Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN FC 2017/08/01 2016-2018Committee on Finance 16th Session Hawaii County Building 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, Hawaii August 1, 2017 CALL TO The regular meeting of the Committee on Finance was called to order at ORDER: at 9:46 a.m., in the Council Chambers, Hilo, by Ms. Maile Medeiros David, Chair. ROLL CALL: Present: Ms. Maile Medeiros David, Chair Ms. Karen Eoff, Vice Chair Mr. Aaron S. Y. Chung, Member Mr. Dru Mamo Kanuha, Member Ms. Sue L. K. Lee Loy, Member Ms. Eileen O'Hara, Member Mr. Herbert M. Richards, III, Member Ms. Jennifer Ruggles, Member Absent & Excused: Ms. Valerie Poindexter, Member STATEMENTS The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, FROM THE Statements from the Public on Agenda Items. PUBLIC ON AGENDA ITEMS: The following individuals registered to speak and came forward when called by the Chair: Jon Olson: Emily Naeole: Christopher Biltoft: Hugh Ono: Dave Kisor: Robert Petricci: (Representing Puna Pono Alliance) Bill 53 (Comm. 353), comment. Bill 53 (Comm. 353), in support. Bill 53 (Comm. 353), comment. Comm. 355, in support. Bill 53 (Comm. 353), in support. Bill 53 (Comm. 353), comment. FC -16 August 1, 2017 CHR. DAVID: I'm closing public testimony at this time. If it's okay with Council Members, I'd like to take Communication 355 out of order right now if it's okay with everyone? Ms. Bautista and Mr. Higgins could you please come forward, and Mr. Clerk, could you please read Comm. 355 into the record. Change Order As directed by the Chair and with no objection from the Council Members, of Business: the following item was taken out of order: Comm. 355: NOMINATION OF JAMES HIGGINS TO THE SALARY COMMISSION From Mayor Harry Kim, dated July 13, 2017, submitting for the Council's review and confirmation the above nomination. Requires Council Confirmation by: August 28, 2017 (Section 13-4(1), Hawaii County Charter) Vote on Comm. 355: Mr. Richards moved to recommend confirmation of the (Approved) appointment of Mr. James Higgins to the Salary Commission. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, O'Hara, Richards, Ruggles, and Chair David — 8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Poindexter —1. Excused: None. (Committee Members spoke in favor of the appointment.) CHR. DAVID: I'm going to take a short recess, so we can shake your hand. We're in recess. Recess: At 10:13 a.m., the Chair called for a recess. Reconvene: The meeting reconvened at 10:19 a.m. CHR. DAVID: We are now reconvening the Committee on Finance. Mr. Clerk, please at the top of our agenda Comm. 7.11. Return to Order The Chair directed the Committee to return to the order of business. of Business: COMMUNI- The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, CATIONS: Communications. Page 2 FC -16 August 1, 2017 Comm. 7.11: FINAL MONTHLY BUDGET STATUS REPORT FOR THE MONTH ENDED MAY 31, 2017, FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE From Finance Director Collins Tomei, dated June 29, 2017, transmitting the above report pursuant to Hawaii County Charter Section 6-6.3(h). Vote on Comm. 7.11: Ms. O'Hara moved to close file on Comm. 7.11. Seconded Filed by Mr. Kanuha and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, O'Hara, Richards, Ruggles, and Chair David — 8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Poindexter —1. Excused: None. CHR. DAVID: Mr. Clerk, Comm. 14.16. Comm. 14.16: REPORT OF CHANGE ORDERS AUTHORIZED: JUNE 1 - 15, 2017 From Finance Director Collins Tomei, dated June 29, 2017, transmitting the above report pursuant to Hawaii County Code Section 2-12.3. Motion to Close File: Ms. Eoff moved to close file on Comm. 14.16. Seconded by Ms. O'Hara. CHR. DAVID: Any discussion? Ms. O'Hara. MS. O'HARA: Could the Director of Finance come forward? Thank you. I know we've been in something of a pickle in West Hawaii, but this is at Hilo Wastewater Treatment Plant Outfall Repair that has gone to over 300 percent of original cost. Can you give us some background or explanation? (Note: At this time, Finance Director Collins Tomei came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. TOMEL Collins Tomei, Department of Finance. The Hilo Wastewater Treatment Plant has gone through several major renovations, and these are just accumulations of those cost. I really would wish that Department of Environmental Management was here to expound on that. They went through a lot of renovations, and findings for the systems. This is just additional cost that they started to see. MS. O'HARA: It's a lot of additional cost. MR. TOMEL Yes. Page 3 FC -16 August 1, 2017 MS. O'HARA: Okay, so are we near completion, or are we going to see more supplemental or amendments to this contractor? How's it going? MR. TOMEL Again, that's a question that really should be addressed to DEM (Department of Environmental Management), please. MS. O'HARA: Another item that's on the same schedule, its environmental assessment for Hawaii County radio tower upgrades. There is locations in Puna and Ka`u. We're also at two and a half times the original cost. MR. TOMEL The radio tower renovation is a very big project. And I think that estimation was low to begin with, so when they started to look at everything it started to accumulate also. But that's a very big project. MS. O'HARA: So this is open, and the cost is going to continue to increase? MR. TOMEL Yeah, that one again too, even that question I think MS. O'HARA: Well DPW (Department of Public Works) is here. This is a DPW project. I don't know if the Director or Deputy wants to come forward and provide any additional information about that project. I see David Yamamoto is actually the Project Manager, and he's on vacation. I'm sorry. (Note: At this time, Director of Public Works Frank DeMarco came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. DEMARCO: Frank DeMarco, Director of the Department of Public Works. Good morning, all. Yes, this is an important project for the county. These towers are important in terms of Police Department, Fire Department, and our Civil Defense response. Some of these towers are in disrepair, just given the nature of our environment here is highly corrosive. So the intent is to investigate these sites, and either replace, reconstruct, or relocate new towers. MS. O'HARA: And you're also submitting new permits, right? I mean we have Geometrician Associates, and they generally do environmental assessments. MR. DEMARCO: Right. MS. O'HARA: Okay, so that's what's happening with these towers now, they haven't been through that process before? MR. DEMARCO: Well to work on these sites and locate new sites, we have to go through this environmental review process as described in this request. Page 4 FC -16 August 1, 2017 MS. O'HARA: So we don't really have an idea what the cumulative cost will eventually be, or do we have a new estimate? MR. DEMARCO: Well as you can imagine as you go through environmental review and you encounter an archeologic feature, or something historic that needs to be preserved. You know, that may result in driving up the cost, so it's hard to anticipate those things until you've investigated the site. MS. O'HARA: Alright, thank you. I yield. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. O'Hara. Mr. Kanuha. MR. KANUHA: Thank you, Madam Chair. Sorry Collins, I really need a better explanation about the Wastewater Treatment Plant Outfall Repair from Environmental Management. I know it says within the purpose, add additional unforeseen work to the contract. You have the unforeseen work? Mr. Kamelamela. Because this is something we brought up before, and there were additional cost. Because of weather related issues added you know, another $100,000 but this is like another $200 -something thousand. (Note: At this time, Corporation Counsel Joseph Kamelamela came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. KAMELAMELA: Joseph Kamelamela, Corp Counsel. So what's reflected there is the consultant fees. So I wanted take things backwards, I wanted to answer Council Member O'Hara question. The project is finished. For the project to get finished, there was a lot of disputes that were generated as to the method of the work that had to be done so that created the issue. The consultant was good enough, so that we could keep these guys in check to follow the contract. Because some of the delays that were happening is because they had a different understanding as to what the contract terms was. I was involved in that dispute, and we made it clear to them. Follow the contract, or we're going to go after your bond. So this consultant was good enough to double check everything, and make sure that they follow what the specs was. MR. KANUHA: So the consultant was an extra $274,000? MR. KAMELAMELA: Yes. MR. KANUHA: Wow. MR. KAMELAMELA: Yes, very expensive. But well worth it, just to get the project done. Because there's also a lot of federal regulations that we had to comply with, and so there's all of these deadlines that have to be met. So if the construction wasn't completed at a certain time, it could of subjected the county Page 5 FC -16 August 1, 2017 too with potential violations. But then we'd probably go after the contractor on that. MR. KANUHA: I know these are change orders and you're just reporting on what happened, but how does that $274,000 add to a change order within the original contract? Wouldn't that be a separate budget item from someplace else, or this is all lumped into this one original contract? MR. KAMELAMELA: Yeah, it's lumped into a contract, same contract. So sometimes there's situations that occur, that we require them to do more work basically. It's still within the scope of work. MR. KANUHA: Okay. Well I just leave that out there. Thanks for that. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Kanuha. Mr. Chung, go ahead. MR. CHUNG: Yeah, I'm kind of glad Mr. Kanuha brought that up, Joe. I'm just going to offer this as comment. Because you stated that you had talked to the contractor, you said that you have to follow the contract, or you guys going move against the bond. So we have to pay a consultant to tell them how to follow the contract? MR. KAMELAMELA: Usually on a lot of these kinds of contracts there are CMs (Contract Managers) that are hired, so their function is to really make sure that the contractor's do the work. So it's kind of like quality control kind of stuff And this doesn't always happen, it's just that for this contractor who was doing the repair, it happened. MR. CHUNG: Yeah. I just got to say on the record, this doesn't really make sense to me. MR. KAMELAMELA: Yeah. MR. CHUNG: Because I know time was of the essence, but it almost suggests to me that however you look at it. The contractor had more leverage than us in this negotiation, if we had to end up paying for a consultant to tell them how to follow the contract. It's just my comment. Thank you, Mr. Kanuha, for bringing that up. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Chung. Ms. Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: I agree with Mr. Kanuha. I really wish someone from DEM was here to explain all of the change orders. You know, this outfall is my community, and I believe a month or month and a half ago we got a warning about water quality in that area. So there was a lot of confusion with the community, as far as whether the work was done accurately or not. And what I heard today is the work Page 6 FC -16 August 1, 2017 is done, but what I hear from the community, is there's still more issues with that outfall whether it be in the water or on land. I'm a little disappointed, because we're in a position where if we except this and file this, the conversation doesn't continue about how these contracts are managed. And how these change orders have now risen the cost by 300 percent, and I was hoping there would be opportunity to maybe re -bid portions of the work, and maybe we could of gotten a better deal. You know, these are just my comments, the problem is it's all lumped together in this one communication. And if we want more information, either we hold on to this communication and set it for another meeting, or just push it along. What I hear my colleagues saying is, some of these answers are not good enough. MR. KAMELAMELA: You make a good point. I'm just giving you some information, I was just about to email them saying that this question has come up. I just wanted to answer some of the questions. I am familiar with what you are talking about. There are actually two different areas, because the outfall was kind of far out that the repair—so what you talked about is separate areas. But I think it's a good idea just to have the discussion, so it's up to the Council. Maybe you can talk to DEM, and then find out whether it's in this sitting with them and just get more information. Because I do agree with the Council Members, unless you are familiar with these constructions are managed, you know, it does kind of get confusing. And so maybe somebody from DEM can set forth an explanation on that. MS. LEE LOY: Yeah. Thank you. CHR. DAVID: Would you like to table this, until someone comes from DEM? MS. LEE LOY: Yes. Because I'm feeling that we're not getting the answers, or at least the justification to move this along. I do want to repeat something I said way back in December, which is good information helps us make good decisions. And I'm not feeling that I'm getting good information to make a good decision, and I applaud Ms. O'Hara, Mr. Kanuha, and even Mr. Chung for kind of being alarmed at this number. Yeah, I want to hear what my colleagues have to say. Thank you. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, and I'll come back to you. Ms. O'Hara. MS. O'HARA: I do think we need to hear from DEM. There's another item here that is now at 175 percent of original cost. It appears to be related, and I'm not sure. Because I need an explanation and Dora Beck is the Project Manager, who is our wastewater head. And it has to do with compliance with the DOH (Department of Health) rules for the Hilo Wastewater Treatment Plan. So these are two separate contracts, both of which are going considerably over. I agree that we need to hear from DEM, so I'm hoping that somebody can contact Page 7 FC -16 August 1, 2017 Ms. Beck if she's available. Hopefully she's not on vacation, and we'll see. Thank you. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. O'Hara. If anyone else doesn't have any more discussion, then I'll go back to Ms. Lee Loy to make the motion to table this matter. Vote on Motion Ms. Lee Loy moved to table Comm. 14.16. Seconded by to Table: Mr. Kanuha and carried by the following voice vote: (Approved) Ayes: Committee Members Chung, Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, O'Hara, Ruggles, and Chair David — 7. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Poindexter, Richards — 2. Excused: None. CHR. DAVID: Mr. Clerk, can we move on to Comm. 15.12, please. Comm. 15.12: REPORT OF FUND TRANSFERS AUTHORIZED: JUNE 16 - 30, 2017 From Controller Kay Oshiro, dated July 11, 2017. Vote on Comm. 15.12: Ms. Eoff moved to close file on Comm. 15.12. Seconded by Filed Mr. Kanuha and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, O'Hara, Richards, Ruggles, and Chair David — 8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Poindexter —1. Excused: None. CHR. DAVID: Mr. Clerk, Communications 69.2. Comm. 69.2: FOURTH QUARTER CLAIMS REPORT: APRIL 1 - JUNE 30, 2017 From Claims Investigator/Adjustor Clifford D. Victorine III, dated July 5, 2017, transmitting the above report pursuant to Section 2-9 of the Hawaii County Code. Motion to Close File: Mr. Richards moved to close file on Comm. 69.2. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy. CHR. DAVID: Any discussion? Mr. Kanuha, go ahead. MR. KANUHA: Can I have Mr. Victorine up, please? Thank you, Madam Chair. Page 8 FC -16 August 1, 2017 CHR. DAVID: You're welcome. (Note: At this time, Claims Investigator -Adjustor Clifford Victorine came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. VICTORINE: Good morning, Cliff Victorine. Claims Investigator, Corporation Counsel. MR. KANUHA: Morning. How do weI'm not going to go for everything, but just a couple of things maybe I want information about. You know, a falling mango hit and shattered a windshield on Pohoiki Road, okay. No, Road 130 and Pohoiki. How do you go through these claims that, you know, this is county road I'm assuming? MR. VICTORINE: Yes. MR. KANUHA: And the mango tree was in the county right of way? MR. VICTORINE: Yes. MR. KANUHA: In the air? MR. VICTORINE: Basically there are protected trees— CHR. DAVID: Mr. Victorine, could you please identify yourself first. MR. VICTORINE: Cliff Victorine, with Corporation Counsel. CHR. DAVID: Thank you. MR. VICTORINE: Yes. There's some protected trees, exceptional trees. The mango that grows down there are all protected. So there are some trees that are basically right in the middle of the road, and the road goes around the trees. So yes, there's a lot of mango trees in that area. MR. KANUHA: So basically, you know, mango hits a windshield, well supposedly the mango hits the windshield somebody calls saying this mango broke my windshield it could be a mango it could not be a mango or. MR. VICTORINE: Yeah, you know, it could or it could not. But that's part of going out and doing an investigation trying to get the best knowledge as we can. Part of it is looking at the person who makes the claim, is there you know, he has a witness doesn't he. The pictures he submits, you know, it comes really hard at a point. He doesn't have a history of filing claims, doesn't look Page 9 FC -16 August 1, 2017 MR. KANUHA: Unreasonable. MR. VICTORINE: Yeah. It's reasonable as we looked at this, this claim is actually a long time ago. We had it pending, because I wanted more information and there was a lot of time that some of the information didn't come in. So basically when it all most reached the statute of limitations running out, we said well I can go with this and get it done with or we're going to let this expire. And they settled at an amount. MR. KANUHA: And how about the next one? The claimant's car was stolen while in the county's contractual custody. MR. VICTORINE: Okay, that was a rental vehicle. MR. KANUHA: From a county employee? MR. VICTORINE: Yeah. A county employee was on a training, and vehicle was rented. When he came out, vehicle was stolen. The problem that we had with that is that, and I kind of talked with the department they didn't use their P -card. So the P -card, which would have had a coverage that would of helped protect the car. By not being used because of a different procedure that they use to rent vehicles, we had to cover that employee under the self-insured. The primary insurance, if you were to go and rent a vehicle, your insurance is the primary to cover. MR. KANUHA: So because he didn't use his P -card, it wasn't covered. MR. VICTORINE: Because the department rented for them. The person doesn't have a P -card, the department rented it for that person in training. So therefore they couldn't use a P -card. MR. KANUHA: That's interesting, okay. Thank you. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Kanuha. Ms. O'Hara. MS. O'HARA: I just have a point of clarification, and thank you for being here. The accident that occurred in the Pohoiki area was that on Pohoiki Road? MR. VICTORINE: It wasn't an area that we had to kind of look at and determine, it was off the road but it was in the county right of way. MS. O'HARA: It was on Pohoiki Road? MR. VICTORINE: Yes, it was on the road. Page 10 FC -16 August 1, 2017 MS. O'HARA: I may be confused, you mentioned exceptional tree status for the mangos. I'm not sure those mangos are in that category. I know that there is an exceptional tree status for the mangos along what use to be called Red Road, and also along what a lot of people now refer to as the Wa`a Wa`a Road. The old Government Beach Road, but I don't know without going over and checking out the code that, that's actually a protected status on those mangos. I do know they're problematic, and yes, I had stopped there and had my car dented by falling mangos. I'm just kind of curious about that. MR. VICTORINE: I think that's really a different point that I brought up, but the trees are growing. That need to be taken care of, and if it's not protected then maybe that's something that should be taken care of. CHR. DAVID: That's it Ms. O'Hara? Okay, thank you. Anyone else? Thank you, Mr. Victorine. All those in favor of filing Comm. 69.2 please say "aye." Vote on Comm.69.2: The motion to close file on Comm. 69.2 was carried by the Filed following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, O'Hara, Richards, Ruggles, and Chair David — 8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Poindexter —1. Excused: None. CHR. DAVID: Mr. Clerk, Communication 377, please. Comm. 377: FOURTH QUARTER REPORT OF PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER A CONTRACT FOR LESS THAN 90 DAYS: APRIL - JUNE, 2017 From Human Resources Director Sharon Toriano, dated July 3, 2017, transmitting the above report pursuant to Ordinance No. 17-42. Vote on Comm. 377 Filed Ms. Lee Loy moved to close file on Comm. 377. Seconded by Mr. Richards and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, O'Hara, Richards, Ruggles, and Chair David — 8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Poindexter —1. Excused: None. CHR. DAVID: Mr. Clerk, Order of Resolutions, please. Page 11 FC -16 August 1, 2017 ORDER OF The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, RESOLUTIONS: Order of Resolutions. Res. 241-17: AUTHORIZES THE OFFICE OF THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY The agreement would assist the County with its intervention of Public Utility Commission dockets pertaining to Hawaiian Electric Company's Power Supply Improvement Plans and Grid Modernization Strategy. Reference: Comm. 364 Intr. by: Ms. David (B/R) Motion to Approve: Ms. Lee Loy moved to recommend adoption of Res. 241-17. Seconded by Ms. Eoff CHR. DAVID: Any discussion? Ms. Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: Yeah, I have some questions about this, and I'm hoping somebody from R&D (Research and Development) is here. CHR. DAVID: Ms. Ley is here from R&D. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Ms. Ley. Ms. Ley, please help us understand Resolution 241-17. (Note: At this time, Director of Research and Development Diane Ley came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MS. LEY: Sure, happy to do so. I'm Diane Ley, Director for the Department of Research and Development. So Resolution 241-17 is basically required by State Statue Section 46-7, which requires the county before it enters into a contract with any government entity to come before the Council to ask permission. So with the intent of this resolution, is to basically authorize approval for the administration to enter into a contract with Arizona State University. To support the review of several fairly complex dockets, that are before the Public Utilities Commission. As well as the integration of those dockets into additional dockets. Arizona State University has a history of being able to address a number of utility related planning strategies and assessments. So we like to rely on them to assist the department with a formulation, and identification of concerns and opportunities that are put forward in these dockets. As well as policy issues, recommendations, and also any suggested conditions or timelines that we may want to propose to the Public Utilities Commission. Page 12 FC -16 August 1, 2017 And milestones, I think the focus would be on balancing the concerns about equitable rates for our rate payers in the county as well as the county itself, which is one of the largest users of electricity on the island. As well as balancing that with the needs for the utility to be economically viable, so that's what we're looking for. So we'd ask for your support. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you. Ms. Ley, last night I attended the HELCO's (Hawai`i Electric Light Company) presentation on the Grid Modernization. I hope I said that correctly. My understanding is the comment period, is going to wrap up on us fairly quickly here. And so how does this evaluation from the University tie into that comment period, and then moving that forward to PUC (Public Utilities Commission) level as they go through that analysis at that level? MS. LEY: Okay, we've been working on that, the county has been a participant in that docket. So we've been working through that process, and we do have a timeline that's coming up very quickly this month. Because we're into August already, so we'll just continue working forward. MS. LEE LOY: Will they be on board with the adoption of this resolution? Will they be on board in time to evaluate all of the comments, and provide? MS. LEY: Yes. We've actually have an existing contract, this is an extension of some of the work that needs to be done. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you. I yield. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. Anyone else? Mr. Kanuha. MR. KANUHA: Thank you. I'm in full agreement of this. So going to enter into an agreement with ASU (Arizona State University) is there any money involved in that agreement, or is it just like a thank you for helping us out, mahalo for your time? MS. LEY: No. It's not a Pro Bono agreement. The contract is for $87,000. MR. KANUHA: Okay, I don't know if I saw that in here. MS. LEY: I don't think it was identified in the resolution itself. MR. KANUHA: Okay. MS. LEY: But we've identified the resources within the department. MR. KANUHA: So $87,000 nothing more nothing less? Page 13 FC -16 August 1, 2017 MS. LEY: No. MR. KANUHA: Okay. Because I mean MS. LEY: My understanding is these are billable hours within the contract, so that was the intention is to be billable hours. So if the PUC actions do not require continued support from ASU then we will terminate the contract. MR. KANUHA: Okay. Because within the resolution it says, you know, the Mayor is authorized to execute on behalf of the county agreement and related documents. So pretty much can do whatever with this contract, just wanted to make sure that's— MS. LEY: One of things we look for in particular this contract and the work that is related to—we're focused right now with the power supply improvement plans and the modernization strategy docket. The challenge has been, the utility goes forward with some of its planning process to the Public Utilities Commission. Then they have the authority to—which has happen is they split off into separate dockets to drill down on these issues. So we don't really know where they're going, so we need a little bit of flexibility with it. We do want to, you know, obviously these are public dollars we want to be conservative with them. We don't want to be, you know, pie in the sky, research that's going on or anything like that. The intent is to help the county in asking the right questions, suggesting the right policy decisions. The department has been working in this fashion for a number of years now, with a number of dockets that have come up to the Public Utilities Commission. And we estimate that you know we've had a savings to both the county as well as rate payers of $50 to $70 million dollars over the course of, I going to guess at five to six years. MR. KANUHA: Yeah, absolutely, and that's why I really feel that this is really important for us to be part of this agreement. I just wanted to see, you know, if there was you know, an estimated amount of money. Instead of just giving this blank check to the department and mayor to do whatever they want with the agreements. Even though, you know, I understand the savings, they're substantial, so thank you guys for your hard work. I know Will Rolston, I'm pretty sure he's part of this. He's been a major part of these savings too, so thank you. MS. LEY: Thank you. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Kanuha. Anyone else for Ms. Ley? Thank you, Ms. Ley. All those in favor of approving Resolution 241-17 please say "aye." Page 14 FC -16 August 1, 2017 Vote on Res. 241-17: The motion to recommend adoption of Res. 241-17 was (Approved) carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, O'Hara, Richards, Ruggles, and Chair David — 8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Poindexter —1. Excused: None. CHR. DAVID: I see Director Kucharski is in the room. Could I please have a motion to remove Comm. 14.16 from the table? Vote on Motion to Ms. Lee Loy moved to remove Comm. 14.16 from the Remove from Table: table. Seconded by Ms. Eoff and carried by the following (Approved) voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, O'Hara, Richards, Ruggles, and Chair David — 8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Poindexter —1. Excused: None. CHR. DAVID: Director Kucharski, thank you for coming. MR. KUCHARSKI: My apologies for not being here, somehow it slipped from my calendar. CHR. DAVID: Please identify yourself, and I believe Ms. Lee Loy had some questions. (Note: At this time, Environmental Management Director William Kucharski came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. KUCHARSKI: William Kucharski, Director of DEM (Department of Environmental Management). CHR. DAVID: Thank you. MS. LEE LOY: Good morning. We were looking at this Comm. 14.16, and there was a line item related to the management services for the Hilo Wastewater Treatment Plant. And the change order is associated with that, to the original contract amount. And really this body is really asking how come so much, and if you could just provide a lot more background on that. Page 15 FC -16 August 1, 2017 MR. KUCHARSKI: Yes. In the Hilo outfall, and any kind of discharge you have what's called a mixing zone. And we're required by DOH (State Department of Health) to monitor within that mixing zone, at edges and then two other locations around. DOH, has come and requested that additional testing be done, so this is in response to DOH's request for additional sampling. MS. LEE LOY: So the change orders were actually driven by the Department of Health request. And the contractor was done with the work, but because the Department of Health came in and asked for more work. MR. KUCHARSKI: Like instead of six locations we had 12 locations that needed to be sampled. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, that helps a lot. I mean if you're doubling the monitoring sites, I can see how come the numbers went up. And we didn't have that information earlier, so thank you for that explanation. I yield. MR. KUCHARSKI: Apologies that I was not in earlier. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. Mr. Chung. MR. CHUNG: Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. Thank you very much, Mr. Kucharski. I'm just wondering now Joe, what was that thing you were talking about that we're going to move on bond? How does that all relate. MR. KANUHA: Separate one. MR. CHUNG: Oh, it's a different, okay. So we're going to get to that then? Okay, thank you. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Chung. Ms. O'Hara. MS. O'HARA: I'm not sure if this is related, but please explain. You're also increasing funding for the furnishing and delivering, of testing compliances with DOH rules for the Wastewater Plant in Hilo. Is that somehow related to this work, or no? Or is this a separate contract? MR. KUCHARSKI: One of the things that has happened is that we had a disruption in our chlorine supplier. The chlorine for disinfection has stopped shipping, and so we're in the process of trying to find new suppliers. They're a little more expensive, and going through that kind of process. So any of the additional cost is, and I'm not certain. But I'm pretty certain it's all dealing with the fact that the chlorine gas that we've used, has not become available in quantities that we had before. Page 16 FC -16 August 1, 2017 MS. O'HARA: Okay, thank you. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. O'Hara. Anyone else? Mr. Kanuha. MR. KANUHA: Bill we had a question earlier about the other change order, which was the construction management services for the Hilo Wastewater Treatment Plant outfall repair. Mr. Kamelamela came up saying that this change order was, you know, additional unforeseen work, which was the hiring of a consultant to make sure that the contractor was doing what they were supposed to do. Correct? MR. KUCHARSKI: Yes. Again, Bill Kucharski, DEM. In this particular instance this was the repair to the outfall, were we had areas of the discharge pipe that were under cut. And we had areas of the pipe of the discharge along that were holed that needed to be repaired. The contractor that we had was less then great, and we actually came close to sending contract termination letters. They finally corrected it, but during all of this time, we're also under compliance order to get this done by June 1st. So we had problems with that contractor, and the Kennedy Jenks oversight was required to have daily reports. We have not budgeted for that, this was supposed to be done in mid-April. And it was pushed to July, and that extra time that the contractor took required us to have somebody on site all the time. And that is what this is. MR. KANUHA: So because the contractor wasn't the best for this type of work, we ended up paying. Not only the first change order, but because of weather related or whatever it was. Which was a substantial amount of money, we paid this fourth one for $243,000 to make sure that the contract, it's just hard to understand that, you know. MR. KUCHARSKI: Again, we were under a compliance order from— MR. KANUHA: But it wasn't our fault, it was the contractor's fault. MR. KUCHARSKI: It was the contractor's fault. MR. KANUHA: Because the contractor's fault we ended up paying an extra— MR. KUCHARSKI: Yes, we did. Pursuing them for damages within the contract, since they completed the contract essentially on time. These additional cost, I'm not certain what our recourse would be as far as being able to show their inability to perform as expected and anticipated. It didn't go past the point of firing them, and so we worked with them to get this done. Page 17 FC -16 August 1, 2017 MR. KANUHA: And so there's nobody within the department to monitor, or make sure that these contracts are done correctly? MR. KUCHARSKI: In the regard MR. KANUHA: Because we could of hired several people, you know, not only to monitor that, but I mean your department is always asking for additional revenue for positions to help with a lot of different situations around the island. I mean that's a huge chunk of money. MR. KUCHARSKI: It is, and I couldn't agree more. We're actually in the process of getting three additional positions reallocated. One that is on the books, but not funded. The other two are changing their position, and will be coming to you with that. This is an indicator of how thin the department is, we really couldn't take somebody out. MR. KANUHA: Where is this money coming from? MR. KUCHARSKI: I can't tell you exactly what part, but it's in our construction monies that we have. MR. KANUHA: And what is it taking away from? MR. KUCHARSKI: I can't say that it's specifically taking away from anything, primarily because when we get the money we really do need to have somebody to manage that. And this is an example to what happens when we're so thin. It cost us more money to go in and hire a professional from outside to manage this, because we don't have the internal staff to do that. And if it's not money, this is a onetime hit if we hire somebody it is a continuous thing. We have work for them, but your questions are really spot on. And it is the problem that we have of taking a very thin—each one of our project managers, we have five that are dealing with six to seven projects. MR. KANUHA: You've been advocating on that specific subject since the beginning, so I can understand why you're saying that the process is backwards. You know, we're wasting a lot of money, that it doesn't seem right. It's hard to swallow something like this. MR. KUCHARSKI: This is something that when you're dealing with the contract, you suggest that we're going to get to it, and then it delays a little bit. It's always a day or two, or three or four days. And then all of sudden you look and say your about out of contract, which is why we had worked with sending them a letter saying we're about to terminate this contract. With that we got the owner of the company the president to come down, and then he intervened and started to get it moved forward. And once he was here and understood the Page 18 FC -16 August 1, 2017 problems on the ground, things moved and we got this done satisfactorily. But it was expensive for us, and it was also expensive for the contractor. MR. KANUHA: I appreciate you coming down to explain this, because several of us already said this doesn't make any sense. We got to make this better, I mean this process has to better in the future. We can't be doing this backwards like this, it's a complete waste of money for the taxpayers, you know. MR. KUCHARSKI: I could not agree with you more. MR. KANUHA: I appreciate you explaining it. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Kanuha. Mr. Chung. MR. CHUNG: Thank you. So this is a change order, did we hire the consultant? MR. KUCHARSKI: The county, already had Kennedy Jenks under contract for construction and design services. And we tapped into that contract for additional services. MR. CHUNG: Who hired them? MR. KUCHARSKI: Kennedy Jenks? The subject of the change order, or the original contract? MR. CHUNG: Right. So in other words we let the contractor, who you just stated that you were not fond of in terms of their performance choose— MR. KUCHARSKI: No sir, I'm sorry, that was not intended. We had two contracts. We had the contract for the construction, and we had another for oversight. Which was our contract Kennedy/Jenks. And that was a limited amount of oversight time to construct MR. CHUNG: I see. So this only increased the amount to Kennedy/Jenks? MR. KUCHARSKI: Yes. MR. CHUNG: Okay. MR. KUCHARSKI: And they went from, you know, once every three days to five days a week. MR. CHUNG: Okay. Alright, thank you. MR. KUCHARSKI: Thank you. Page 19 FC -16 August 1, 2017 CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Chung. Ms. Eoff. MS. EOFF: Thank you, Madam Chair. I know this is just regarding this particular change order, but I can't help to want to state that degradation of our water quality in the surrounding waters of the entire island is getting to be an issue. And you stated that we are thinly staffed, and that maybe increasing staff in the department would help us to stay on top of the aging system that are now causing these problems. Would you be willing to help advocate for that rather than have things go wrong, and then be in a situation where we have to spend extra money with these contract hires, etc.? I mean, I'm feeling really like this is a timely subject, time to be addressing this given what's happening around the island. I'm not sure how, you know, you're in a position now that you're seeing this. And you seem to be very qualified, to help us get on top of this before we see the decline of our water quality. MR. KUCHARSKI: I think I've addressed the Council before, as this being my number one concern within the range of my responsibilities. As I said we have three positions that we discussed with the mayor, the mayor is fully behind this. Understanding that we've just started a new budget, and the fact that it will take six to eight months to get somebody on board. We have again, we're in the process of three positions that were already approved, but not funded. We found the money to fund those positions, we're in the process of getting the position descriptions. Some of them are like a student engineer, which we're going to try and upgrade to an engineer three or four. Again, right now in the process with HR (Human Resources) of three additional positions to get the position descriptions going forward. And we would then provide next year's budget, for at least two, possibly three more engineering positions. So we're trying to scale it in as quickly as we can, as I have become more aware everyday nothing moves quickly. And we're taking these steps as quickly as the system allows us to take. MS. EOFF: I really appreciate the administrations making this a priority, and your attention paid to it. And really looking forward to improving our expertise, and personnel at the department. I'm sure the Council would support these positions. MR. KUCHARSKI: Thank you. MS. EOFF: Thank you. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Eoff. I'm going to go to Ms. O'Hara first, and then Mr. Chung. MS. O'HARA: Thank you, Chair. And thank you for coming up and talking with us, Mr. Kucharski. I also wanted to, on top of your explanation, I just wanted to Page 20 FC -16 August 1, 2017 point out since you may not be aware of it. But this afternoon in the Environmental Management Commission there will be a presentation by Terri Napeahi, and I hope that you or your wastewater staff or someone is present for that. Because it pertains to a lot of what we're discussing here. MR. KUCHARSKI: Thank you. Yes, I intend to be here for that. MS. O'HARA: Thank you. CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Mr. Chung. MR. CHUNG: Thank you. You know, with regard to this $243,000. If you could just tell us whether you think that this money was well spent, and if so explain why it was well spent. The last question would be, how would additional positions in your office have obviated the necessity for this expenditure? MR. KUCHARSKI: Thank you, Councilman. The money was well spent in that the contractor that was doing the construction work really required a significant amount of independent observation, and input for them to move forward on the test that they needed to complete. Which were again, filling in underneath the pipeline, there was coral that needed to be removed. There were all number of systems, and problems that needed to be addressed. The Kennedy/Jenks construction manager was very thorough, very detailed. I would rather that we didn't have to use him, but the fact of the matter was the construction contractor needed oversight. So I think the money was well spent in that it got us to the end point that we needed to get to, when we needed to get to it. But it ought not to have been necessary, had the contractor performed and done what they needed to do and had been completed in April none of this would have been necessary. That not having occurred, we needed to take a very direct action to ensure that we were not out of compliance with our administrative order from EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) to get this repair done. We had already got one extension on that, and we did not intend to go back for a second one, this was the push. Had we had more staff, someone that was assigned to this project alone, they could have been the construction manager. Could have been there from the beginning, could have stayed there and we would not have required to bring in outside support. If we did, it would have been advisory and minimal, not a full time presence. This was essentially a full time presence for very expensive senior construction manager. MR. CHUNG: So we're short construction managers? MR. KUCHARSKI: We're short everybody. The construction managers, our senior personnel that have that experience, and can do that. As I said we're averaging five to six projects a person. Page 21 FC -16 August 1, 2017 MR. CHUNG: How much does a Senior Construction Manager cost the county with all the MR. KUCHARSKI: The loaded cost for them was probably over $200. I don't know the exact thing, but from experience it would probably about $210 an hour. MR. CHUNG: I mean over the course of a year, you know, with all their benefits and everything about how much? MR. KUCHARSKI: You mean internal or external? MR. CHUNG: Internal. MR. KUCHARSKI: An engineer four, I think makes about $85, and with benefits it's about maybe $120 with everything a year. MR. CHUNG: Okay. If I could ask who's the contractor on this? MR. KUCHARSKI: The contractor was HawaiianI blocked his name out now. It wasn't Hawaiian Dredging, but the company was out and I'll get that for you. I'm sorry I can't get the full name right now. MR. CHUNG: From Oahu? MR. KUCHARSKI: Out of Oahu, yes. MR. CHUNG: Maybe Joe, if you can come up for a second. And incidentally, thank you very much Bill. I mean that was real helpful for us going forward too, with regard to the need for various positions. Joe, given that back drop, do we have legal recourse against the construction company? I know it's going to be tuff, but this is not chump change, almost $250,000. (Note: At this time, Corporation Counsel Joseph Kamelamela came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. KAMELAMELA: There's a possible claim, but you know, a lot of these contracts too there's retention amount. So sometimes when we get into these kinds of problems, you know, we'd give them less then what their entitled to. Actually after this project got done, then I moved on to other things. So we haven't addressed it yet. MR. CHUNG: Okay, and I don't want you to really talk about things that may come up. So in other words, they haven't made the last draw yet? Page 22 FC -16 August 1, 2017 MR. KAMELAMELA: Not that I know of MR. CHUNG: Well who's going to know? MR. KAMELAMELA: I would have to talk to them. MR. KUCHARSKI: The final invoice would come in to Wastewater Division. MR. CHUNG: And it hasn't? MR. KUCHARSKI: I have to check, I don't know that it has or hasn't. I need to check on that specifically. MR. CHUNG: Alright. I don't want you to disclose any of your thoughts, but let me give you my thoughts. I can't speak for anybody else. I seriously urge you guys to either retain some of that last draw to force them into some kind of litigation with us, or file a lawsuit. You know, we're going to be honoring Judge Ibara pretty soon, right for his many years of service. Joe I know how highly regarded he is in your eyes, but remember what his directives were when he was Corporation Counsel. He's not going to stand back on any of these things, he's going to make everybody work. I mean not just the employees, but people who have contracts with the county. He's not just going to roll over, and play dead basically. MR. KAMELAMELA: No. I don't know him to play dead here. MR. CHUNG: Okay, thank you, Joe. MR. KAMELAMELA: Okay. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Chung. Ms. Lee Loy. Oh, I'm sorry, Mr. Kucharski. MR. KUCHARSKI: Excuse me, Council Member Chung. The company was AMC (American Marine Corporation). I believe is the name that was the company, I was checking my old e-mails trying to get that pulled up, but that was the name. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Kucharski. Ms. Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: Yeah, thank you. I agree with Mr. Chung. We had an opportunity, once we saw that the contractor wasn't adhering to terms and conditions of the contract and we had to hire an independent party. And in this case, somebody who was already on contract with us for other stuff I think that Page 23 FC -16 August 1, 2017 would have been the prefect open door opportunity to begin to hold them accountable to the contract, and even look at liquidating damages or something. I don't want the county to have a reputation, it's real easy to get a change order from us. You know, even if you don't comply with the terms of the contract, it takes them a while to catch up. And then they go ahead and throw money at with a change order to make it right, I don't want us to have that reputation. This is where those expenditures, and cost end up bleeding us out unnecessarily. So Mr. Kamelamela, you know, I agree with Mr. Chung. Without discussing too much, you know, what other options we have, I think we have an open opportunity right now to put other people who are on contract with the county on notice. That we're watching how these contracts are spent. I believe this conversation has gone over an hour alone, just on what this one communication. And we as a body are looking at how this money is being spent, especially through our change order contracts. So please take this to heart, and help protect the public's money. Please, thank you. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. Given that I don't see any lights. I'd like to thank Mr. Kucharski, and I do have a question. Given the comments from Mr. Chung and the rest of my colleagues regarding this particular contractor. I know that potentially we may not be in a position to recoup the county's cost in having to hire the extra time to make this contract complete, but given the fact that we have other systems that are failing. I would really like to not see this contractor be awarded another contract with the county. I know there's a process on that, but because of the history that we've had with this particular contractor. I hope that it's taken into consideration on future bids that we can't allow this kind of stuffs to happen, for all the reasons that we're talking about. If we can't recoup our huge added cost from this contractor then maybe this contractor, we have to think twice about his reputation in doing contracts for this county. That's my comment on this, given the really good input from my Council Members. I really thank you, Mr. Kucharski, for taking this issue at heart and very well indeed. And Corp Counsel Kamelamela, thank you very much for bringing us some clarity on this very concerning issue. So given that, thank you, gentlemen. All those in favor of filing Comm. 14.16, please say "aye." Page 24 FC -16 August 1, 2017 Vote on Comm. 14.16: The motion to close file on Comm. 14.16 was carried by the Filed following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, O'Hara, Richards, Ruggles, and Chair David — 8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Poindexter —1. Excused: None. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, very much gentlemen. Mr. Clerk, can you please continue on to Resolution 242-17. Res. 242-17: AUTHORIZES THE OFFICE OF THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT, PURSUANT TO HAWAII REVISED STATUTES 46-7, WITH HO`OPONO, SERVICES OF THE BLIND, DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN SERVICES, STATE OF HAWAII The agreement would provide for permits for vending machines to be located at the Public Works Department's Traffic Division baseyards in East Hawaii and West Hawaii. Reference: Comm. 365 Intr. by: Ms. David (B/R) Vote on Res. 242-17 (Approved) Mr. Richards moved to recommend adoption of Res. 242-17. Seconded by Ms. Eoff and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, O'Hara, Richards, Ruggles, and Chair David — 8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Poindexter —1. Excused: None. CHR. DAVID: Mr. Clerk, please Resolution 243-17. Page 25 FC -16 August 1, 2017 Res. 243-17: CHANGES THE FULL-TIME EQUIVALENT STATUS OF A HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SPECIALIST III POSITION FROM A PART-TIME HOURLY POSITION TO BECOME A FULL-TIME SALARIED POSITION Requests a change in the time element of this position to accommodate the increased number of housing projects in Kona, which requires close monitoring of management, financial, and social services; also anticipates the position to provide oversight to upcoming Community Development Block Grant projects such as the certified kitchen at the Friendly Place and Kona Abuse Center renovation projects. Reference: Comm. 368 Intr. by: Ms. David (B/R) Motion to Approve: Ms. Eoff moved to recommend adoption of Res. 243-17. Seconded by Mr. Kanuha. CHR. DAVID: Council Members, any discussion? Mr. Richards. I believe Mr. Gyotoku is here. Thank you. (Note: At this time, Housing Administrator Neil Gyotoku came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. GYOTOKU: Good morning, Neil Gyotoku, Housing Administrator. CHR. DAVID: Good morning. MR. RICHARDS: Thank you, Chair. Thank you for being here this morning. I assume this is coming out of your department. And can you explain the financial impact it will have on your budget, and how that will balance for your budget, please. MR. GYOTOKU: Position was budgeted for the fiscal year 2017-2018. We plan to establish a full time position in Kona, to help us monitor the upcoming new construction projects, such as Kamakana Village. Also in Waikoloa we have Kamakoa Nui, also Kaeo`o, Waikoloa, that project's being planned and will be coming up. We need the position to help us monitor the construction, as well as the management portion of the projects. We also have the friendly place at Hale Kikaha the Emergency Shelter, and also Ulu Wini Housing Project. And this will help us budget and monitor the activities of the projects. Like I said, it has been budgeted for the 2017-2018 budget. MR. RICHARDS: Okay, thank you. I'm glad to hear this is budgeted. What is the impact overall? We move from a part time to a full time position, what is the overall increase? Page 26 FC -16 August 1, 2017 MR. GYOTOKU: I think the overall increase would be about approximately, $47,000 from part time to full time including the fringes. MR. RICHARDS: Okay. And currently with the part time position, what are we looking at? MR. GYOTOKU: Half of that, so about $30,000 without fringes. MR. RICHARDS: Don't take this as me not supporting, I'm just trying to ask the questions when we start talking larger numbers. And I think this is a good direction because that means we have more to manage, which means we are starting to address some of our concerns. Just to reiterate we're spending maybe $25,000 for the last part time, and we'll double that and go up to $50,000? MR. GYOTOKU: Well the position has been vacant for the last couple years, and it wasn't filled and it was stationed in Hilo on the east side of the island. My plan was to transfer it over to the west side, so we can monitor the positions more closely. Because this has been the focus of activity on the west side, especially in the South Kohala and North Kona Districts. MR. RICHARDS: Okay, thank you very much, I yield. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Richards. Ms. Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Chair. Mr. Gyotoku, could you give me a thumbnail sketch of all the projects that this individual would be monitoring. MR. GYOTOKU: Right now we have Ulu Wini, which is 92 units along Hinalani. We also have the Friendly Place in Hale Kikaha in the industrial area. We're just about finishing Kamakana Villages, and there's also a new project being planned within the next two years to be constructed. We're working in Waikoloa to develop a multi -family unit in Kamakoa, I hope to get that started in the next year or so. There's Waikoloa, which is urban development corporation, they are planning to build that project in Waikoloa within the next year. MS. LEE LOY: How many units total, and your best guess. MR. GYOTOKU: My best guest would be approximately 250 units, multi -family. MS. LEE LOY: And the timing for all of these projects to be seen through fruition? Page 27 FC -16 August 1, 2017 MR. GYOTOKU: Well like I said, we already have quite a number of projects completed. The other ones would be within the next two to three years that we've been looking at. The important part which I missed was that, this person would be overseeing the block grant projects, and the renovations of the certified kitchen for the emergency unit. Also for the Kona Abuse Center, and to help people from the west side in applying for block grant projects. That position would be like a liaison for my CDBG program (Community Development Block Grant). MS. LEE LOY: My question is, once all of these units are built, why would we still need the position? MR. GYOTOKU: That position would have to work with the property management people of each project. We oversee the budgets for Ulu Wini and Ouli Ekahi, those are county owned projects. They're property managed, but we have to work with property managers as far as financial budgets. Also the social services that they provide. All of those things takes a lot of time. We also have Section 8 housing voucher contracts, which are put into there, so we have to monitor those contracts like that. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you. I didn't mean to put you on the spot, but we need to hear how valuable going from a part time to a full time is. And Mr. Kanuha always asks this question, what are we going to get? So we need to hear as a body, what we're going to get and the value of this going forward. Again, I don't mean to put you on the spot, but this is the kind of information we need to hear. Thank you. I yield. MR. GYOTOKU: And I think the main point is that this person be almost like our eyes and ears, and point of contact for the people on the west side who manage our projects. And are developing our projects. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Administrator Gyotoku. Anyone else? Mr. Chung. MR. CHUNG: Thank you. Good morning, Neil. I wanted to thank both Ms. Lee Loy and Mr. Richards, for their very relevant questions. And the answers that you gave, which made me decide that I'm going to be supporting this measure of course. You know, just to foreworn you and other members of the administration, my attitude in terms of increasing the size of government. Right now in as much as we're grappling with this whole revenue stream issue, you or anyone else is going to really have to answer the questions, just as you did today going forth to get my support. At least for a year or two. Thank you very much. MR. GYOTOKU: I'd like to point out that the Office of Housing and Community Development is funded by the Federal Government, we receive Page 28 FC -16 August 1, 2017 91 percent of our funds on the Federal Government. Nine percent comes from the county and our project revenues like that, so the bulk of the salaries are being paid by the Federal Funds. CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Anyone else? Well thank you very much, Administrator. Council Members, all those in favor of approving Resolution 243-17, please say "aye." Vote on Res. 243-17: The motion to recommend adoption of Res. 243-17 was (Approved) carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, Richards, Ruggles, and Chair David — 7. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Members O'Hara and Poindexter — 2. Excused: None. CHR. DAVID: Mr. Clerk, Resolution 244-17. Res. 244-17: AUTHORIZES THE OFFICE OF THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH THE OFFICE OF RESEARCH SERVICES, UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII The agreement would provide $25,000 from the Department of Research and Development to fund the AgVenture program, which seeks to increase agricultural awareness by supplementing fourth grade classes with events focusing on agricultural careers and entrepreneurial opportunities. Reference: Comm. 369 Intr. by: Ms. David (B/R) Motion to Approve: Ms. Lee Loy moved to recommend adoption of Res. 244-17. Seconded by Mr. Kanuha. CHR. DAVID: Ms. Lee Loy, go ahead. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Chair. I believe this is where Communication 369.1 comes in, so I would like to make a motion to amend Res. 244-17 with contents of Comm. 369.1. Motion to Amend: Ms. Lee Loy moved to amend Res. 244-17, with the contents of Comm. 369.1. Seconded by Mr. Kanuha. CHR. DAVID: Any discussion, Council Members? Ms. Eoff Page 29 FC -16 Vote on Motion to Amend: (Approved) Vote on Res. 244-17 Draft 2 (Approved) August 1, 2017 MS. EOFF: It's just a correction? CHR. DAVID: Yes, it is. And as far as I understand it, before I go to you Ms. Lee Loy if you want to say something. It was requested by the university that this be made, so that it would accommodate an easier time in executing documents under this contract. Anyone else? All those in favor of the amendment, please say "aye." The motion to amend Res. 244-17 with the contents of Comm. 369.1 was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, O'Hara, Richards, Ruggles, and Chair David — 8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Poindexter —1. Excused: None. CHR. DAVID: Now we're back to Resolution 244-17, as amended. Any discussions? Hearing or seeing none, all those in favor of approving Resolution 244-17 as amended, please say "aye." The motion to recommend adoption of Res. 244-17, as amended to Draft 2, was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, O'Hara, Richards, Ruggles, and Chair David — 8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Poindexter —1. Excused: None. CHR. DAVID: Thank you very much. Mr. Clerk, Resolution 245-17, please. Page 30 FC -16 August 1, 2017 Res. 245-17: AUTHORIZES THE PAYMENT OF FUNDS OF A LATER FISCAL YEAR AND OF MORE THAN ONE FISCAL YEAR FOR A MULTI-YEAR MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT FOR DIGITAL IMAGERY AND ASSOCIATED SOFTWARE FOR THE HAWAII COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT Authorizes a six-year lease agreement with Pictometry/Eagleview for a total cost of $3,089,955. The digital imagery would support E-911 response systems with enhanced area views, providing increased ability to identify and arrive at the accurate location. Reference: Comm. 370 Intr. by: Ms. David (B/R) Motion to Approve: Ms. Eoff moved to recommend adoption of Res. 245-17. Seconded by Mr. Richards. CHR. DAVID: Discussion please, and I believe Lieutenant Kimura is here today if you folks have any questions. Ms. Eoff would you like MS. EOFF: Well he has been waiting her patiently, so maybe he has something to add. CHR. DAVID: Even if we have no questions. Yes, you can go ahead lieutenant, thank you very much. (Note: At this time, Police Lieutenant Alan Kimura came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. KIMURA: Hi, good morning. I'm Lieutenant Alan Kimura from the Hawaii Police Department, dispatch section. MS. EOFF: Would you like to just enlighten us a little bit more about the benefit of this? MR. KIMURA: The digital images provides 911 responders to accurately send officers or EMS (Emergency Medical Services) personnel to the correct location. The funding for the cost of the images comes from the State E-911 Board, so it's already funded. There's no cost to the county. MS. EOFF: Great. Thanks for explaining that. CHR. DAVID: Mahalo. Thank you very much. Mr. Kanuha MR. KANUHA: Thank you. These digital images are the entire island? Page 31 FC -16 August 1, 2017 MR. KIMURA: We already have images already from a previous contract that we just ended. MR. KANUHA: Okay. MR. KIMURA: So we're entering into a new six year contract, and this contract will focus on areas of growth and development. Because there's certain areas that won't change over time, you know, because there's rural areas where it's just brush. MR. KANUHA: Are these images only provided for the department, or can any of the other departments use this image for additional things. MR. KIMURA: Many of the county agencies do utilize these images, through our website. MR. KANUHA: Okay. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Kanuha. Anyone else? Ms. O'Hara. MS. O'HARA: Thank you, Chair. And following up from that question from Mr. Kanuha. I understand the images can be made available, but do other departments have access to use this software for other reasons? I'm thinking Real Property Tax, or Public Works. MR. KIMURA: Correct. We do share out images once we obtain it with Real Property, Planning, and other agencies that request it. MS. O'HARA: So they can request for you to image a certain property or area, and you can do that for them. Is that how it works? MR. KIMURA: Well, we identify areas with their input. Planning and Real Property as to areas that they foresee growth. This contract, they fly three flights throughout the contract, it's every other year. It takes almost a year for them to fly the projected areas, and each flight we'll tell them where we want them to fly or where we want them to capture the images. It shared by many other departments within the county, it's not just the Police Department. MS. O'HARA: Okay, thank you. That means they can kind of que up, and ask for certain areas to be flown over when you're preparing for this. MR. KIMURA: Correct. MS. O'HARA: Okay, thank you. Page 32 FC -16 August 1, 2017 CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. O'Hara. Anyone else? Lieutenant thank you so much for your patience. MR. KIMURA: No, problem. CHR. DAVID: You've been here all morning, and it's close to lunch time, so you can go to lunch now. Thank you very much. All those in favor of approving Resolution 245-17, please say "aye." Vote on Res. 245-17: The motion to recommend adoption of Res. 245-17 was (Approved) carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, O'Hara, Richards, Ruggles, and Chair David — 8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Poindexter —1. Excused: None. CHR. DAVID: Mr. Clerk, Bill 53. BILLS FOR The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, ORDINANCES: Bills for Ordinances. Bill 53: AMENDS CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE 36, OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE 1983 (2016 EDITION, AS AMENDED), RELATING TO THE GEOTHERMAL RELOCATION AND COMMUNITY BENEFITS PROGRAM Amends Sections 2-177 and 2-181 by adding community health and safety projects as authorized expenditures from the fund. Reference: Comm. 353 Intr. by: Ms. O'Hara Motion to Approve: Ms. O'Hara moved to recommend passage of Bill 53 on first reading. Seconded by Ms. Eoff CHR. DAVID: Ms. O'Hara. MS. O'HARA: Thank you, Chair. Bill 53 is kind of a complicated issue. We heard some testifiers earlier, and I just want to clarify for those who may not be as aware. There are actually two different, separate geothermal funds. One is the Asset Fund, which is primarily there for completion of technical studies, mitigation of negative impacts of geothermal. To the surrounding community, to the environment at large. And that asset fund is funded by the land lease, paid by the company PGV (Puna Geothermal Ventures). Page 33 FC -16 August 1, 2017 And then the second fund is, the Relocation and Community Benefit Fund. And that fund receives funding from the royalties, based on how much electricity is sold to the utility. The funds are separate, and they have a long history as does geothermal in the Puna district. As one of our testifiers said, Mr. Petricci who was here earlier. Things have not always gone well, with relation to using these funds for the affected community. The affected communities, primarily in the immediate area up to a three mile radius of the plant. Have had through the years experienced negative health impacts, and other environmental impacts from releases, at the plant. As I said, a long ongoing issue, 25-30 years here. And I think it was Mr. Petricci who said, one of the main critical things is the lack of an independent monitoring system. Now if you go to the permit, which I have with me for this operation. That obligation actually falls on the shoulders of Department of Health, and it's been our mayor's main concern that's who should be taking care of the independent monitoring. It hasn't happened, and we can continue to finger point or we can work with the community to get a monitoring and notification system in place. We can work the community, to get a community emergency response plan in place. I asked for addition of this wording to add flexibility to this fund, flexibility and clarification. When I first called planning and talked to them about the fund, which they manage that was the response that I heard this would be helpful in clarifying the application for use of this fund. There's so many projects out there, that I could go on about that have been asked for that relate to the community health and safety. I would just like to get started on working with the community to affect these projects, so I'm asking for your consideration. In that regard I have made a commitment with Puna Pono Alliance to have a follow up meeting this week, so we can get their priorities in view. Because they have been advocating for the immediate community for years, and need to be listened to first. This is a community -wide benefit. If you read the rule, it applies in lower Puna. And there are other projects conceivably be done with this fund as well, so that's where we stand with it. I'm asking for your support. Any more discussion? I know we have Mike Kaleikini here, Plant Manager from PGV. Bob Petricci has returned. So if you have questions in planning, he's in the far corner. Any questions anybody has, folks are here, thank you. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. O'Hara. Anyone else? Ms. Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Chair. I think I want to start with the Planning Department, so if the Director and Joaquin could come forward. Thank you. (Note: At this time, Planning Director Michael Yee came forward to address the members of the Committee.) Page 34 FC -16 August 1, 2017 MR. YEE: Good morning, Michael Yee from Planning. MS. LEE LOY: Good morning, Director. My reading of Article 36, the Geothermal Relocation Fund, and Community Benefit Program. If I understand correctly, it was for the establishment of the fund for relocating affected properties. Is that correct? MR. YEE: Yes. There's the Relocation Fund, Community Benefits, and then there's an Asset Fund, so there's actually three different places. Yeah, three buckets. MS. LEE LOY: If I understand the bill correctly, we're affecting a change under Article 36. My question is, if the fund was established to relocate affected properties. How many properties are still being affected, or would be able to utilize this fund for relocation? MR. YEE: I'm going to call Joaquin up here, who manages the details. (Note: At this time, Administrative Officer Joaquin Gamiao-Kunkel came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. GAMIAO-KUNKEL: Joaquin Gamiao-Kunkel, Administrative Officer, Planning Department. That's kind of a difficult question to ask of how many people are available, because of the empty lots. The fund was set up without any real strong criteria, the priority was given to people built before PGV was built and so forth. It's one mile around the property of the PGV. So if you have an empty lot and you build a house on it this year, and next year starts to affect you, you qualify for it. As long as you can still apply for it. The only people that cannot apply for the relocation, would be somebody who's already relocated. Then that would not be part of deed, the house would not be able to be sold under the Relocation Program again. MS. LEE LOY: Okay. So under that scenario I am a property owner, I am aware of the potential effects of building a home. And I still choose to go forward to build a home, I would still be able to tap into this Relocation Fund? MR. GAMIAO-KUNKEL: Yes, you would. MS. LEE LOY: Wow. And no number as far as how many properties lie within that one mile radius? MR. GAMIAO-KUNKEL: I don't have it on top of my head, but it's a mile around us. It's thousands of properties. Page 35 FC -16 August 1, 2017 MS. LEE LOY: Okay. Are they all individual property owners, or are they large land owners like maybe DHHL (Department of Hawaiian Home Lands) or State? MR. GAMIAO-KUNKEL: No. They're all individual property owners. MS LEE LOY: I know this is managed through the Planning Department. Have you folks had the opportunity to vet this through your department? I'm just wondering if it should be going through the Planning Commission, because it's you know, if I'm reading it correctly the Planning Department is here by authorized. So this would be a duty or responsibility that would lay with the Planning Department, the Planning Director. MR. YEE: No, we haven't had an opportunity to talk to the community yet. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you. I yield. CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Ms. Ruggles. MS. RUGGLES: Thank you for being here. Does the Planning Commission have rules and regulations currently on any of the Geothermal Funds? MR. GAMIAO-KUNKEL: Yes, for the Asset Fund. MS. RUGGLES: Okay. MR. GAMIAO-KUNKEL: The ordinance requires that any claims on the Asset Fund would have to be presented by a claims adjustor presented to the Planning Commission, and the Planning Commission would review it and approve or deny. MS. RUGGLES: Okay. So the Asset Fund is made to help pay for administrative cost, of administrating the Relocation Fund? MR. GAMIAO-KUNKEL: No. The Asset Fund is funded by Puna Geothermal Ventures. They put a certain amount every year, and that money stay's in there. And that fund is primarily for mitigation of hazards, or anything that is caused by PGV. Such as monitoring equipment for air quality, study of the ground water that sort of things. MS. RUGGLES: Has that ever been utilized? MR. GAMIAO-KUNKEL: Yes, it has. MS. RUGGLES: So there has been. What has it been used for? Page 36 FC -16 August 1, 2017 MR. GAMIAO-KUNKEL: It has been used with some monitors that were purchased, and that have been used between the Civil Defense and the Department of Health. They did the ground water study, several other studies have been requested. They've gone out to RFPs, and some of them have just sat, right now they're not moving. I believe the mayor's office is looking at some of these studies that may have been duplicated, and it's a waste of money. So they're looking to see what's duplicated, and which ones isn't going to move forward. So the Asset Fund studies, have kind of sat right now. The Relocation Fund earns its money from royalties that's paid to the State and we get 30 percent of that royalties to the State. That money was initially set up in 1996 for relocating of people who live area and are having problems, and they want to be relocated. In 2008 they amended that ordinance to include community benefits, which would include, I can't even think. MS. RUGGLES: Infrastructure. MR. GAMIAO-KUNKEL: Infrastructure, parks, roads, acquisition of land that sort of thing. MS. RUGGLES: Thank you. MR. YEE: I wanted to add that the Asset Fund not the Community Benefits Relocation sits at a million dollars with $900,000 already encumbered and it only gets funded about $50,000 a year. Just to kind of let you know what goes on with that fund, and currently we estimate maybe $400,000 for the Community Benefits fund next year. MS. RUGGLES: Okay, thank you. Since this issue has come up, I've done quite a bit of research. I had to get some clarity on the actual amounts within the accounts within the Geothermal Benefits Fund. And thank you Joaquin, for sending me all those numbers. While there is $45 million, there's actually only $1.3 million available within the fund. MR. YEE: That's $4.5. MS. RUGGLES: Well what did I say? I know, I saw your guys' faces, thanks for that correction, $4.5 million, excuse me. So there's $1.3 that's actually available for expenditures. We've got $2.2 million that are encumbered for relocation, and $1 million has to be the minimum balance mandated by the ordinance. For the Asset Fund, how much was in there? MR. YEE: Has $1 million, but $900,000 is encumbered. MS. RUGGLES: Okay, thank you. I also did a lot of research on how this fund was started, and why it was created. So it started in 1990 with the Asset Fund, Page 37 FC -16 August 1, 2017 which specified—and it was on October 9th it was a Bill 338. It said the creation of Geothermal Asset Fund the purpose of it being, is to mitigate geothermal impact in the district of Puna. And from there in 1995, I read the minutes on the discussion of why we changed it to a Relocation Fund. And that was to provide a way, at least this my understanding from the reports and the minutes. It was to provide a way so that we could provide permanent relocation, because there was discussion of temporary relocations. And that could have been done through the Asset Fund, but the permanent couldn't. So that's why they traded the relocation for the permanent. That was in 1995, and in 2008 it was renamed to the Relocation and Community Benefits Program. So looking back this has all really stem from the Asset Fund, and the original intent of the Asset Fund was to mitigate the impact of geothermal operating within a residential area. I want to make sure we heed the original spirt of what this fund was created for. We've heard a lot of testimony, I really appreciate Mr. Petricci coming from Puna Pono Alliance to remind us what the fund was originally for. The people within the community are concerned that we're going to use these funds for basic infrastructure, which we do need. But these infrastructure projects, are projects that normally come from the General Fund. So really the question is, is this fund meant to make up for the infrastructure projects that county currently isn't taking care of within the district? Or is it meant to mitigate the impact, or is it some sort of mix in between? So while I believe the original intent was to provide for public health and safety—Chair could I have a few more minutes? CHR. DAVID: Yes, go ahead. MS. RUGGLES: Thank you. I believe the original intent was for community health and public safety. I think that this amendment goes in alignment with that, so I will be supporting that with a condition that we meet with Puna Pono Alliance. And the people that are making decisions with the Planning Director, and the Planning Commission to come up with a more clear criteria on how these funds should be used. And really insuring that they are used for the original purpose, which is to protect the residents from geothermal operating within the district. That's all, I'll leave it with that. Thank you. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Ruggles. Mr. Chung, did you wish to speak before I go to Ms. Eoff? MR. CHUNG: You know, I had a few questions, and those few questions multiplied into a number of questions. Really, I agree with Ms. Ruggles. And my initial thoughts when I read this bill, were sort of in line with what Mr. Petricci and the other speaker had noted. What had been the underlying purpose for these programs to begin with, but when I really thought about it, I understand what Page 38 FC -16 August 1, 2017 Ms. O'Hara is trying to accomplish. And it's really going to come down to its implementation that's with your department. And what's she's doing here, is providing more options. Makes it more broad, but it doesn't make it exclusive doesn't set priorities or anything like that. So I'm in full support of this. I certainly understand the concerns, hopefully they can be addressed. Thank you. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Mr. Chung. Ms. Eof£ MS. EOFF: Just procedurally is this the type of bill that should be referred to the Planning Commission? MR. YEE: I was intending to, yes. MS. EOFF: So from committee we probably will make a motion to refer to the Planning Commission. I wasn't going to try and interrupt discussion, I just wanted to check on that. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Eof£ Ms. O'Hara go ahead. MS. O'HARA: Thank you. And I did have my light on for that exact reason. I wanted to withdraw the motion I made initially, because procedurally I think this is the time when it should go to the Planning Commission before it comes back to Council, if it is approved. So I would like to withdraw my original motion, and move to send it to the Planning Commission. CHR. DAVID: Alright, thank you. Withdraw Motion: Ms. O'Hara withdrew her motion to approve Bill 53. Motion to Refer: Ms. O'Hara moved to refer Bill 53 to the Planning Commission. Seconded by Ms. Eof£ CHR. DAVID: Any discussion on the referral to Planning Commission? Ms. Lee Loy, go ahead. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Ms. Ruggles, because I really appreciated that legislative intent. And that's very important to me, a lot times we establish or codify something. And then we start migrating away from its original intent, and I too echo this same concern of Mr. Petricci. We started this fund, because we wanted to accomplish certain things. And as we begin to expand the definitions which provides more options, which I think is a good thing for the community. I still want to make sure we're fulfilling the obligations of the original intent. I shared all of that, because you know, sending it down to the Planning Commission there will be an opportunity to vet all of that. And then Puna Pono Alliance can actually go ahead, and weigh in from community Page 39 FC -16 August 1, 2017 perspective there. So I will be supporting the motion, to go down to the Planning Commission for review. Again, Ms. Ruggles, thank you for all that background, that was extremely helpful. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. Ms. O'Hara. MS. O'HARA: I did have a follow up question. Joaquin, when you were responding to Ms. Lee Loy about the number of properties within the one mile radius that are still eligible for relocation. Were you talking about vacant lots that was purchased before a certain date, or could they be purchased recently? MR. GAMIAO-KUNKEL: They can be purchased recently. MS. O'HARA: Okay. So that brings me to the point that when a property is part of the relocation program, the county then has the deed changed to reflect that it cannot participate a second time in the relocation. MR. GAMIAO-KUNKEL: That's correct. MS. O'HARA: But any vacant properties that are being sold on the market do not have that exclusion? MR. GAMIAO-KUNKEL: We've asked realtor companies to put that in there, to mention that it is a geothermal and they won't touch it. MS. O'HARA: So it's not a requirement for disclosure for vacant land? MR. GAMIAO-KUNKEL: No. MS. O'HARA: Yeah, the disclosure requirements for vacant land is a lot less. MR. GAMIAO-KUNKEL: Even if you purchase a house that's already built, if it hasn't been through the relocation program that house becomes available. MS. O'HARA: Okay. MR. GAMIAO-KUNKEL: It qualifies. MS. O'HARA: Is there a way that the Planning Department could inventory that one mile radius, to see the number of properties and the eligibility of those properties at some point? I know you said thousands, but I think it's hundreds. MR. GAMIAO-KUNKEL: Yes, we can. Page 40 FC -16 August 1, 2017 MS. O'HARA: I know, but we have all of these great tools now to do that with. I think it may not be as difficult as we think, if somebody smart puts their mind to it. MR. GAMIAO-KUNKEL: Yeah. We can probably pull it off GIS (Geographical Information System). MS. O'HARA: Yeah. It would be great to have that, and knowledge is very, very important. One other question. If a resident with a property has come forward and applied for relocation, but didn't take the offer extended by the county. Would they be eligible for a second shot at that? MR. GAMIAO-KUNKEL: Yes, they would. MS. O'HARA: Okay. MR. GAMIAO-KUNKEL: The only way we can get that restriction on the deed is when we take over the property, when we exchange the deeds. Then when we auction it off again, then we put it on the deed. The county does that. MS. O'HARA: Okay, great. Because I think what exacerbated the problems that a lot of people were having. Number one the Relocation Fund wasn't functioning well for the first decade of this century. And then when the rules were modified, tweaked, and it started to work again. We were also at the peak of the great recession, and our property values as everywhere had plummeted into zilch especially down in Puna. So when an assessor goes out even at market value, the property values were very low at that point and time. Real estate is reviving, and even down in lower Puna subsequent is selling—the lava threat. We've seen a real increase in property values in the last couple of years. So I think that may have exacerbated the problems that occurred there. MR. GAMIAO-KUNKEL: If I may, one of the big reasons that happened that way is during the middle part of 2000's there were no relocations, and the fund kept building. Then it was discovered that all this money was there, and then they started spending for the Community Benefit side. When the market went down, and people started to request the relocation we didn't have money. So we had to take them as they came in, and that's why it took us so long to catch up, and we finally caught up. MS. O'HARA: I'm sure there were many reasons for that. One last question. The Asset Fund you said there's $900,000 encumbered, is that because it's a minimum for the fund, or are we talking about a contractual arrangement that hasn't been met yet? Page 41 FC -16 August 1, 2017 MR. GAMIAO-KUNKEL: A lot of the studies that have been approved by the Planning Commission, it's already encumbered until—if the Council, Mayor, or somebody says no we're not going to do that, then that would un -encumber that amount of money. MS. O'HARA: So one of those studies that was encumbered, and signed into an agreement in November 2016. I think it was for $300 plus thousand, I'm not sure the exact amount. It was a technical evaluation study that the mayor did cancel in April, so that money comes back into the Asset Fund? MR. GAMIAO-KUNKEL: That's correct. MS. O'HARA: Then there is the outstanding health study, which he was in negotiations and decided to pull, so that's the other money still encumbered? MR. GAMIAO-KUNKEL: That is correct. That's the $700,000. MS. O'HARA: Okay, I just wanted to understand that. Then beyond the $700,000, there's more? Because I heard $900,000, so is there another study pending? MR. GAMIAO-KUNKEL: There's a couple other smaller studies that are in there. It has not been expended. The money is still there, we just haven't had the official "Put the money back." We're not going to do this. MS. O'HARA: What are those studies? Do you know? MR. GAMIAO-KUNKEL: Don't have it right at the top of my head, but I can get that information to you. MS. O'HARA: If you could provide that, it would be great. MR. GAMIAO-KUNKEL: Sure. MS. O'HARA: Thank you. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. O'Hara. Alright I believe that concludes this matter, so I'm going to take a vote on referring Bill 53 to the Planning Commission, all those in favor please say "aye." Page 42 FC -16 Vote on Motion to Refer: (Approved) August 1, 2017 The motion to refer Bill 53 to the Planning Commission was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, O'Hara, Richards, Ruggles, and Chair David — 8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Poindexter —1. Excused: None. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Director. And thank you, Joaquin, for coming. MR. GAMIAO-KUNKEL: Thank you. CHR. DAVID: Thank you. Mr. Clerk, please take us to Bill 55. Bill 55: AMENDS ORDINANCE NO. 17-39, AS AMENDED, THE OPERATING BUDGET FOR THE COUNTY OF HAWAII FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2018 Increases revenues in the State Grants - Coastal Zone Management account ($23,685); and appropriates the same to the Coastal Zone Management account, bringing the total State grant amount to $155,663. Motion to Approve Vote on Bill 55 (Approved) Reference: Comm. 366 Intr. by: Ms. David (B/R) Ms. Lee Loy moved to recommend passage of Bill 55 on first reading. Seconded by Ms. Eoff CHR. DAVID: Any discussion? I think this is pretty much self-explanatory. They thought they lost the amount from the state, and then now the state is giving it back. So they're just balancing their account. So all those in favor of approving Bill 55, please say "aye." The motion to recommend passage on Bill 55 on first reading was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, O'Hara, Richards, Ruggles, and Chair David — 8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Poindexter —1. Excused: None. CHR. DAVID: Mr. Clerk, Bill 56 please. Page 43 FC -16 August 1, 2017 Bill 56: AMENDS ORDINANCE NO. 17-40, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS AND FINANCING THEREOF FOR THE FISCAL YEAR JULY 1, 2017 TO JUNE 30, 2018 Adds the Public Works, Road Improvements - Pua, Todd, Baker and Desha Avenues — State project for $152,000 to the Capital Budget. Funds for this project shall be provided from the State Capital Improvement Project Funds. Funds would be used to improve roadways and drainage around Keaukaha School in Hilo. Reference: Comm. 367 Intr. by: Ms. David (B/R) Motion to Approve: Mr. Richards moved to recommend passage of Bill 56 on first reading. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy. CHR. DAVID: Ms. Lee Loy, go ahead. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Chair. This particular work is being done right now, actually this particular week. Which is actually perfect timing. This surrounds Keaukaha Elementary School. So I appreciate the timing, and the Public Works Department for doing this during the summer before school starts. I know the kids walking to school, won't have to walk through puddles of mud anymore. So thank you, Frank and Neil. Thank you so much. And I urge everyone to support this. Thanks. CHR. DAVID: Thank you, Ms. Lee Loy. Any other discussion? Hearing or seeing none, all those in favor of approving Bill 56, please say "aye." Vote on Bill 56: The motion to recommend passage of Bill 56 on first (Approved) reading was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, Richards, and Chair David — 6. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Members O'Hara, Poindexter, and Ruggles — 3. Excused: None. Page 44 FC-16 August 1, 2017 ADJOURN There being no further business, at 12:10 p.m., Ms. Lee Loy moved to adjourn MENT: the meeting. Seconded by Mr. Richards and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members Chung, Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, Richards, and Chair David—6. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Members O'Hara, Poindexter, and Ruggles—3. Excused: None. CHR. DAVID: Thank you. We are adjourned. Approved: «l'/ri Ms. Maile Medeiros David, Chair (Date) Finance Committee MMD/ja/rk Page 45