision was a
residential subdivision, an improved residential
lot. But the problem has arisen because of the
fact that the Mayor is proposing land as a
differential rate against buildings. Now I
maintain that if we 're going to give buildings a
special rate, then we have to give the same rate
to land.
I 'd like to point out to you, Mr . Chairman of the
Committee of the Whole, that you are the
Councilman from the Puna District and that the
number of land parcels, the assessed valuation of
land in the Puna area is higher than in any other
area, so it really affects your district.
Now, I would like to say also that the reason that
we have, as Mr . De Luz says he pays very little ,
is because he has a farm. He has cows up there,
you know? He is a farmer and you' re a farmer I
suppose and Mr . Dahlberg is a farmer . It has been
- 32 -
,IUM 2 1983
O I �a
the policy of the State and the County to
encourage diversified farming, to encourage
agriculture and because of that, you can dedicate
your land and get this special privilege. But
somebody who is living on 12,000 sq. ft. in
Hawaiian Beaches cannot dedicate that 12,000
sq. ft. lot to agriculture, it' s not possible.
And somebody who' s living up on one acre now in
Waiakea Uka in some of those very, very exclusive
subdivisions are going to get the rate of an
improved residential rate, not an agricultural
rate of $10.00 and so forth. But the difference
in those properties comes out in the assessed
valuation. You go try and buy an acre up there,
you know, you're going to pay. And the value of
that is in the assessment because those are not
assessed according to agriculture, they're
assessed according to urban. So the value is in
the assessment. And the tax bill that the average
person pays is the assessment times the rate
equals to dollars. So if we discriminate against
a whole class of people and we make it easy for
some people and hard for others by a variable tax
rate, I don't think we 're doing a good job. And I
don't believe that the tax rate has to be $10.00
across-the-board.
I have a proposal that we could cut $3 million off
our budget and come up with a $9.01 tax rate
across-the-board. If you' re interested I ' ll
discuss that, but I have to know that there 's a
real interest here in my proposal and not just in
passing what you have already printed out before
you.
Taking $3 million off the tax rate, we could
across-the-board go down to $9.01.
CHR. FUJII : Mrs. Hale, I just want to point out
that in my discussion with Mr . Takahashi, we
looked at the figure of $9.00 plus, you know, to
make it straight across-the-board. But I think
the emphasis here was the taxpayers who had
insisted a tax deductionin the residential area.
But as a Chairman, I don' t want to talk too much
and so, I 'll give the floor to Mr . Schutte.
- 33 -
JUR 21983
111 411
MR. SC$UTTE: Mr . Chairman, you know this
particular ag parcels I know it' s a problem
because of the land use designation in the
particular areas. But I think you've got to look
at the other side, also.
There are some other areas that are agriculture,
three acres, five acres that have one residence on
it, are we to assess these people in the same
manner or give them the same benefits as the
bonafide residential owners? The people in--- . I
think Councilwoman Hale has also implied at
various times of a rich man' s subdivision or
gentlemen' s farmers , etc. , and here are areas that
you have, three, five, ten-acre parcels which have
been made mention of as gentlemen farms, that you
have a situation where you would be giving them
the same benefit of the doubt as you would have in
these other residential areas. It's unfortunate
that that land use classification hasn' t changed.
I think to correct it would be to correct the land
use classification or designation of that
particular area to improve residential instead or
leaving it in agricultural.
What I 'm trying to point out is that you have the
other side of the coin to look at because you do
have areas where you could have people come in,
and I have no problem with people who want to put
up quarter-of-a-million dollar homes or
half-a-million dollar homes or as is commonly
referred to as millionaires or gentlemen farmers
coming in, I also believe they should pay their
fair share if that 's the case. If they are
actively involved in agriculture, that' s something
else. But if they want to have a five-acre
estate, fine, pay the bill on it. I 've got no
problems on that. The thing is if you' re going to
make a law that relieves that problem, that
situation, you' re going to have to make another
law which also attacks these other big parcels.
That's all I hav to say for now, Mr . Chairman.
CHR. FUJII: Thank you, Mr . Schutte. Mr . De Luz .
MR. DE LUZ : Gary, you know Hawaiian Beaches and
some of these areas, what the lots going for ,
about $10 ,000 , $12,000 valuation?
- 34 -
JUN-
219:4
110
S
MR. KIYOTA: In that neighborhood, yes.
MR. DE LUZ : So, you' re talking $12 difference in
$1.40? Thank you, Gary.
CHR. FUJII : Thank you, Mr . De Luz. Mr . Dahlberg.
MR. DAHLBERG: I ' ll yield.
CHR. FUJII : Thank you, Mr . Dahlberg. Mrs. Hale.
MRS. HALE: Mr . Chairman, I 'd just like to answer
Councilman Schutte' s concern. I have been
concerned about gentlemen' s estates and if we
assess gentlemen' s estates on market values, we'd
take care of the problem. If they' re going to
build half-a-million dollar houses, their
assessments are going to be half-a-million dollars
and the rate we apply against that assessment will
mean that they will pay their fair share of
taxes. If they, in fact, do dedicate their lands,
if they have three or five acres and dedicate it
to agriculture, that's the area that I think we
really have to tighten up to make sure that this
o just is not �u t a way of getting around the
tax rate.
As far as the rate is concerned, the rate I feel
across all lands should be the same. And if we
are out to encourage industry, for instance, then
why do we give a higher tax rate against
industrial land or commercial land or hotel land
then we' re giving against real property? We ' re
not really taking care of the real property tax
owner until we increase their assessments.
Anything else we do is only cosmetic. We are, if
we go out in the world market and try to advertise
our community as a good place to come and
establish a business , they' re going to say what
are your taxes? We're going to say we 're going to
tax you more for your industrial land or your
commercial land or your resort land than we do
some other lands. That' s not the way to take care
of the problem and it's certainly not the way to
entice industry to come to our island to take care
of our economic problems.
- 35 -
JUS 21983
411 111
So I don' t believe that a tax rate, I think I have
become convinced the more I thought about it and
it came up primarily because of the residential
problem, but the more I thought about the thing,
the more I became convinced that philosophically,
it is not right to have a differential tax rate.
The rate should be the same. We should
distinguish between the values of property on the
assessment, the market value of that property and
market value times tax rate will equal your tax
bill. So those properties that are more expensive
will pay more. But I cannot buy a variable tax
rate at this stage unless I can hear some better
arguments than I 've heard so far this morning .
CHR. FUJII : Mr . Yamashiro.
MR. YAMASHIRO: Thank you, Mr . Chairman. From
hearing the statements made to date by my good
colleague ori my right, it would seem that she has
never heard of a variable tax rate in favor of
residential lots. We 've had a variable tax rate
in favor of residential lots in excess of the last
10 years, it' s called the homeowner ' s exemption.
You like varying it someplace else but it's still
a variable tax rate because homeowners pay less
because they get an exemption. All we' re saying
is the same thing, homeowners are a special class
of people, they' re getting a special tax rate, be
it called a homeowner ' s exemption or a variable
rate on land, it is both the same thing.
You' re right, we are discriminating, but we 're
discriminating on a policy basis. We have stated
that policy by creating such things as the home
exemption, that residential taxpayers should be
given some sort of preference. We are finally
recognizing that. Perhaps the homeowner ' s
exemption is not sufficient at this present time.
Our big problem here, and I would be more than
happy to work with my good friend from Ka'u to try
and work on some relief for the problem. But I do
not see working to say that just because we cannot
benefit everybody, we should not benefit anybody
is a good policy. I think we are trying to take a
step. No matter how small it is, no matter how
imperfect it is, it is a step in the right
direction by giving as many residential property
owners the relief we feel that they are due. We
should work with the Land Use Commission and if
- 36 -
JUN 21924
• 411
Mr . Dahlberg can construct a one time one shot
exemption to take care of this one situation that
we have in these pre-existing agriculture
subdivisions, I would fully support that. But I
do not feel that there is anything wrong with the
variable tax rate. I do not feel that there is
anything wrong to discriminate in favor of the
residential property owners. Thank you.
CHR. FUJII : Thank you, Mr . Yamashiro. Mrs. Hale.
MRS. HALE: Well, I 'd like to say that I think
we' re doubly discriminating. It' s been pointed
out this morning that anybody who lives in
Kihilani Gardens, or whatever you call it up there
the one-acre subdivision in Hilo, is going to pay
the improved residential rate. Anybody that lives
in Hawaiian Paradise Park on one acre is going to
pay the agricultural rate and I don' t think that' s
fair . I still feel I am for helping the homeowner .
I thoroughly understand the variable tax rate with
home exemption, and I think that home exemption is
the only way to go to assure that we are really
helping homeowners. Because what we are doing in
this case, we have a lot of people who live in
residential areas who don' t even live here and
we' re giving them the rate because their house or
their apartment happens to be in a residential
zone. This is a rental, it' s not a homeowner 's---
MR. DE LUZ : But they are not getting home
exemption.
MRS. HALE: The way to help homeowners is to raise
the home exemption and then, we know that people
are living in there, we' re helping homeowners.
That' s the only way to realistically help home
exemptions, to help homeowners. And until we do
that, I 'm still not convinced that we should go by
the variable tax rate.
I appreciate your philosophy and I respect your
concerns and I respect your opinions. You have a
perfect right to your opinion and I have a perfect
right to my opinion and that's the way, I guess,
the cards will have to fall
MR. YAMASHIRO: Mr . Chairman, one last thing.
- 37 -
JU H 2193
• 110
CHR. FUJII: Mr . Yamashiro. .
•
MR. YAMASHIRO: I think that is, I want to clear
up one thing, that it ' s not that this Council or
the counties have not been working on this
matter . Mr . Schutte has been working very hard.
I know he' s very frustrated at times with a
proposal to provide a means of property tax relief
which would precede residential assessment and
give a tremendous across-the-board relief. We are
having many sessions on it, it' s not an easy
problem. It' s got great revenue impacts. But
it' s not something that is forgotten.
We would like to say that your $9 .01 tax rate
would be 29 cents higher than ours and what you
would be saying to the residential owner ' s , they
should come up with 40 cents more than under our
proposal.. You' re effectively raising the tax rate
on the class of improved residential properties
just for this one problem, like 40 cents.
CHR. FUJII : Mr . Schutte.
MR. SCHUTTE: Yes, Mr . Chairman, I think Gary can
vouch for this. I sat hours with him and we 've
gone over all different phases of the assessing
procedures of the exemptions, what type of
exemptions could be done and just how we can turn
around and give the residential property owner a
little more benefit than this tax rate without
passing the burden off to any other classification
or any other individuals.
It is not a very simple matter to sit down and try
to work something out. You can' t just, can' t pick
numbrs out of the air . You know, the easiest way
is to say we' ll just give them the exemption but
the exemption is not full proof. You have people
that claim exemptions that do not necessarily
reside there. There ' s still violations in regards
to that, so nothing is full or sound-proof type of
thing where it' s just going to run according to
what the book says it should be done. No way is
that going to happen. We looked at percentages of
exemptions and everything else to see which comes
out the fairest and what it amounts to is every
year , you've got to go back statewide and change
that exemption.
-. 38 -
JUN 2 `i9 ;
We ' re trying to look at something that you don' t
have to continuously move every year and have a
joint state effort in which to accomplish that
exemption. Because the exemption what it was
worth in 1977 , may be amounted to 50 percent of
the assessed value of a particular parcel; today,
may be only worth 35 percent or represent only 35
percent of that value. But constantly as long as
you have appreciation in value, you' re going to
have to change that exemption in order to keep it
so that it reflects the 50 percent difference if
that' s what the various Councils within the State
decided they should do.
But when you look at these variations in tax
rates, there' s nothing new. You have, they say
we' re very prejudicial to one particular item or
we' re giving a particular benefit to other
people.. You do it to your agricultural rates when
you have through your dedication. You do it
through your exemption for your homeowners. You
do it for your exemptions for the handicapped. So
we have these things already on the books.
What we' re trying to do, as Councilman Yamashiro
stated, is try to give that benefit to the
residential, the bona fide property owner that
wants to live here, wants to reside here and try
to give him some benefit so that he ' s not actually
taxed out of his house. You're going to have the
people come in and speculate, you're going to have
speculation from day to day, we all live on
speculation. So you know, you can' t cut that out
that' s what keeps things moving, it's healthy for
the economy. But by the same side, you want to be
able to take those people that just want to reside
and be able to give them some benefits that they
can receive in just being a resident without the
intent of speculating and I think that' s what
we' re constantly trying to do and the easiest way
at this particular time is to change and make a
differential in the tax rate so that you can have
some difference for the residential property owner .
Unfortunately, like I said, nothing is perfect.
The Land Use laws have not been changed and that's
unfortunate. I believe that in changing it and
making the different changes, you've got to find
out exactly down the line because what' s going to
happen, because sometimes you can take care of one
problem and create many more and I think that' s
what the biggest thing that we have to look at
today. So it' s just not a matter of opening a book
- 39 -
JU N 210
• 111
and changing a whole section. It's the long-term
effect that takes the time to see what the
ramifications are. Thank you, Mr . Chairman.
CHR. FUJII : Thank you, Mr . Schutte. To the
audience, I just want to explain that the
counties , individual counties can set the tax
rate, but when it comes to exemptions, the home
exemptions areas the three counties will have to
agree. You know, when the Constitutional
Convention met and they gave the powers to the
counties for the assessment powers which were
originally held by the State, they had made those
provisions where three counties will have to agree
and Mr . Schutte' s proposal that came up sometime
ago has been bogged down in the State Association
of Counties level. Our representative on that
committee is Mr . Yamashiro, who is the Chairman of
the Real Property Tax Committee and Mr . Schutte ,
who also represents us. So, I just want to
explain to you why Mr . Schutte 's proposal has not
moved because two other counties would have to
approve. Councilman Dahlberg.
MR. DAHLBERG: You know for awhile, I thought we
might be losing sight -of the forest in the trees .
But I 'm hardened, Councilman Schutte, to hear your
statements and your commitment because there is an
equity here that we 've all agreed upon and I
really believe we must pursue this special
exemption. I 'm trying to get a handle on how much
of an inequity it is.
We've all learned as politicians that we can' t
please all of the people all of the time but there
seems to be a very large amount of people on
parcels that can' t take advantage of dedicating
their land, like I can, because it's too small.
They just can' t keep even one animal on three
quarters of an acre and for this class, we must
try to ascertain how large that class is and I 'll
work with you in the coming weeks and see if we
can. And then, Councilman Schutte, I hope that
you will pursue this idea of a special exemption,
you know, so that we can try to take as much of
the inequity if not all of it out of the rate.
Another issue. Councilwoman Hale, I 'm interested
in hearing your $3 million cut approach. Could we
take couple of minutes now for you to outline
where you would cut $3 million.
- 40 -
JUN 21933
•
MRS. HALE: I think the proper time is when we
take ,up the budget.
MR. DAHLBERG: Oh, okay. Well, you offered it a
little while ago, okay.
MRS. HALE: We're only on the tax right now.
MR. DAHLBERG: Well, you offered it and you said
nobody wanted to---
MRS. HALE.: We aren' t setting a tax rate even at
this time. I would be very happy to get you the
information when we take up the budget.
MR. DAHLBERG: Okay, as a colleague, I would be
interested in hearing your proposal today---
MRS. HALE: Thank you.
MR. DAHLBERG: While we' re deliberating the budget
then. Thank you.
CHR. FUJII : Thank you, Mr . Dahlberg. Mrs. Hale.
MRS. HALE: Yes, I 'd just like to say that I
appreciate Councilman Schutte 's efforts to try to
solve the problem with his proposal of a
dedication of residential land to residents. I 'm
not sure that that proposal is going to be that
popular to solve the problem. People are used to
home exemptions, we could tie the home exemption
to a percentage, you know, so it would go up
automatically, not much more than your tax bill if
the percentage had to change or the dollar value
had to change according to the percentage that you
were going to raise your real property tax. There
are other ways to tackle it.
There has been no proposal to come before this
Council except Mr . Schutte ' s proposal for the
dedication of residential lands. There has been
no proposal that we have voted upon although it' s
been discussed many times to just have an overall
- 41
JUN 2 19..;
411.
increase in home exemption tied to a percentage
rate rather than a dollar rate or however might be
most feasible .
I would suggest, Mr. Nakamae, that the real
property tax law that we passed upon which you
base your assessments gives you as Director of
this Department the responsibility of suggesting
to the Council the changes in real property tax
law and I haven ' t seen anything from you. I think
it would be very good if you would write down for
us in the coming years, what your proposal would
be to increase home exemptions to take care of
this problem because I 've heard you and your
department say many times, the easiest way is an
across-the-board home exemption. I think as part
of your responsibility as Director , if you would
point this out to the County and give us a
proposal, we 'd have definite upon which we could
chomp our teeth .
In the meantime, all we ' re discussing now is the
report before us from the Real Property Tax
Administrator on the assessed valuations. So I
see no point in further discussion on this, we
aren' t at this point setting either a tax rate or
the budget.
CHR. FUJII : Okay.
MR. YAMASHIRO: I think we ' re on Communication
1247 from Mrs. Hale, and the motion is to receive
and file. I just want to clarify what we' re doing.
CHR. FUJII : Okay. Mr . Dahlberg.
MR. DAHLBERG: You know with all due respect to my
colleagues, you know, Mrs. Hale, this is an
appropriate time for you to give your $3 million
budget cut projection.
MRS. HALE: Okay, if you want to do it, if you
want it now, fine. I ' ll be willing to give it to
you.
It isn ' t in theo we' re mmunication we re talking about,
however . My communication there, I told you how I
was going to get it. I was going to take the
- 42 -
JUN 21983
111- •
overtime and I was going to take the vacant
positions that are presently in the budget and it
came to, I think I gave you the figures in that
communication, but that was based upon a variable
tax rate which as I 've said, I 've changed my mind
on as a result of the additional public hearing
that we've had on the tax rate. So I 've had to
come out with a different tax rate than the $9 .74 .
MR. YAMASHIRO: Helene, do you have a copy of that
so that we could duplicate copies---
MRS. HALE: What?
MR. YAMASHIRO: And pass it on to everybody?
Let' s take a short break while we have it
duplicated.
RECESS: At 11: 15 a.m. , Mr . Yamashiro requested for a short
recess.
RECONVENE: The meeting reconvened at 11:35 a.m.
(Councilmembers De Luz and Schutte did not return
to the meeting at this time. )
CHR. FUJII : Mrs. Hale, you have the floor .
MRS. HALE: Mr . Chairman, if we 're on
Communication 1247 , I 'd like to say that I 've
finally have had a little chance to look over this
proposed budget that came from somewhere. I
assume it came from you or from our Council
Chairman, I don' t know whose adjustments to
revenues these are but I 'm very happy to note that
you have taken some of my basic ideas and that is,
that you are setting up an overtime account, which
is what I suggested as one way that we could save
some money. Your figures don' t come out to
exactly the same as mine , but my idea was in the
$3 million budget that' s option 3 if you'll look
on that first page (referring to her proposal) ,
that' s taking off of the $63 million that we
have. Present budget, $63 million something, so
$60 ,619 ,453 , would be $3 million off. You could
- 43 -
JUN 19::`,
111 •
come out with a uniform property tax rate of
$9.01. The budget cut would be $3 million. The
overtime cut would be $679 ,740 . Now I haven' t had
a chance to compare what your overtime cut is on
this.
MR: YAMASHIRO: Ours is roughly, about $600 ,000 . . .
MRS. HALE: You've got $611,000 , yes. Mine is a
cut, yours is an appropriation.
MR. YAMASHIRO: It's the same thing.
MRS. HALE: Whatever , it' s the same thing, okay.
Vacant positions. I don' t know how you came out
with your proposal of only $399,000 in vacant
positions, unless since this position report was
given to us, which is dated as I understand it, as
of April---
MR.
prit---MR. YAMASHIRO: No, we got an updated report.
MRS. HALE: You probably got an updated report. I
took mine from the position report that we had
here and I came out with vacant positions of
$1,265 ,000 . Now if that has been substantially
reduced to $399 ,000 , then something ' s been going
on in the last couple of months in this County
that I think we should be aware of because that' s
a tremendous reduction in vacant positions as in
your report that this was, I gather dated sometime
in March or April and this report that you've come
out with today.
I 'm suggesting that the Council cut as good faith ,
$119 ,000 off our budget. That we cut $45,000 off
the Mayor ' s budget, which would be a 10 percent
cut in each of us. I think that as leaders of the
County, that it would be fairly easy to cut this.
I have proposals as to where we could cut. We
could cut more off our travel. We could cut more
off of our NACo expenditures. At the time that I
did this, we had an unfunded position that we have
now recently funded and hired. But I 'm sure that,
for instance, if we charged the postage and
telephone back to the other agencies as I think we
- 44 -
JUN 2 1983
411 411
should, we could come up with more than $119,000 ,
but that' s just a. rough 10 percent cut. It is not
an election year next year , we could probably cut
some more out of the Election expenses. I 'm not
proposing that we cut any particular positions but
there is enough in travel and NACo and HSAC and
local and interisland and mainland travel on the
County' s budget. We find enough money to send the
Planning Commission, for instance, out of our
budget, you know. These kinds of things, I don' t
think it's that difficult to find $119,000 .
Equipment. I got this idea from our Council
Chairman who said we should defer all equipment
purchases. And so that comes to $1,100 ,000 , going
through this book and taking out all the equipment
account.
(Mr . Dahlberg left the meeting at 11:38 a.m and
returned to the meeting at 11:40 a.m. )
R & D. I have said that if you don' t want to buy
my proposal, which I didn' t think you would, then
I think the $300 ,000 we' re spending for promotion
of tourism is a waste of money and that could at
least take the R&D budget by downing that. I
think we could take the R&D budget down by
one-half, we could take off, if we can' t find it
find the Council, we could it from R&D for
another $100 ,000 easily. Even if we just take the
studies that I heard my colleagues criticize
during the R&D budget that should not be funded.
So it would come out with a balance then of minus
$23 ,170 , which I felt would in a $63 million
budget was easily adjusted.
(Mr . De Luz came into the meeting at 11:42 a.m. )
Revenues from real property tax then would be
$36 ,238 ,613 . And if you want the details to it, I
showed you the figures, we have xeroxed all the
figures that we took from Equipment Purchases ,
from Vacant Positions Purchases and from Projected
Overtime Purchases. And it depends on how much
you want to set up in that overtime position.
(Mr . Schutte came into the meeting at 11:45 a.m. )
I have had a number of people come into my office
from the County in the last two weeks and tell me
that the Police Department has put out an order
that they are to use up their overtime. I can' t
prove this, Mr . Chairman, but I would just like to
- 45 -
,`� 19:4
• •
say that I .think we should watch that if in the
next two months theovertime of the Police
Department has increased drastically, I want to
know why...
(Mr . De Luz left the meeting at 11:48 a.m. )
I 've heard this in Parks & Recreation. That they
have sent out an order and that they are doing
more overtime in this department as a way of using
up their budgets. I think it' s very important
that we control the overtime by making them come
to us for overtime and justifying that overtime
expenditure.. That was an amazing thing to me to
find becausethis is the first time we've ever
gotten this position report that has overtime
budgeted in it. Up to now, I 'd always assume that
we were budgeting salaries and wages based on the
positions that we approved in the Salary
Ordinance. We' re not, we' re budgeting salaries
and wages not only on the positions we approve in
the Salary Ordinance but on estimated overtime ,
estimated vacation time, estimated temporary
assignments. We didn' t even go through and take
the money that could be gotten. I 'm sure that
there' s at least a half a million dollars in this
budget in temporary assignments.
(Mr . Yamashiro left the meeting at 11:48 a.m. )
Meals and Other Compensation. I propose in my,
and I don' t think it got into my final draft, but
one of the things that I would like to see us do
is that I would like to see us break down travel,
travel into the inter-island travel, intra-island
travel, inter-island travel budgets, and mainland
travel budgets, so we'd really know where we ' re
spending that travel. I think all of us realize
that this is a big island and to service this
island there has to be a lot of intra-island
travel from one district to another .
MR. SCHUTTE: That's right.
MRS. HALE: We could really cut down on
inter-island travel. I read very few reports from
anybody that goes to Honolulu telling me what they
got out of their Honolulu trips or why they go or
what they' re bringing back to us. And as far as
mainland travel is concerned, I think that should
really be justified. I am never opposed to
mainland travel if it's going to be something
that' s going to benefit this County and that all
- 46 -
JUN 2 1983
s II!
of us can get something out of. But when the
reports come back made by staff and not by the
people who actually go, I don' t think that shows
us what we' re getting out of this and we're not
sharing with each other the ideas that we get out
of this kind of travel.
So, these are areas that we could even break down
more. I thought I was being very conservative to
take $3 million out of this budget and a $3
million budget could take us down to $9 .01.
I 'd like to point out one mistake in this letter ,
and that is that there was a typographical error
on page two, because it said that we should take
this money, on page three, I said the Health
Insurance Fund, that was not what I meant. I
meant the Self Insurance Fund, it came out wrong
on the. tape. So in the third paragraph from the
bottom, the $300 ,000 in the Self Insurance Fund.
If you look at the monthly report for the Self
Insurance Fund as of the end of April, there was
still in the Self Insurance account, there was an
appropriation of $208 ,352 ,000 , that we didn't
spend any of it for .
MR. NAKAMAE: That' s some $25,000 that we---
MRS. HALE: Well now, but I 'm talking at the end
of April.
In the Contingency Fund, we had supposedly an
appropriation of $170 ,900 ; there ' s still
$155 ,900 . We looked at every other department.
We didn' t even consider this in the budget
review. We didn' t even take up these things. But
every department, I heard Councilman Schutte ask
them, you've got so much money left over in this,
are you going to use it up within the year? Now
maybe, we' re using up the Contingency Fund, but
you know, we didn ' t even ask these questions.
There' s still $155 ,900 .
Provision for Compensation Adjustment. I don ' t
really know what that's, is that supposed to be
for collective bargaining or is this for
reallocation of positions, or what is it for? You
see everytime we reallocate positions if you
realize over the past year , the departments very
seldom have ever wanted any more money, they
already have it. I never could figure out how
- 47 -
JUN 21983
411 411
they've always had this money in their budget.
It' s because they' re taking from overtime or other
things that we didn' t even know were in there.
But there's still $75,000 left in Provisions for
Compensation Adjustment and the Legislature has
not done anything for Compensation Adjustment. So
this just means either reallocations or
anticipated salary increases that I don' t see how
we can budget because they have not even passed
the Legislature .
I 'm willing to answer any questions about my
budget but I think that we could do it. And
although it would, as Council Chairman Yamashiro
points out, it would be an increase over your
proposal as far as the residential homeowners is
concerned, it would be an across-the-board, even
fair rate, and it would be way below what we had
told the people that we would do which was $10 .74
last year .
CHR. FUJII : Mrs. Hale, if you don' t mind, I have
a question here. But rather than to follow
through the question, I 'd like to call a recess at
this time so we could all go to lunch. We can
then come back and start the meeting at 1:30 p.m. ,
would that be alright?
MRS. HALE: Fine.
CHR. FUJII : No objections?
MR. DAHLBERG: Mr . Chairman.
CHR. FUJII : Mr . Dahlberg.
MR. DAHLBERG: Just one minute, because I just
have a couple of things that Mrs. Hale might want
to work on while we' re on recess.
Councilwoman Hale, you know my questions on your
first breakdown, the $1.161 million, is this an
across-the-board percentage for each of these
departments?
MRS. HALE: You' re talking about which category
now, the budget reduction options or what are you
talking about?
- 48 -
JUN 21983
MR. DAHLBERG.: Okay, on the Equipment---
MRS. HALE: This is just what was in the budget in
this thing for equipment for every department. I
just took out all the equipment---
MR. DAHLBERG: All the equipment? •
MRS. HALE: Purchases that they have asked for .
MR. DAHLBERG: Okay. And then in your letter ,
there' s one additional mistake that I 'd like to
share with you and that would be that under the
Charter , we' re required to do that auditing. So
that $78,000 or x-number of dollars have to be
there for the auditing.
MRS. HALE: I realize that and I 'm not suggesting
we take that away, it's not in my proposal. I 'm
suggesting that we expand the audit to include a
management study along with it and use part of
this $78 ,000 in addition to the $100 ,000 that I
suggested for a management audit.
MR. DAHLBERG: Where would that money come from
then the additional money you need, over and above
the audit?
MRS. HALE: Well, I told you in my letter here.
I 'm saying that that money for the audit could
come from the Compensation for Salary Adjustment
account, which is in this budget as $300 ,000 .
MR. DAHLBERG: Okay. And then on your 10 percent
cut on accounts from the Mayor , is that just---
MRS. HALE: It's just across-the-board, it doesn' t
mean eliminating anybody---
MR. DAHLBERG: So it' s a directive then, to the
Council or to the Mayor?
- 49 -
JUN 21983
411 111
MRS. HALE: That' s right to cut down on our
expenditures.
MR. DAHLBERG: R&D, that' s just a directive to
them, it' s not out of any---
MRS. HALE: No, I 'm not taking, I just think that
that $300 ,000 which is presently allocated for
tourism, which I think is a waste of money.
MR. DAHLBERG: Okay, thank you. Thank you,
Mr . Chairman.
CHR. FUJII : Thank you Mr . Dahlberg. If there' s
no objection, the Chair will call a recess for
lunch. We' ll come back at 1:30 p.m.
RECESS: At 11:50 a.m. , Chairman Fujii called for a recess .
RECONVENE: The meeting reconvened at 1:35 p.m.
PRESENT: Mr . Tomio Fujii , Chairman
Mr . Frank De Luz , III
Mrs. Helene H. Hale
Mr . William S. Kawahara
Mr . Stephen K. Yamashiro
ABSENT & Mr . James L. K. Dahlberg
EXCUSED: Mr . Takashi Domingo
Miss Merle K. Lai
Mr . Spencer K. Schutte
Also present were the following:
Mr . Gary Takemura, Controller
Mr . Gail Rock, Data Processing Manager
Mr . Harry Takahashi , Legislative Auditor
Miss Jane Araki , Council Services Secretary
Mrs. Alberta K. Nicolas , Senior Clerk Stenographer
DISCUSSION CHR. FUJII : Councilwoman Hale, you have the floor .
CONTINUED ON
COMM. 1247 :
MRS. HALE: Well, I have presented my proposal.
If anybody has any questions, Mr . Chairman?
CHR. FUJII.: Are there any questions to Mrs.
Hale' s proposal?
- 50 -
NS 21983
411 411
MR. DE LUZ : Mr . Chairman.
CHR. FUJII : Councilman De Luz .
MR. DE LUZ : I think after all her talking, she' s
beginning to listen to me. She still cannot match
our proposal but I think she realizes that we ' re
on the right track.
MRS. HALE: You mean you realize that I 'm on the
right track, is that what you mean?
MR. DE LUZ : No.
MR. YAMASHIRO: I call for the question to receive
and file Communication 1247.
CHR. FUJII : Question has been called for .
Vote on the motion: Carried.
Opposed: Councilwoman Hale.
MR. YAMASHIRO: In deference to Mrs. Hale, some of
her items have been considered in the proposal
that we would like to present. We are looking at
an average tax rate of $9 .30 on all other
properties except improved residential and $8 .60
on residential. Her $9 .01 across-the-board would
essentially mean balancing the tax rate, you know,
back to the residential homeowner which I don' t
think I 'd be willing to do. But you know, I think
our rate is probably the same. I think our budget
is about $600 ,000 higher than yours and we 'd be
collecting $36 . 9 million as opposed to $36. 2 ,
we' re pretty close.
MR. DE LUZ: And on improved residential, we' re
lower .
CHR. FUJII : The Chair would like to call a short
recess.
RECESS: At 1: 37 p.m. , Chr . Fujii called for a short recess.
-
51
JUN 21983
•
411
RECONVENE: The meeting reconvened at 1: 43 p.m.
PRESENT: Mr . Tomio Fujii , chairman
Mr . James L. K. Dahlberg
Mr . Frank De Luz , III
Mr . Takashi Domingo
Mrs. Helene H. Hale
Mr . William S. Kawahara
Mr . Spencer K. Schutte
Mr . ,Stephen K. Yamashiro
ABSENT & Miss Merle K. Lai
EXCUSED
Also present were the following:
Mr . Stanley Nakamae, Finance Director
Mr . Gary Takemura, Controller
Mr . Gail Rock , Data Processing Manager
Mr . Harry Takahashi, Legislative Auditor
Miss Jane Araki , Council Services Secretary
Mrs. Alberta K. Nicolas, Senior Clerk Stenographer
CHR. FUJII : Before we start, I just want to say
that' Merle Lai was not able to attend our meeting
because she is in Honolulu. So I just wanted to
express her regrets for not being here. She is
excused.
ORDINANCE OPERATING BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR JULY 1, 1983 TO
BILL 967: JUNE 30 , 1984
Appropriates estimated revenues for expenditures
by the County of Hawaii for the Fiscal Year
July 1, 1983 to June 30 , 1984 .
Mr . Schutte moved that a Bill for an
Ordinance numbered 967 , pass second and
final reading. Seconded by Mr . De Luz .
CHR. FUJII : There' s a motion to approve
Bill 967 . Mr . Yamashiro.
AMENDMENT: Mr . Yamashiro moved to amend Bill 967 , with
the attached Exhibit "A" , as circulated;
recommends passage of Bill 967 , Draft 2 , on
second and final reading. Seconded by
Mr . Schutte .
- 52 -
• 411
a motion and second,FUJII : There' s an y
discussion? Mr . Yamashiro.
MR. YAMASHIRO: Mrs. Hale, this bill proposes to
enact a budget of $64 ,870 ,744 of which real
property taxes would make up $36 ,942 ,438. The
proposed real property tax rate under this
proposal will be $8. 60 for land and buildings on
improved residential classes of land; $8.60 for
all buildings in other classes of land, and $10 .00
for all lands other than residential.
Basically, the proposal calls for the removal of
all funded vacant positions in the County budget.
TheP ooling of all overtime in the proposed County
budget, and the reduction of that overtime total
by 50 percent. We've also proposed various
appropriations for motor vehicles and provided for
the eventual dissolution of the Motor Pool
revolving fund during the current operating year .
The sum totals are in the adjusted revenue
explanation sheet that has been handed out which
outlines the cuts in Travel which is 18 percent
across-the-board for all departments and the
vacant positions and overtime reductions in the
various departments.
CHR. FUJII : The Chair would also like to state
that there will be a proposal for language change
at our---
MR. YAMASHIRO: There may be a proposal of a
language change.
MR. SCHUTTE: There will be a proposal.
CHR. FUJII : There will be a proposal at our
meeting of June 8, 1983 , that will be the full
Council meeting. This Committee of the Whole is a
proposal to the full Council.
MR. YAMASHIRO: Alright.
MRS. HALE: What is---
- 53 -
JUN 2 W
411 411
MR. DE LUZ: Mr . Chairman, you know on the $3
million so-called increase over last year , where
Mr . Yamashiro explained that, we' re below that
because, did you explain that? We' re below that
because the $1 million sum is new money. So a lot
of people have been testifying about getting their
breaks back to 1982.
MR. YAMASHIRO: If you will look at the amount of
money that' s going to be realized by this
proposal, $36 ,942 ,438 , the budgeted amount in the
Operating Budget last year was only approximately
$36 ,000 ,000 also. So we' re holding the line
pretty much for the revenues that we received last
year from real property taxes.
MR. DE LUZ: But there' s lot of new money.
MR. YAMASHIRO: The other changes in the budget
are the results of increases in the Federal, in
either funds balances, the liquidation of the
Motor Pool fund and savings that are generated by
the frozen positions and things like that.
CHR. FUJII : Okay. Thank you, Mr . De Luz and
Mr . Yamashiro. Mr . Dahlberg .
AMENDMENT: Mr . Dahlberg moved to further amend Bill
967 , Draft 2, by directing the
Administration to cut $215 ,000 from the
Department of Research & Development and
4 from Mass Transit. Seconded
$3 1,577 by
Mr . Kawahara for the purpose of discussion.
CHR. FUJII : There ' s a motion and second, are
there any further discussion. Councilwoman Hale.
MRS. HALE: Why did you pick on Mass Transit? I
can understand Research & Development, I certainly
can go along with that. Mass Transit, if we cut
their budget, then how do we propose to make it up?
MR. DAHLBERG: I don' t propose to make it up.
MRS. HALE: What do you intend to do, cut the
services of certain routes?
- 54 -
JUtd 21983
411 111
MR. DAHLBERG: This would be up to the
Administration and that department
I think this Council has to take a hard look at
where we' re going with Mass Transit because it' s
only going to get, if I may say us into what I
feel, what I consider deeper and deeper fiscal
trouble. If we don' t start now in doing something
with that department in giving them fair notice
that this is policy on the part of this body, it' s
just going to delay the inevitable realization of
dealing with the problem that we have with Mass
Transit.
The rationale behind this amount of $556 ,577 is
that that will bring us in line with our real
property tax revenues that were generated and used
in the last fiscal year . We 're $556 ,577 from that
figure and I don' t see anywhere else in the budget
where we can make cuts that would equal this
amount of dollars needed.
CHR. FUJII : You have the floor , Mrs. Hale .
MRS. HALE: He was answering my question, can I
follow up?
CHR. FUJII : Yes, you may follow up.
MRS. HALE: I would, even though you didn' t
support my proposal on Tourism, I certainly would
support your proposal on cutting Research &
Development.
As far as cutting Mass Transit, I do feel that we
do need to take a hard look at it. I don' t think
you have the votes, Mr . Dahlberg, but I can assure
you you will have my vote because it is a step in
the right direction. Thank you.
CHR. FUJII : Councilman De Luz .
MR. DE LUZ : Mr . Chairman, I want to speak against
the amendment. I believe that if we look at all
the programs that we have in our Research &
Development, I really think we need the money.
The tourist industry is starting to look better .
United is now, I talked to one of the officials ,
they' re going to fly to Kona and I really think
we've got to continue promoting.
55
JUN 21983
!II 410
I think the sugar thing that we've all supported,
I know when the goodies come in front us,
everybody votes but now to go against Research &
Development, I think is a step backwards. We need
it and if we' re not doing it right, it' s all our
fault. I really think that research and
development is something that we constantly have
to be on top of.
CHR. FUJII : Thank you, Mr . De Luz. Mr . Yamashiro.
(Mr . Larry Mosher came into the meeting at
1:53 p.m. )
MR. YAMASHIRO: Yes, I would share Mr . De Luz ' s
sentiments on both proposals. I think
conceptually, what we 're trying to do may be the
same, Mr . Dahlberg, but what we have done in our
proposal, while it is some $500 ,000 above last
year ' s tax revenue, you have to realize that no
matter what we do we' re going to face some sort of
increase in salaries. Under the collective
bargaining law or civil service, if they get an
increment in the collective bargaining, they don' t
get an increment under civil service. If they
don' t get a collective bargaining increase, they
are entitled to increment under civil service,
which would be approximately five percent. Not
everybody would get it, but a good portion of the
work force would be entitled to that raise and
there is no provision for that in this present
situation. It would further reduce the resources
down to last year , basic requires to possibly
layoffs, if we did not make some provision for it.
I think the theory behind our proposal and its
structure and why we went into overtime and vacant
positions and did not cut the programs was to give
the Administration the ability to evaluate the
ongoing programs that they have listed and make
the changes that are there. Because we feel that
there are going to be some salary and wages
necessary for Police & Fire are going to have to
have some overtime, it' s going to be generated
someplace, and we feel that there are programs
either in Research & Development perhaps, or some
other departments that are going to have to be
taken out. We cannot see just going through it at
this point in time and saying we' re going to cut
out $217,000 out of Research & Development because
I , too, believe that we should continue promoting
tourism and the other efforts we have continued
with sugar .
- 56 -
JUN 21983
411
If you are serious about Mass Transit, the way to
do it is start this coming year and plan a gradual
phaseout. I don' t think to take a meat axe
approach to something that' s so important and an
intrical part of a lot of people ' s lives and
livelihoods, it would not be fair to say that
you've only got three months or you're going to be
out of a business, that you ' re going to find your
own way from Ka'u to Kona, or Kohala to Waimea, or
Honokaa to Mauna Kea Beach. If you are truly
interested in doing this, I have been one who has
fought against making this system permanent.
MR. DAHLBERG: Me, too.
MR. ' YAMASHIRO: I 'm the one that has held off it
becoming permanent and I fully support your
thinking. If anything is going to eat us up
alive, it' s Mass Transit. I believe that you
should be taking the correct steps as to answer
that problem but I don' t think the meat axe
approach is proper .
MR. DAHLBERG: Mr . Chairman.
CHR. FUJII: Mr . Dahlberg , may I call them as the
lights went on.
MR. DAHLBERG: Sure.
CHR. FUJII : Thank you. Mr . Domingo.
MR. DOMINGO: Thank you, Mr . Chairman. Iwould
also tend to agree with Councilman Yamashiro and
De Luz . Although I appreciate Councilman
Dahlberg' s attempt to make further adjustments in
the budget, I feel at this time, especially for
the Transit System, rather than just come up with
immediate cuts, I think what we should do and I
think what we have already begun to do is look at
the program and see what direction it will go in
the future and what effects it will have on our
future. We are looking at the programs we have at
the present time real seriously and even thinking
of making some adjustments and to even going as
far as abolishing those programs in the future .
But as far as makingthose cuts at the present
time, I would tend to disagree with it and I would
vote against that proposed amendment.
- 57 -
JUN 2 1983
CHR. FUJII : Thank you, Mr . Domingo. Mr . Kawahara.
MR. KAWAHARA: Mr . Chairman, I think Councilman
Dahlberg' s points are well taken and I would be
the first to go along with his proposal to tune
down on the expenses of Mass Transit if that could
be done in a way that will not curtail necessary
services. For example, I think a lot of our buses
are really oversized and they are not cost
effective. I see buses running around with one or
two passengers and it really hurts to see an
operation like that. I thought about this for a
long time that Mass Transit really needs to be
given a hard look and I think it should be. I
think we need to work, start working on it right
away. But I think cutting it off by $.5 million
right now would be too much like a meat axe
approach and I would not like to go along with
that.
The second point. I fully realize that perhaps
the results of Research & Development have raised
a number of questions in our minds but in this
instance, where the money is going to a carrier
that I believe proposes or promises to do so much
for the Big Island, I would like for the Council
to not cut it out but to support it because I feel
that the money is going to be well spent.
I have been closely in touch with the people of
United Air Lines and I think it' s quite certain
r
that they are cominginto Kona soon. A letter is
on it' s way right this minute to Richard Ferris ,
Chairman of United Air Lines, pointing out where
these things concerning the expanded service here
on this island. I have been in touch with UAL for
quite a while and I believe it' s quite certain
that they will be coming into West Hawaii.
I got the word from Mr . Owen Miyamoto, Chief of
Airports for the State, that it' s better than
50 percent sure that Keahole is going to get
expanded before very long. There' s an expenditure
of about $5. 8 million right now being put in to
build up sports facilities such as a first-class
restaurant. Hangers and other facilities have
been put in for the preparation for the expansion
of the runway, land for which has already been
acquired in preparation for that eventually.
I think . it' s going to mean great benefits to
Hawaii County by UAL coming into the tourist
destination area and by refusing to go along with
the promotion for United Air Lines, we ' re saying
directly into their faces that we' re not
supportive. I think this is not, this would be
shortsighted and I would like to recommend that
- 58 -
3U'! 2 'g
110 411
the Council not do this and be supportive of
United Air Lines. They' re the, I think the
premier promotors of out-island air service in
Hawaii. They've made a good success of their
attempt on Maui, as Mr . Miyamoto has personally
told me, they're very satisfied with what happened
on Maui and they're going ahead with expenditures
for putting up a new terminal at great cost.
The air industry in Hawaii is destined to expand.
There is now a plan to set up a cargo carrier . It
is going to be done by a private enterprise, I
think it's AMFAC that's going to do it. They're
going to put together a few propeller cargo planes
and go into hauling cargo from the mainland to
Hawaii as well as taking back cargo back from here
to the mainland. This is actually being planned
and I think it's quite sure that it' s going to be
implemented.
(Mr . De Luz left the meeting at 2:00 p.m. )
These processes are being carried on out there at
Puna Sugar where sugar operations will be phased
out next year and they're going heavily into
production of other crops such as papaya and other
fruits as Mr . Henry Walker has outlined recently
in public. addresses. Therefore, I would like to
urge strongly that the Council be supportive of
the promotional efforts of United Air Lines and
not delete that item from the budget.
CHR. FUJII : Thank you, Mr. Kawahara. Mr . Schutte.
(Mr . De Luz returned to the meeting at 2:03 p.m. )
MR. SCHUTTE: Mr. Chairman, I can understand the
concerns of Councilan Dahlberg in regards to the
Mass Transit. I think we ' re looking at a
situation that as it is going today has no result
and end outside of phasing out. To approprite the
necessary monies without Federal subsidies for
additional buses, etc. , I think is something of
the past and I don' t look forward to any further
help from the Federal government in regards to
this.
I do feel though that in all fairness that to make
an abrupt cut at this particular time would not
satisfy the concerns of a number of people.
However , I would go so far as to say that I do
believe the Mass Transit Agency should be put on
notice that they should look at the eventual
- 59, -
21983
• 411
phaseout or a possible cutback and we would like
to see some information relative to the higher
subsidized routes to give us some idea of what the
phaseout or the total phaseout could possibly be.
I think we 've been playing with this subject for
quite a long time and although it may satisfy
certain segments of the community as a
convenience, I don' t believe the money is being
spent that well to justify the amount of subsidy
that we are presently giving to this particular
agency. So, I do feel that in all fairness to
them, that they should be put on notice that they
should consider sending us a report on those areas
that are very highly subsidized, but I would have
to speak against the amendment that Councilman
Dahlberg has suggested.
CHR. FUJII : Thank you, Mr , Schutte. Mrs. Hale.
MRS. HALE: As I 've told you, Mr . Dahlberg, if you
can count, you didn' t have the votes. I didn' t
think you did. But anyhow, I will still support
your proposal because I thoroughly agree with you
about the Research & Development. You didn' t
specifty but I 'm hoping that they would take it
from Tourism or from some of the other
agricultural programs that some of my colleagues
criticized during the budget hearings. Listening
to the budget hearings, you would have thought
that they would have come out with a proposal of
funding that department, like Councilwoman Lai
said, by only one half, but that didn' t seem to be
what came out of it.
I , for one, think that the money with United Air
Lines is completely wasted. As soon as we gave
that money to United Air Lines, they cut the
service to Hilo and went to Maui. Maui had put up
$30 ,000 of their County funds, we put up $300 ,000 ,
and they got United Lines. I agree with
Councilman Kawahara that they probably will go to
Kona, but it won' t be because of our $300 ,000 .
They'll go to Kona when they find it economically
feasible to go to Kona and to take the passengers
into the Keahole Airport and up to their own hotel
up at Mauna Kea Beach. You know, it' s a purely
business operation that they' re going to do it.
Our $300 ,000 and their $12 million promotional
budget is peanuts, they don' t care whether they
get it or not. I 've watched their television
promotion that they made so much fuss about and I
thought it was very poorly done. I didn' t see
that it had identified the Big Island at all as
the place to visit. I don' t think their
promotional efforts has been directed to bring
tourism to the Big Island. They have been directed
- 60 -
JU21983
low
to take it away from the Big Island. So I , for
one, I spent a good deal of time coming up with
what I thought of was a way we could put the Big
Island on the map. We have built a better
mousetrap say in the Merrie Monarch Festival when
people come to Hilo from all over the world,
they' re coming to the Merrie Monarch Festival to
see it. I still feel that using this money to get
a Promoter of Activities who could coordinate all
of the sporting events and all of the conventions
that would be possible to bring to this island
would be a better expenditure of our promotional
funds. But since that was voted down, I see no
reason to give that money to Research &
Development to continue doing what they have been
doing. In my opinion, even though the Mayor says
they've come up this month, that' s still not
enough in my opinion for the expenditure of money
that this County is doing.
As far as Mass Transit is concerned, I don' t
necessarily agree with you that we should cut
back , I 'm not sure. There is a study being done
now. We' re funding a study. I would go along
with your proposal because I think at this late
time we've got to do meat axe approach to
something and so I 'd just assume do it to that or
something else. It really doesn' t make any
difference since I don' t think it' s that important.
If the Council in it' s wisdom at a later time
decided to add back those funds from supplemental
appropriations to continue a program once the
Administration came to us with a place as to how
they would reduce services and we didn' t like
their plan, we could always put that money back .
I 'm sure there ' s going to be some more surplus
funds that we can do that with. So, I don' t take
it as a meat axe approach to cut out an agency. I
take it as .a meat axe approach to cut out our
budget which we have to do at the last minute in
order to bring it in line with my philosophy of
option two, which was the same real property tax
that we had last year . So you want to do it in a
different way but your philosophy is to bring the
real property tax to the same amount that we had
last year . If that is true, we can have an
across-the-board non-variable rate of $9.05 . I
heard you on the radio yesterday saying that you
didn' t believe that the variable rate was a good
thing, so maybe you ' ll support my proposal of
non-variable rate. But I 'm not asking you to
scratch my back because I 'm scratching yours. I 'm
going along with you because I feel that at this
stage, we've got to take a meat axe "approach to
something, and to me, Research and Development is
the best way to do it. Mass Transit is something
that we can do because they wouldn't have to
- 61 -
N 21g:4
• •
immediately do that. It' s a yearly budget we' re
talking about, hopefully by that time, they'd have
to come up and chop that amount out of the budget,
we would have the study that is being done and we
would be able to make more intelligent decision on
where we want Mass Transit to go.
Personally, I would like to see us have a Mass
Transit that combined all of the various
transportation things that OEO is doing, that
Elderly Activities is doing, that Mass Transit is
doing. To me, it' s ridiculous that we have all of
these different vans going around town picking up
certain classes of people and I 'm sure there are
ways that we could combine them.
So, I will support it on the theory that it is an
attempt to bring our real property tax down to
what we collected last year , an attempt to bring
in line a variable rate that would not be a great
hardship on anybody, I mean a non-variable rate.
Maybe that' s not your intention, but that' s my
motive for approving and supporting your motion.
CHR. FUJII : Thank you, Mrs. Hale. Mr . De Luz .
MR. DE LUZ: Mr . Chairman, our family has been in
business for over 60 years, and it doesn' t staff
overnight. Tourism, or anything that we get into,
it takes hard work and takes constant promotion.
And even if you' re up there, you still got to
continue going as it' s so easy to go under today.
We try to compare with Maui. I sure hope our
politics and our business attitude would change
towards Maui. Maui back in the late 60 ' s when I
first got in, they were promoting $350 ,000 and
they really built a good environment. They
welcomed people to Maui . Not us, we haven' t, so
we have to build it. So when we talk about well
Maui- put in $30 ,000 , I think it' s political
bullshit because I think if we don' t agree with
one persons--- . I' noticed with Helene if she
don' t get her way then the rest is no good. I
think that if she don' t get along with Research &
Development, I think it's our fault in not
directing them. I think that the majority, or all
the Council have got to take a step forward not a
step backwards.
I believe with the Mass Transit transportation, we
should pass a resolution giving the Mayor or the
Administration one year and tell them we 're going
to have a cutback . But I think just to come off
and give a balloon cut that way, I don't think
it' s right because of the program. We have bids
- 62 -
JUN 2 1933
• 410
out and we have not said--- . I 've seen mostly
everybody vote for . I think by resolution to the
Administration and to the department we can say
that within the one year , we, want this, this and
work toward phasing out. I think it' s more in
line. I would like to speak again against the
motion.
CHR. FUJII : Thank you, Mr . De Luz. Mr . Dahlberg.
MR. DAHLBERG: Thank you, Mr . Chairman. I
appreciate all of the thoughts expressed. One of
the thoughts behind my trying to meet the same
real property tax revenue generated in the past
budget is that I believe and we all must admit, or
at least in thinking about this give serious
thought to the fact that if you are to take the
values as of January 1, 1983 , that there has been
no appreciation in the past year , the past fiscal
year and so how can we generate any more than what
we generated last year?
Some comments have been made and I ' ll take the
blame for not explaining my motion correctly. I
did not say Mass Transit would be out of business,
I suggested a cut of roughly 33 percent so that
the message would be given in that way. If this
body sees fit, the majority of these members see
fit that a resolution would be a better way, I
will support that resolution. But I feel a
message has to be given, a very strong message.
Maybe, my suggestion is too strong, but by giving
them that message, telling them that we, as a
policy-making body, wish to phase it out, giving
them a 33 percent cut at this time so that they
get the message, that' s one way. Another way, via
the resolution, I will support wholeheartedly
because a message must be given to the
Administration and we 've got to bite this bullet.
Yes, there will be people who have come before us
before and they'll come again and I hope that I
can stand tall at that time. But the message has
to be given, because I ' ll tell you, it's a
monster . You know, you think Pension is a big
monster , Mass Transit is maybe not as big but it's
a monster and it' s going to keep haunting us.
CHR. FUJII : Thank you, Mr . Dahlberg.
MR. DAHLBERG: Mr . Chairman, excuse me, just a
couple more comments.
- 6:3 -
jim 2198
Mr . Chairman, I would like to withdraw my motion
and make another motion.
CHR. YAMASHIRO: You withdraw your motion?
MR. DAHLBERG: Yes .
MR. KAWAHARA: I withdraw my second.
MR. YAMASHIRO: Mr . Chairman, could I have the
floor?
CHR. FUJII : Yes, Mr . Yamashiro.
Mr . Yamashiro moved for the previous
question. Seconded by Mr . Domingo and
carried. Opposed: Councilman Dahlberg .
CHR. FUJII : The previous question has been called
for .
MRS. HALE: Mr . Chairman, I wonder if that' s
procedurally correct. He moved, he wanted to
withdraw his motion, the seconder said, yes, and
then you called the previous question. He should
have, you should have allowed him to withdraw his
motion.
MR. DE LUZ : He did, so now we ' re going with a
regular motion.
MR. YAMASHIRO: He did and then, he yielded the
floor to Mr . Kawahara. After Mr . Kawahara yielded
the floor , he recognized me.
MRS HALE: You' re on the previous question on what
motion, then?
MR. YAMASHIRO: The motion on the previous
question. It was made after Mr . Dahlberg withdrew
his motion. He yielded the floor to Mr . Kawahara
for him to remove the second. Mr . Kawahara
acknowledged this .
- 64 -
M 9 iq83
111
MRS. HALE: So now we ' re voting on your amendment,
is that right, that' s the previous question?
MR. YAMASHIRO: That' s right.
MRS. HALE: Mr . Chairman, under the Committee of
the Whole, I think it' s entirely illegal, if not
improper , I think it' s illegal to call a previous
question.
The whole purpose of a Committee of the Whole is
full and free discussion. If you will read
Robert' s Rules of Order , you will know that you
don' t call for previous questions in the
Committee of the Whole. The whole purpose of our
Council going into Committee of the Whole is to
have free and full discussion of everything. If
you want to call the previous question, that' s
done in the Council meeting, not in the Committee
of the Whole. I suggest that you call a recess
and read your Robert' s Rules.
CHR. FUJII : The Chair will call a recess .
,
p
RECESS: At .m.
2 : 15 the Chair called for a recess.
RECONVENE: The meeting reconvened at 2 : 25 p.m.
MRS. HALE: Mr . Chairman, Robert' s Rules of Orders
states: "When an assembly has to consider a
subject which it does not wish to refer to a
committee, and yet where the subject matter is not
well digested and put into proper form for it' s
definite action, or when , for any other reason, it
is desirable for the assembly to consider a
subject with all the freedom of an ordinary
committee, it is the practice to refer the matter
to the Committee of the Whole."
And then further down, "the only motion in order
are to amend and adopt and that the committee rise
and report, as it cannot adjourn; nor can it order
the yeas and nays. The only way to close or limit
debate in Committee of the Whole is for the
assembly to vote that the debate in the Committee
shall cease at a certain time, or that after a
certain time no debate shall be allowed, excepting
on new amendments, and then only one speech in
favor of and one against it, of say five minutes
each; or in some other way regulate the time for
debate. "
- 65 -
JUN 2 1983
111 •
"If no limit is prescribed, any member may speak
as often as he can get the floor , and as long as
each time is allowed in the debate in the
assembly, provided no one wishes the floor who has
not spoken on that particular question. "
Also, I 'd like to read you some other things about
the Committee of the Whole. "Like other
committees, it cannot alter the text of any
resolution referred to it; but if the resolution
originated in the Committee, then all the
amendments are incorporated in it. "
For that reason I interpret that, Mr . Chairman, to
mean that we cannot alter the Mayor 's budget in
Committee of the Whole.
MR. YAMASHIRO: It originated in Committee of the
Whole.
MRS. HALE: It did not originate in Committee of
the Whole, it was referred to the Committee of the
Whole.
Then it goes on to say when it is through with a
consideration, you're supposed to rise and report
the Committee' s findings. We do not conduct a
Committee of the Whole according to Robert' s Rules
of Order and yet that' s what our rules say that we
will do. I still say that a motion to cut off
debate in Committee of the Whole is improper and
illegal.
MR. YAMASHIRO: And immoral.
MRS. HALE: And immoral.
MR. SCHUTTE: Mr . Chairman.
CHR. FUJII : Councilman Schutte .
Mr. Schutte moved that debate on the issue
stop at 2:29 p.m. Seconded by Mr . De Luz.
CHR. FUJII : There' s a motion and a second.
MRS. HALE: That means that the whole Committee of
the Whole has to stop at 2 :29 p.m. , not just this
issue.
- 66 -
JU S 2 1983
A
411
MR. - YAMASHIRO: The debate on the matter .
CHR: FUJII : Mrs. Hale, according to the County
Clerk ' s interpretation, he said the motion to cut
debate is valid. Then, as long as we have a
two-thirds majority supporting it, then it' s
current. •
MRS. - HALE: Well, the County Clerk ought to read
the Robert' s Rules of Order , can't he read, I just
read it to you.
MR: - YAMASHIRO: Maybe he' s got a different copy.
MRS. ' HALE: Well, I don' t care. What copy did we
adopt of the Robert' s Rules of Order , Mr .
Chairman, let' s not carry out a farce.
MR. -DE. LUZ: We' re not carrying on a farce, let' s
vote.
MRS. - HALE: If you want to cut off debate, fine,
you cut off debate but do it properly. You've got
to cut the whole Committee of the Whole---
You know, I understand Mr . Yamashiro has to go to
Honolulu this afternoon, I heard you tell that to
the reporters. I 'm sorry if you don' t want to
stay, leave, maybe I ' ll get my budget--
MR. YAMASHIRO: I think I 've discussed the matter
with Mr . Dahlberg and what he intends to do is to
make a motion to amend the wording of the budget
to include a direction to the Administration with
regards to Mass Transit.
MR. DAHLBERG: Made from comments made by this
body so that everyone ' s input regarding
Mass Transit is a part of the budget message and
it doesn' t come from me.
In addition, just to add to half of the statements
made by me that Mr . Yamashiro just made, you know
I would like to throw out for discussion and in
order for us to have a discussion, there has to be
a motion, and so, I 'd like to throw out the
following motion. This is predicated upon some
good discussion we had during budget review
concerning Research & Development and you know, I
would like to. move so that we can consider the
- 67 -
�` 2 1983
111 Oil
following concept
CHR. FUJII : Mr . Dahlberg, let's get the procedure
straight here. I think the Council here probably
has no objections to let you withdraw your--- .
Because there is a motion on the floor right now,
an amendment to the amendment, okay, that' s where
we are right now.
I think since Bill has agreed to withdraw his
second and you have withdrawn your motion, you' re
coming in with a new amendment to the amendment,
is that where we are?
MR: DAHLBERG: Yes.
CHR® FUJII : I think , you know, the Chairman, who
had made the motion forthe previous question and
the rest of us, I think, have allowed you to make .
a new amendment to that amendment. That' s where
we are and so will you state your amendment to
that amendment.
AMENDMENT: Mr . Dahlberg moved to further amend
Bill 967 , Draft 2 , by including in the
budget message, all of the comments made
regarding Mass Transit. Seconded by
Mr . Kawahara.
CHR. FUJII : There is an amendment to the
amendment, any discussion on that? Councilman
Schutte.
MR. SCHUTTE: Mr . Chairman, may I ask Councilman
Dahlberg, is this in regards just only to
Mass Transit.
MR. DAHLBERG: Yes, it is.
MR. YAMASHIRO: That' s what he said.
MR. SCHUTTE: No comment at this time.
CHR. FUJII : Mr . Domingo.
MR. DOMINGO: Mr . Dahlberg, what would the main
intent be in the back of the motion, you know,
68 -
'JUN 2 1983
111 111
as directed to Mass Transit?
MR. DAHLBERG: Insteadof taking a meat axe
approachto this problem, instead a very direct
statement to the Administration that this body,
and I 'm hesitating because I want to look at all
the comments made by the colleagues so that it' s
in concert and it' s going to get the support when
it is indeed put in writing, but something to the
effect that we want to give the message to the
Administration that at least, a scale down, and a
hard look at phasing out portions of or down the
road entirely, Mass Transit.
In other words, it' s merely a feeling of this body
and it's not a directive that we will phase it out
in one year or three years but to give them the
message and we' re going to have to start thinking
about this. To do it one year from now, why not
give it the message now and if you don' t want to
do it in a form of a cut in their budget, which I
think would be one way of doing it, then the
statement is a part of the budget would certainly
put the Administration on notice. I guess that's
the best way and I think many of you have
indicated that something must be done.
I ' ll be happy to circulate the statement among
colleagues so that they can give their input. You
know, I want it to not from me but from this
body. If you want me to do it, I ' ll be happy to
do it.
CHR. FUJII : We' ll just vote on that concept then,
Mr . Dahlberg.
MRS. HALE: Mr . Chairman.
CHR. FUJII : Yes, Mrs. Hale.
MRS. HALE: I- will vote against that motion.
That' s a measely way out. Your idea of cutting
the budget, I thought was fine. If you' re just
out to, cut Mass Transit, I can see a lot of other
areas in this County that need to be cut and I 'm
not willing to pick on Mass Transit except as an
excuse to cut the budget. So, therefore, I would
not support that statement. I would support
waiting until we get the Mass Transit study and
then we go into a real honest to goodness program
review to decide what we do with Mass Transit. I
will not support just a statement and a message to
the Administration. I would have supported a cut
- 69 -
411
in the budget but I would not support that
statement.
CHR: FUJII : Okay. Thank you, Mrs. Hale.
Mr . Domingo.
MR. DOMINGO: Mr . Chairman, let' s not then use any
one department as a whipping boy in this case .
But let' s, if we' re really concerned about cutting
the budget and taking some steps in the future,
let' s come up with a broad statement indicating
that the Council will examine all departments very
thoroughly throughout this year and make some
valid assessments and considerations for the next
budget review session.
MR. DAHLBERG: Mr . Chairman, we' re not using
Mass Transit as a whipping boy. It's a weak link
and we' re showing Administration that this link is
going to break us as time goes by. That' s what
I 'm saying , I 'm not using it as a whipping boy.
It' s a program we must go after and we must start
now. If you don' t want to make a budget cut, then
I ' ll agree but we should let the Administration
know that the budget cuts are going to come in
that department next year , is what I hear you
folks saying. We' re going to scale it down and I
say why wait till next year , give them fair
warning now in the form of a budget message, okay?
CHR. FUJII : Are you through , Mr . Dahlberg.
MR. DAHLBERG: Thank you.
CHR. FUJII : Mr . De Luz .
MR. DE LUZ : Mr . Chairman, I agree more with
Takashi Domingo that we go overall and give them
the message. If we want to talk about cutting out
or are really worried about our concerns, nobody' s
mentioned about salary increases. I think
everybody is scared to look at our workman' s
compensation what kind of, we have a lot of big
worms in this bag, you know? So if we are going
to look at this, there' s so many things that' s a
really nightmare like the retirements, social
security. All of these things are major issues.
So I think what Taka said is right. I agree more
with Taka that we should send a message that says
we' re going to have to really curtail, we ' re going
to have to look at our productivity, a highly
- 70 -
JUd 2 1983
I
111 : 111
increase of productivity, higher management. Our
administration in all the managerial positions
have to really get off their butts and really
produce man-hours and see that we get more
productivity with good management. So I think
like Taka, if we' re going to make a message, it
has to be an overall message because we know the
bus isn' t the only problem, but I don' t believe we
can just cut it off, too.
MR. SCHUTTE: I ' ll yield at this time .
CHR. FUJII : Councilwoman Hale.
MRS. HALE: In this case, the only thing that
talks is money and if you're not willing to cut
the money, you' re just wasting words, and it' s a
shiibai . I wouldn' t vote for it.
CHR. FUJII : Councilman Yamashiro.
MR. YAMASHIRO: I don' t think words are a shiibai ,
Mrs. Hale. If you talk to Mr . Nakamae and the
Mayor , they don' t care what the numbers are in
here. They' re more worried about the words than
the numbers. So I think in this situation, words
speak louder than numbers.
I think Jim has hit a concern that I think is a
legitimate one in that we have, you know, last
year passed a resolution saying we want to recover
50 percent of operating costs and we haven' t been
able to do it. Maybe we can address the message
to the whole governmental structure, but we have a
particular entity of service that we are providing
in Mass Transit that we are either going to have
to agree that we' re going to continue to support
it at a certain level and not allow it to go any
higher or we' re going to have to bear the costs as
in Honolulu. The thing that's eating up the
Honolulu budget right now is the Mass Transit
system and it' s eating up every municipal
government around the country.
CHR. FUJII : Councilman Dahlberg.
MR. DAHLBERG: Thank you, Mr . Chairman. I 'd be
happy to support a general message as long as we
leave some of the meat in the message with regard
to the Mass Transit issue as Chairman Yamashiro
has pointed out. You know, I would agree and
disagree with the Chairman. I think we' re giving
- 71 -
JU1983
111
the Administration a message in our $2.2 million
reduction in the budget and if we can' t reduce it
in Mass Transit, then we should have a verbal
message, at least is my feeling.
• There ' s motion and a second, any
FUJII . a
discussion. Councilwoman Hale.
MRS. HALE: Are we talking about Exhibit "A"?
MR. YAMASHIRO: We're talking about Draft 2 , which
includes Exhibit "A" .
MRS. HALE: Mr . Chairman, I found this (reference
to Exhibit "A") on my desk this morning. We've
been going out for budget hearings since about
May 15, 1983 , a little over two weeks. I have
come out twice with two letters as a result of my
feelings, personal feelings as a result of the
budget hearings. I haven' t seen anything in
writing from any of my colleagues about what you
got out of either the budget hearings or the tax
hearings. But I come this morning and I find that
Exhibit "A" , Bill 967 , Draft 2 , this must be the
bill that was privately circulated by the County
Chairman as I read in the paper among everybody
and everybody' s concerns are taken care of in this
budget, is that it? I certainly for one haven' t
had a chance to read this and I cannot in good
conscience vote for something that I have not even
been able to take home and read. That' s a massive
document to look at and I see an awful lot of
scratching out in there.
MR. YAMASHIRO: Mr . Chairman, may I clarify this
for Mrs. Hale?
CHR. FUJII : Councilman Yamashiro.
MR. YAMASHIRO: Mrs. Hale , Exhibit "A" is the same
document that was provided you by the
Administration, it is their detailed budget.
MRS. HALE: But this is Draft 2.
MR. YAMASHIRO: This is their detailed budget.
The only changes that were made in the detailed
budget are included in this proposal which
explains the amendments. We have taken out all
72 -
411
of the overtime in the detailed accounts. We have
taken out the salaries that were attributed to
vacant positions in each departmental account. We
have stricken motor vehicles from the detailed
account. We have made the necessary adjustments
to the FICA, Contributions to Pensions and other
miscellaneous accounts that are attributable to
the vacancies.
We have gone through the Travel account and
reduced everyone by 18 percent to come up with the
totals as shown in this proposal.
We also made the necessary changes with regards to
the new revenues that were shown after the start
of the budget hearings that were provided to us by
the Administration, wherein we received more money
for coastal zones and other Federal programs.
We've also made adjustments in the Prosecuting
Attorney' s Office and some proposals with regards
to the Police and Tax Office including your
proposal to include further positions in the Tax
Assessor ' s Office.
MRS. HALE: Yes, Mr. Chairman, may I answer that
in a full and free discussion?
CHR. FUJII : Councilwoman Hale.
MRS. HALE: I 'd like to say that the explanation
of the adjustment to the revenues was attached to
this book that I got, which I got this morning
I came in yesterday afternoon to pick up the
agenda of the Committee of the Whole to take home
to study. This was not either on my desk or in my
file. It was not attached to the Committee of the
Whole agenda when I picked it up yesterday. I
have different reports as to whether it was put on
my desk yesterday afternoon after I left or this
morning , but in any case, I was not able to get it
when I got my agenda for the Committee of the
Whole. So, Mr . Chairman, I am saying that I am in
no position to vote on this today. I cannot
approve in good conscience all of these
adjustments when I haven' t even had a chance to
see them. And if these have been worked on all
week , I can't see why every member of the Council
did not get the thinking of whoever made these
adjustments.
I went to you personally, Mr . Chairman, several
times during the past two weeks and I said, "Tom,
are you going to come out with any new proposals?
- 73 -
eki 21983
410 411
Are you going to come out with a different tax
rate? Are you going to come out with any new
adjustments to the Budget?" And you told me we ' re
going to go to the public hearings on the basis of
the Mayor ' s tax. rate and you had no suggestions to
give to me but that you might have some---
CHR. FUJII : Mrs. Hale, Mrs. Hale.
MRS. HALE: Mr . Chairman, I 'm going to tell you
what I understood you to say.
CHR. FUJII : Alright, you have the floor .
MRS. HALE: You might have some adjustments when
we took it up in Committee of the Whole. I
assumed that I would get these 72 hours before the
Committee of the Whole met so that I 'd have a
chance to look over and find out what adjustments
you had proposed. I get them this morning. I
don't see how any Councilperson, unless you have
been privy to this or ,---
MR. YAMASHIRO: Mr . Chairman, may I rise on a
point of personal privilege in this matter . It
seems that Mrs. Hale can construe her budget
proposals, her three proposals on her own, not
provide them to anybody before this meeting and
expect us to adopt them and see nothing wrong with
that. But when some people have worked on their
own in the same manner that she has, she finds
that objectionable and improper , illegal and
whatever else she wants to call it.
MR. DE LUZ: Immoral.
MR. YAMASHIRO: When she does it, it's alright; if
anybody else does it, it' s improper .
MR. DAHLBERG: Mr . Chairman.
CHR. FUJII : Mr . Dahlberg.
MR. DAHLBERG: May I have a point of personal
privilege. Mrs. Hale, what is so hard about
this? You served on this Board. You've been the
Executive Officer of this. There' s nothing
complicated about this. Schedule A is Travel,
- 74 -
19 '.
• 111
it' s an 18 percent reduction across-the-board.
Overtime is simple, $1.2 million cut in half to
611. For you to accuse others of not being able
to understand it--- . I understand this, I got it
yesterday, what' s the big problem? Funded vacant
positions, you did it, the same exercise, only you
came up with $700 ,000 and there ' s only $390 ,000
because you didn 't have an updated vacant position
printout. You know, why don' t you, how come you
always disagree, disagree, huh?
CHR. FUJII : Well, it' s alright, Mr . Dahlberg .
Everybody has the privilege to disagree and that' s
what makes this world so progressive.
MR. DAHLBERG: Not 100 percent of the time.
CHR. FUJII: Councilwoman Hale, I 'll call on you.
MRS. HALE: Mr . Chairman I would disagree 100
percent of the time if I want to, that' s my
prerogative as one Councilmember with one vote.
If you don' t like it, it' s too bad---
MR. DAHLBERG: No, it doesn' t make sense.
HALE: Maybe it doesn' t make sense to you but
MRS. y
it makes sense to me, okay. I warned the Council
as to what I wasoin to come upwith.
g 9
MR. DAHLBERG: Oh, come on.
MRS. HALE: I gave two communications in writing
that was circulated to every Councilperson. I
didn't see this till this morning, that' s what I 'm
objecting to (referring to the Exhibit "A" and new
proposal) . I think I could have at least seen
some proposal. I had to read it in the paper this
morning, I didn' t even get it until I read it in
the paper . I don' t think that' s the same thing
that I did, maybe you do, but I don't.
I would like to
9 o on further , Mr . Chairman, to
give my objectins to this Bill 967 . I would like
to commend whoever did this. If you did it, I ' ll
commend you, Mr . Chairman , if our Council Chairman
did it, I commend him; if Harry Takahashi did it,
I commend him, they did take some of my ideas ,
you did take the overtime---
- 75 -
JUN 21983
Ilk
MR. YAMASHIRO: That's an objection right there.
MRS. - HALE: I proposed that on May 23, 1983. Up
to that time, nobody else had proposed it. Maybe
great minds run in the same channel and we were
all thinking the same thing but I 'm the only
person that proposed it in writing, okay? Thank
you
Now I would like to go on to Bill 967. I 'd like
to say that I 'm going to have to oppose this
ordinance, Mr . Chairman. I think that you have
done a fair job of trying to reduce the budget in
certain areas that we agree on philosophically. I
think it could be done a good deal more. I think
we could bring the tax rate down and I think the
tax rates should not be variable, so I 'm going to
have to vote against that.
I don' t like the words in this Bill 967, Draft 2 .
(Messrs. Dahlberg and Yamashiro left the meeting
at 2:48 p.m. )
It says here, legislative policy. "Each program
shall be funded by an appropriation which shall be
individually counted for ." I don't know what that
means but maybe you do. "It is the policy of this
Council to establish the types of services, the
level in which they are to be provided, the areas
of the County in which the services are to be
provided and the goals to be achieved through the
appropriation of funds. "
(Mr . Yamashiro returned to the meeting at
2:49 p.m. )
I would like to know where is all of this? These
are words that our Council Chairman talked about a
few minutes ago. They are very important, they' re
very important words.
MR: - YAMASHIRO: Let's make it clear.
MRS. HALE: You're talking about those goals that
have been the goals for the last---
MR. YAMASHIRO: Like you said, money talks and
bullshit walks.
MRS. - HALE: I 'd like to point out on Page 11, I
don' t agree on that last sentence in Section 6, of
Federal Funds. "The transmittal shall set forth
- 76 -
a 219'83
110 411
the criteria for appropriations and shall set
forth at least three proposed uses for the funds
if said alternatives are appropriate. "
(Mr . Dahlberg returned to the meeting at 2:52 p.m. )
I think the Administration should come forth with
one proposed use for the fund. If the Council
sees fit to change that, they have the perfect
prerogative to do it. But to ask the
Administration to come out with three proposed
uses for the fund, is hypocritical. What do they
do, find out where the majority of people stand
and then we argue among ourselves as to which one
of those proposed uses we 're going to do? That is
not good administration, Mr . Chairman, and it' s
unnecessarily making unnecessary work for the
Administration.
I 'd like to point out under Section 7 , State
Funds, that same wording. I object to it. I
cannot see why the Administration should have to
come out with at least three proposed uses for the
funds if said alternatives are appropriate. If I
were Administration, I 'd find only one use and no
other alternative was appropriate. But maybe
that' s what they' ll do, I see Mr . Nakamae laughing .
I 'd like to point out, Mr . Chairman, Section 8 .
I 've seen this in every draft of this resolution
that I 've seen sofar , somebody ought to take an
English course. It' s where old funds in the
specific appropriation, the word should be have,
not has. Funds in plural and that' s the subject.
Thank you, that' s one point.
CHR. FUJII : Mrs. Hale , your comments are well
taken. As I mentioned earlier , our proposal for
language change will come on June 8 , 1983 , okay?
MRS. HALE: Are those the proposed changes?
MR. SCHUTTE: No, no.
CHR. FUJII : No, language change---
MRS. HALE: Please include that in your proposal.
I am not going to vote on the pig in the poke, if
I don' t know what the proposal for change is, then
how can t vote on this?
77 -
JUN 1983
•
whatever
CHR. FUJII : Well, you voteyou want on
this, and when you come to vote on June 8th , you
vote the way you want at that point in time.
MRS. HALE: Well, I 'm just going to have to---
CHR. FUJII : Are you through , Mrs. Hale?
MRS. HALE: No, I wasn 't.
CHR. FUJII . Okay, you have the floor , Mrs. Hale.
(Messrs. Kawahara and Yamashiro left the meeting
at 2 :53 p.m. )
MRS. HALE: We' re voting .on Bill 967 , I have
pointed out some of the reasons that I am against
this.
I 'm not at all sure about the Motor Pool. I don' t
think that the Motor Pool Revolving fund should be
just eliminated like this without further
discussion. I 'm willing to look into it. I 'm
willing to get a report. I 'm willing to get some
reasons as to why we should do this. All we heard
so far is that the Engineer doesn' t have any
Y
objection to it, but I don ' t know what the affect
of this would be .
I was on the old Board of Supervisors when we
established the Motor Pool and there were very
good reasons for establishing the Motor Pool and I
just want to make sure that those reasons no
longer exist. Maybe they do but we have not
studied the question. I don ' t think that it is a
proper thing to be put in our budget. If we want
to eliminate the Motor Pool Revolving fund during
the year after proper study and with some
justification, I would go for that.
MR. YAMASHIRO: You probably don' t know when you
can affect the budget and when you cannot. You
can only do it at the start of the year .
MRS. HALE: Well, we 're talking about affecting
next year ' s budget and in Councilman Dahlberg 's
memo to the Administration, it means nothing.
CHR. FUJII : Okay, Mrs. Hale , are you through?
- 78
a'a 2 1983
MRS. HALE: For the time being.
CHR. FUJII : Mr . Schutte.
MR. SCHUTTE: Mr . Chairman, I just wanted to
explain to Councilwoman Hale that what was
originally mentioned was that the language that
you speak of , I , too, disagree with , okay? But
there will be a language change. It' s too late
now, because you already went over the whole thing
but anyway to cut a long story short, there will
be a language change forthcoming.
MR. YAMASHIRO: A proposed language change.
MR. SCHUTTE: There will be a language change.
CHR. FUJII : Mr . De Luz.
MR. DE LUZ : I ' ll bet next week , we' ll continue
going and getting more publicity and making
noise. I think we ' re ready for vote because we
have until next week . This is a recommendation
from the Committee of the Whole out to full
Council, so I think we can stay here for the next
two hours, hoping that the Press will write a few
more lines. If you listened to what happened all
morning, all afternoon, it has been scattered
brain half of the time.
CHR. FUJII : Mr . Dahlberg.
MR. DAHLBERG: Yes, I would just echo Councilman
De Luz ' s words and encourage Concilwoman Hale to
do your thinking nd reviewing and analyzing
because it' s at the Council level or at the full
Council to vote. And so, I don' t see any reason
why you can' t vote for this today.
CHR. FUJII : Mrs. Hale , you have the floor .
MRS. HALE: Well, I don' t have to explain my
reasons to Mr .Dahlberg, but there are plenty
reasons and I guess you weren' t listening.
I started out by saying, you know, that the
Committee of the Whole is supposed to be where you
have the full and free discussion. We have very
- 79 -
• 411
definite rules in our County Council as to how
long a person can speak and how much they can say
and how many times they can speak , which is not
supposed to be true in the Committee of the Whole,
so any comments that I have should really be made
today. It should not be saved till next week when
I can easily be shut up by motions for the
previous questions and obviously, you have the
two-thirds vote necessary to carry them through.
It' s alright for certain members of the Council to
use four-letter words that are unprintable and I
suppose that they say them because they' re
unprintable that they feel they won' t get
publicity. But you know, when some people get
publicity and get their pictures on the front
page, they could buy up all the papers, I
suppose. But other people, you know, if the Press
happens to quote them, then they' re out for
publicity.
I 'd just like to say, for the benefit of my
colleagues that anything I have said here today is
not for the benefit of the Press. I don' t tell
the Press what to write. What I say here today is
a result of many, many hours that I have spent on
working on these figures. I 'd like to recognize a
student of Jim Wang ' s who has given free time to
help me work out these figures, you know. I 'd
like to recognize Mr . Paul Hunt, who is the
legislative intern on Dr . Wang ' s program and who
was helping me, free of charge and has spent many
hours in my office typing up and looking at these
figures. We have together gone over this budget
and it hasn' t cost the County one penny except for
the duplicating that went on, you know, kind of a
farce during this recess where you wanted to know
what my figures are. In terms of your figures and
what I understand, Mr . Dahlberg, I 'd like to say
that we went through , the only information given
to us to go through was the position report which
we got because I asked for the working papers of
the Administration and some of the questions that
I asked for . It' s the first time this Council has
ever done a budget with a position report and with
a detailed explanation that we've had of the
budget. This is the first time that we can ever
intelligently look at the document. . .
MR. YAMASHIRO: That you asked for , right, Mrs.
Hale?
MRS. HALE: And I asked for it. Well, maybe you
asked for it, too, Mr . Dahlberg. Maybe you asked
for it, too, Mr . Chairman.
- 80 -
JUN 2 1983
•
411
MR. DAHLBERG: What would we do without you.
CHR: FUJII : Mrs. Hale, you should have gone a
little further and tried to ask for the up-to-date
vacancy report. You know, then you would have a
much better picture of the vacancies.
MRS. HALE: Mr . Chairman, if I had used the
services of the Legislative Auditor ' s Office, I 'm
sure I could have gotten the up-to-date report.
But what I want to tell you, Mr . Chairman, is
based on this report, which the budget was based
on. The budget is based on the Salaries and Wages
in this report. If you will look at the Mayor ' s
budget and you will look at the Salaries and
Wages, you will find that this report has done
it. And if the updated report shows only $399 ,000
in vacant positions, then I would like to know
where the Administration has found in the last two
or three months since this report was done', has
spent over $600 ,000 filling vacant positions
because you only found $399 ,000 and we found over
$1 million. So I say that the Administration
then, in the last few months, has been filling
these vacant positions and this is something that
this Council ought to be aware of. Because if
they have been going on all year long without
these vacant positions, and this is what they made
their budget on and if because they gave us this
material, and if because the feeling was that we
had to cut the budget, they have all of a sudden
decided they have to fill these positions,
something is wrong, Mr . Chairman, and this is what
the Council ought to be looking at.
I would also like to ask the Council to look in
the next two months and ask the Legislative
Auditor ' s Office to get per month , as a mangement
study from every department, the amount of
overtime that is being allowed by every department
in these last two months because they have
accumulated so much overtime as it' s been pointed
out by Councilman Schutte in our April 30th ,
budget with the balances that are left on every
department. I have had it from two separate
sources that departments are telling their people
to spend the overtime. I cannot prove it and I 'm
not going to say what departments but I am
suggesting, and I 'm putting the Administration on
record, that if it' s possible to get that
information out of the next two months, I 'm going
to be looking very carefully at Salaries and Wages
that have been spent in May and June. I think
this Council ought to be aware of that and I think
our Legislative Auditor ' s Office should be doing
this kind of research for this Council.
- 81 -
xxi 2 12B3
!II
Based on these reasons, Mr . Dahlberg, I cannot buy
this proposal, it does not go far enough . It is a
step. It does go in the right direction. I
congratulate my colleagues on making the step in
the right direction but in my opinion, with
throwing this to us at the last minute, and
because somebody has decided that this is what you
want, you know, fine, vote for it, Mr . Dahlberg.
I tried to support you in your cut, you know. You
haven' t the courtesy to support me, all you can do
is jump on me and be on Mr . Yamashiro' s side. He
can---
CHR. FUJII : That' s enough , Mrs. Hale, let' s stick
to the subject.
MRS. HALE: He doesn' t have to always jump on me,
Mr . Chairman.
CHR. FUJII : Let' s just stick to the subject,
okay? Are you through , Mrs. Hale.
MRS. HALE: Alright, the subject is the budget.
The budget does not go far enough and the budget
was pushed down us at the last minute. I , for
one, cannot buy it. If you don' t like it, lump
it. Thank you.
MR. YAMASHIRO: Vote , no.
CHR. FUJII : Okay. Mr . De Luz .
MR. DE LUZ : Yes, Mr . Chairman, I think we've
brought up the concerns. We're going to cut the
budget on the overtime. Through the request of
the overtime, I want to say let' s have an
investigation for the next two months. If these
overtime, if they' re forcing overtime, I think we
should know about it. So as Finance Chairman, we
would like to have a report on that if there is a
force overtime .
CHR. FUJII : We will direct our Legislative
Auditor to do the study for us.
MR. DE LUZ : Okay. As far as the budget, I think
that as we' re going through the budget, I think we
brought the concerns of overtime, the positions.
These are some things we 've all discussed and we
82 -
NM 21983
•
wanted the input to put in. I 'm ready to vote so
that we can put this up next week for final
reading .
CHR. FUJII : Okay. Mr . Takahashi, would you like
to make a comment on Mr . De Luz ' s statement.
MR. HARRY TAKAHASHI : Mr . Chairman, if that be the
case, could the person making the allegations at
least inform us as to which departments you know,
be it off the record, or what?
MR. DE LUZ: She claims it was Parks & Recreation
and Police.
MR. TAKAHASHI : Fine.
CHR. FUJII : Mr . Takahashi , could you follow it up
for us?
MRS. HALE: I 'm not accusing them, I 'm just
saying---
CHR. FUJII : Thank you, Mr . De Luz .
Vote on the motion: Carried.
Opposed: Councilmembers Domingo and Hale.
AMENDMENT: Mr . Yamashiro moved to amend the budget
provided by the Mayor as further amended by
the latter motion. Seconded by Mr . De luz .
Vote on the motion: Carried.
Opposed: Councilwoman Hale.
Mr . Yamashiro moved to recommend passage of Bill
967 , Draft 2 , as amended on second and final
reading. Seconded by Mr . De luz and carried.
Opposed: Mrs. Hale.
ORDINANCE CAPITAL BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR JULY 1, 1983 TO
BILL 968: JUNE 30 , 1984
Relates to public improvements and financing
thereof for the Fiscal Year July 1, 1983 to
June 30 , 1984 .
CHR. FUJII : The Chair ' s recommendation is to
approve and adopt Bill 968 on second & final
reading .
- 83 -
9I 21983
111
Mr . Domingo moved to approve and adopt
Bill 968 on second and final reading.
Seconded by Mr . De Luz .
CHR. FtJJII : There' s a motion and second to
approve Bill 968 , any discussion?
Councilwoman Hale .
MRS. HALE: Yes, Mr . Chairman. I 'm going to have
to vote against the Capital Improvements Budget.
I see that some of my colleagues have had some of
their pet projects included in here and that' s
fine. I don' t think $500 ,000 is going to build a
III water system from Keaau to Pahoa, but if that' s
what it' s for , I would very much like to see that
happen. But I don' t think we should fool the
people. The Finance Director has told us that
there are no plans to float these bonds this
year . And so based upon the fact that there are
no plans to float the bonds this year , Mr .
Chairman, I don' t see any purpose in going through
a farce of putting projects on the books that are
going to lapse after three years.
I got some information the other day on the
Kaumana Park , Mr . Chairman. That' s one of the
things you' re telling the Kaumana people that
they' re going to get within this next year .
They' re not going to get it, Mr . Chairman. Those
appropriations for Kaumana Park have been on three
separate ordinances and over the past years,
they've always lapsed. And if we don' t float
moneys for the bonds, Mr . Chairman, these projects
and all other projects here are just words, the
projects are going to lapse.
If we are going to float bonds, then I think we
really need to look at our debt service ratio ,
which is another area, Mr . De Luz , that you should
be concerned about because it reached the prudent
limit last year and we were told this by the
Finance Director when we floated the last year ' s
bond.
So I just cannot be a party to a farce and to me,
this Capital Improvement Project budget is a
farce. We have no plans to float the money.
There will be no actual cash . We' re telling
people we ' re going to get a Kailua Police Station
and we' re going to get a Ka'u Police Station and
we' re going to get a Milolii Park and a Kona
Scenic Subdivision, and there ' s going to be no
money, Mr . Chairman, these are only words. That' s
why I 'm going to vote against the Capital
Improvements Project. If there were plans to
float the bonds, and if we could justify the paying
- 84 -
p 0'3 2 1983
1
!II
back of the debt service in a Financial Impact
Statement projected over the next six years, I
would like very much to see all of these projects
go. There ' s no one project that I 'm against,
Mr . Chairman, but I don ' t think that we' re really
doing the right thing. We' re doing exactly what
we accuse the legislators of doing.
I have heard some of my fellow Councilmen accuse
the legislators of, you know, passing pork barrel
and knowing that the Governor is not going to
release the funds. You don' t have that waterline
between Keaau and Pahoa because it was passed by
the Legislature but the Governor refuses to
release the funds. We' re doing the same thing. I
think that if it' s not good for the State, it' s
not good for the County. I say, let' s be honest
with the people, and we ' re not being honest with
the people by appropriating $7 million worth of
bonds that we have no intention of floating and
that we probably couldn' t afford to float if we
did have the intention of floating.
CHR. FUJII : Any further discussion?
Vote on the motion: Carried.
Opposed: Councilwoman Hale.
(Mr . Schutte left the meeting at 3 :05 p.m. )
ORDINANCE SALARY ORDINANCE FOR 1983
BILL 969 : Establishes the number and rates of compensation
for all positions in departments, offices and
other agencies of the County of Hawaii under the
legislative control of the County Council,
designating payroll periods, pay days, prescribing
certain requirements with respect to overtime,
perquisites and official fidelity bonds, and
repealing Ordinance 797 , and all amendments
thereto; said ordinance to be known as the
Salary Ordinance of 1983.
Mr . Yamashiro moved for the passage of
Bill 969 , as amended, with the new
substituted pages 20 through 2.4 , as
circulated. Seconded by Mr . De Luz and
unanimously carried.
ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business , at 3 :07 p.m. ,
Mr . De Luz moved that the meeting be adjourned.
Seconded by Mr . Yamashiro and unanimously carried.
0-14A-4�''4
CHAIRMAN AND PRESIDING OFFICER
JUN 21983