Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN COUNCIL 2017-10-04 2016-2018 rd 23 Session ounty Council 25 Aupuni Street Hilo October 4, 2017 INVOCATION: Kahu Brian Welsh of Haili Congregational Church gave the m invocation. CALL TO The regular meeting of the ORDER: 9:05 a.m., in the Council Chambers, Hilo, by Ms. Valerie T. Poindexter, Chair. ROLL CALL: Present: Ms. Valerie T. Poindexter, Chair Ms. Karen Eoff, Vice Chair Mr. Aaron Chung, Member Ms. Maile Medeiros David, Member Mr. Dru Mamo Kanuha, Member Ms. Susan L. K. Lee Loy, Member Ms. , Member Mr. Herbert Ms. Jennifer Ruggles, Member PLEDGE OF The Chair directed the Council to the next order of business, Pledge of ALLEGIANCE: Allegiance. (At this time, Mr. Kanuha led the Council in the Pledge of Allegiance.) PETITIONS, The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business, MEMORIALS, Petitions, Memorials, Certificates of Merit, and Expressions of CERTIFICATES Condolence. OF MERIT, AND EXPRESSIONS OF (There were none.) CONDOLENCE: -23 October 4, 2017 STATEMENTS The Chair directed the Council 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: Bill Bugbee: Res. 304-17 (Comm. 462), in support and comment. Moani Akana: Res. 314-17 (Comm. 473), in support. Deborah Chai: Res. 297-17 (Comm. 455), comment. (representing the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney) Kalani Kahalioumi: Res. 302-17 (Comm. 460), comment. (representing Center) Jessanie Marques: Res. 309-17 (Comm. 467), comment. Community Association) Nadine Ebert: Res. 303-17 (Comm. 461), in support. Ret. Colonel Debra M. Lewis: Res. 300-17 (Comm. 458); and Res. 301-17 (Comm. 459), in support. Gail Takaki: Res. 294-17 (Comm. 446), in support. (representing the Success Factory, NexTech STEM Programs) Officer Dane M. Shibuya: Res. 303-17 (Comm. 461), in support Ronald Ebert: Res. 303-17 (Comm. 461); and Bill 52 (Comm. 351), in support. John R. Replogle: Bill 52 (Comm. 351), in support. Jerry Warren: Bill 52 (Comm. 351), in opposition. Page 2 -23 October 4, 2017 Lee McIntosh: Res. 303-17 (Comm. 461), in support. June Domondon: Res. 303-17 (Comm. 461), in support. APPROVAL The Acting Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business, OF MINUTES: Approval of Minutes. Vote on Approval of Mr. Richards moved to approve the Minutes of Minutes: April 6, 2016 and August 16, 2017. Seconded by (Approved) Ms. Eoff and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, Ruggles, and Chair Poindexter 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. COMMUNI- The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business, CATIONS: Communications. (There were none.) CHR. POINDEXTER: Now we move into Order of Resolutions. Mr. Clerk, I -17. Change Order As directed by the Chair and with no objections from the Council Members, of Business: the following items were taken out of order. Res. 314-17: TRANSFERS/APPROPRIATES AN APPROPRIATION OUT AND FROM A DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT AND CREDITS SAME TO A DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT TO PROVIDE A GRANT TO THE BIG ISLAND RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL ND FOR EXPENSES RELATING TO THE 42 ANNUAL WAIMEA PANIOLO Transfers $2,000 from the Clerk-Council Services Contingency Relief account (Council District 9); and credits to the Parks and Recreation, Administration Other Current Expenses account. Reference: Comm. 473 Intr. by: Mr. Richards Motion to Approve: Mr. Richards moved to adopt Res. 314-17. Seconded by Mr. Kanuha. Page 3 -23 October 4, 2017 CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member Richards. MR. RICHARDS: I would ask the support of my colleagues on this. just ask you, again, this stems to our heritage and embracing out past while looking to the future, so I ask for your support. CHR. POINDEXTER: Thank you, any other discussion? Seeing or hearing Vote on Res. 314-17: The motion to adopt Res. 314-17 was carried by the following (Adopted) voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kanuha, Chair Poindexter 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. POINDEXTER: go to the top of the agenda. Resolution 287-17, Mr. Clerk. Return to Order The Acting Chair directed the Council to return to the order of business. of Business: ORDER OF The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business, RESOLUTIONS: Order of Resolutions. Res. 287-17: REQUESTS THE OFFICE OF THE LEGISLATIVE AUDITOR TO CONDUCT A PERFORMANCE AUDIT OF THE DEPARTMENT OF WATER SUPPLY TO ENSURE THE DEPARTMENT HAS ADEQUATE CONTINGENCY PLANS TO GUARANTEE SUFFICIENT WATER SUPPLY TO CUSTOMERS AT ALL TIMES, INCLUDING DURING A DISRUPTION OF DEEP WELL OPERATIONS access to residents, businesses, and private and public services in North and Central Kona. Reference: Comm. 438 Intr. by: Ms. Eoff and Mr. Kanuha Approve: FC-41 Page 4 -23 October 4, 2017 Motion to Approve: Ms. Eoff moved to adopt Res. 287-17 and Finance Committee Report No. 41. Seconded by Mr. Kanuha. CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member Eoff. MS. EOFF: report that two of those wells have been repaired as of yesterday, I believe. So to find ourselves hoping that our auditor can enhance some of the recommendations as we move into the future for safe water supply. CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, Council Member Kanuha. MR. KANUHA: Thank you. And, again, thank you, Ms. Eoff for working with myself and the department on getting this going. This audit will not only help what we do in the future for the Kona wells, but how we can better enhance the going on here. So, I ask for your support and look forward to some positive things coming from the department in the future. CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, thank you, any other discussion? Seeing or hearing Vote on Res. 287-17: The motion to adopt Res. 287-17 and adopt Finance (Adopted) Committee Report No. 41 was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kanuha, Ruggles, and Chair Poindexter 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. POINDEXTER: Mr. Clerk, Resolution 288-17. Page 5 -23 October 4, 2017 Res. 288-17: AUTHORIZES THE OFFICE OF THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, STATE OF The agreement would provide $5,500 from the Department of Research and Development to support the program would construct a robot to survey the internal conditions of the air of the ducts to eliminate dust, dirt, and mold. Reference: Comm. 439 Intr. by: Ms. David (B/R) Approve: FC-42 Motion to Approve: Ms. David moved to adopt Res. 288-17 and Finance Committee Report No. 42. Seconded by Ms. Eoff. CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member David. MS. DAVID: Yes, thank you. I think this is a matter that was already budgeted, so I would ask your support. I thought that Mr. Whitmore would be here, but if you have any questions we can have him come. Otherwise, appreciate your support, mahalo. CHR. POINDEXTER: Any discussion or questions? Seeing or hearing none, all Vote on Res. 288-17: The motion to adopt Res. 288-17 and adopt Finance (Adopted) Committee Report No. 42 was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kanuha, Chair Poindexter 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. POINDEXTER: Mr. Clerk, Resolution 289-17. Page 6 -23 October 4, 2017 Res. 289-17: AUTHORIZES THE PAYMENT OF FUNDS OF A LATER FISCAL YEAR AND OF MORE THAN ONE FISCAL YEAR FOR A MULTI-YEAR LEASE Authorizes the Mayor to enter into a five-year lease for new Taser conducted electrical weapons and associated equipment to be used by the Police Department at a total cost of $385,344.49. The equipment would replace obsolete models and become the property of the department upon completion of the terms of the lease. Reference: Comm. 440 Intr. by: Ms. David (B/R) Approve: FC-43 Motion to Approve: Ms. David moved to adopt Res. 289-17 and Finance Committee Report No. 43. Seconded by Mr. Richards. CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member David. MS. DAVID: Thank you very much. I would like to ask your support. have questions, if not, we would appreciate your support. CHR. POINDEXTER: Any discussion? Council Member Richards. MS. DAVID (Note: At this time, James Gusman came forward to address the members of the Council.) LT. GUSMAN: Good morning. MR. RICHARDS: Thank you, Lieutenant. I appreciate it. So, this replaces all the tasers in the department, is that correct? LT. GUSMAN: The remaining of the old X-26 tasers, yes. MR. RICHARDS: So, how many units does this actually cover? LT. GUSMAN: 175. MR. RICHARDS: Okay. And you have a total taser for each officer, so roughly 450? LT. GUSMAN: Correct. Page 7 -23 October 4, 2017 MR. RICHARDS: Okay, thank you. CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, thank you. Council Member Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: olice Department. One with their weapons, now with their tasers, and I keep asking this question. Is it going to fit on your folks duty belt? Because, then, the next request will be we need new duty belts. LT. GUSMAN: Well, we always need new duty belts; they age. But on the average officer, yes, there is more than enough room, a very slim officer, yeah. CHR. POINDEXTER: Thank you, okay, any other discussion? Seeing or Vote on Res. 289-17: The motion to adopt Res. 289-17 and adopt Finance (Adopted) Committee Report No. 35 was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, Richards, and Chair Poindexter 8. Noes: None. Absent: Council Member Ruggles 1. Excused: None. CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, Resolution 290-17, Mr. Clerk. Res. 290-17 AUTHORIZES THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO A MULTI-YEAR HOUSING (Draft 2): ASSISTANCE PAYMENT CONTRACT WITH UHC 00525 HILO LIMITED PARTNERSHIP OWNERS OF E KOMO MAI, SELECTED FOR THE SECTION 8 PROJECT-BASED VOUCHER PROGRAM AS OFFERED THROUGH A PUBLIC NOTICE DATED FEBRUARY 12, 19, AND 26, 2012 Authorizes the Mayor to enter into a new five-year agreement to continue providing rental assistance for up to 11 eligible participants. Reference: Comm. 441.2 Intr. by: Ms. David (B/R) Approve: FC-44 Motion to Approve: Ms. David moved to adopt Res. 290-17, Draft 2, and Finance Committee Report No. 44. Seconded by Ms. Eoff. Page 8 -23 October 4, 2017 CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member David. MS. DAVID: Yes, I just ask for your continued support. CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, any other discussion? Seeing or hearing none, all Vote on Res. 290-17 (Draft 2): The motion to adopt Res. 290-17, Draft 2, and adopt (Adopted) Finance Committee Report No. 44 was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members David, Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, Ruggles, and Chair Poindexter 8. Noes: None. Absent: Council Member Chung 1. Excused: None. CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, Resolution 291-17, Mr. Clerk. Res. 291-17: POSTPONES COUNCIL ACTION ON REZONING APPLICATIONS IN ORDINANCE, OR DECEMBER 31, 2018, WHICHEVER SHALL OCCUR FIRST Extends the postponement policy statement established with the adoption of Resolution No. 592-16, which expired on June 30, 2017. Reference: Comm. 442 Intr. by: Ms. Poindexter Approve: PC-30 Motion to Approve: moved to adopt Res. 291-17 and Planning Committee Report No. 30. Seconded by Ms. Eoff. CHR. POINDEXTER: Is there any discussion? Seeing or hearing none, all those Page 9 -23 October 4, 2017 Vote on Res. 291-17: The motion to adopt Res. 291-17 and adopt Planning (Adopted) Committee Report No. 30 was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kanuha, Chair Poindexter 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. POINDEXTER: Resolution 293-17, Mr. Clerk. Res. 293-17: TRANSFERS/APPROPRIATES AN APPROPRIATION OUT AND FROM A DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT AND CREDITS SAME TO A DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT TO REIMBURSE THE DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION FOR PROVIDING PUBLIC SAFETY AT Transfers $1,500 from the Clerk-Council Services Contingency Relief account (Council District 1); and credits to the Parks and Recreation, Culture and Education Other Current Expenses account. Reference: Comm. 445 Intr. by: Ms. Poindexter Motion to Approve: Ms. Eoff moved to adopt Res. 293-17. Seconded by Mr. Richards. CHR. POINDEXTER: Is there any discussion? Council Member Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Chair. I just really want to say a personal thank you, to you and Council Member Chung, for supporting such a wonderful community a wonderful event; incident free, which is huge considering the amount of people that we estimated were probably tipping the scales at about three thousand people at that block party. So, thank you so much. And, Mr. Chung, thank you for helping support the Big Island community. CHR. POINDEXTER: Thank you, any other questions or discussion? Seeing or Page 10 -23 October 4, 2017 Vote on Res. 293-17: The motion to adopt Res. 293-17 was carried by the (Adopted) following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kanuha, Chair Poindexter 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. POINDEXTER: Resolution 294-17, Mr. Clerk. Res. 294-17: TRANSFERS/APPROPRIATES AN APPROPRIATION OUT AND FROM A DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT AND CREDITS SAME TO A DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT TO PROVIDE A GRANT TO THE SUCCESS FACTORY, INC., TO SUPPORT A 3-DAY CAMP FOR BIG ISLAND STUDENTS TO PARTICIPATE IN SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, ENGINEERING, AND MATH PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES Transfers $1,500 from the Clerk-Council Services Contingency Relief account (Council District 4); and credits to the Liquor Control, Public Programs account. Reference: Comm. 446 Intr. by: Ms. Motion to Approve: Ms94-17. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy. CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member . MS. : Thank you, Chair. I just ask for your support. We heard from Ms. Gail Takaki testifying on this program, which is relatively new but very exciting in terms of supporting education in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math Programs and Activities. So, I ask for your support. CHR. POINDEXTER: Any other discussion? Council Member Chung. MR. CHUNG: Yeah much as Ms. Takaki mentioned me attending a dinner that was put on by their organization and it was several years ago. This is just to demonstrate the importance of this inspirational value. I was sitting there at dinner looking at this, s guy, Doug Simons, from Canada- Page 11 -23 October 4, 2017 I have ever heard. Well, I have heard some really inspirationalso on par with the most inspirational speeches I have given, it was worth the while. I just wanted to share that experience. And these guys put on a real good program, you know, for a real good purpose. So, thank you very much and I look forward to helping them in other ways throughout the year. Thanks. CHR. POINDEXTER: Thank you, any other discussion? Seeing or hearing no other Vote on Res. 294-17: The motion to adopt Res. 294-17 was carried by the (Adopted) following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kanuha, Chair Poindexter 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. POINDEXTER: Resolution 296-17, Mr. Clerk. Res. 296-17: TRANSFERS/APPROPRIATES AN APPROPRIATION OUT AND FROM A DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT AND CREDITS SAME TO A DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT TO PROVIDE A GRANT TO YWCA OF Transfers $2,000 from the Clerk-Council Services Contingency Relief account (Council District 6); and credits to the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney, Other Current Expenses account. Reference: Comm. 454 Intr. by: Ms. David Motion to Approve: Ms. David moved to adopt Res. 296-17. Seconded by Mr. Kanuha. CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member David. MS. DAVID: Thank you, Chair and this I would like to mahalo, Ms. Chai, from your support of this important resolution. Thank you. CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, any other discussion? Seeing or hearing none, all Page 12 -23 October 4, 2017 Vote on Res. 296-17: The motion to adopt Res. 296-17 was carried by the (Adopted) following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kanuha, Chair Poindexter 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. POINDEXTER: Resolution 297-17, Mr. Clerk, Res. 297-17: TRANSFERS/APPROPRIATES AN APPROPRIATION OUT AND FROM A DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT AND CREDITS SAME TO A DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT TO PROVIDE A GRANT TO THE -DAY SYMPOSIUM TO ADDRESS TERRORISM AND MASS- Transfers $1,000 from the Clerk-Council Services Contingency Relief account (Council District 9); and credits to the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney, Other Current Expenses account. Reference: Comm. 455 Intr. by: Mr. Richards Motion to Approve: Mr. Richards moved to adopt Res. 297-17. Seconded by Ms. David. CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member Richards. MR. RICHARDS: Thank you, Chair. Echoing off of what Councilwoman David them for actually requesting this, and in light of recent history, I think it highlights importance of this. So, I ask for your support. CHR. POINDEXTER: Thank you, any other discussion? Okay, all those in favor Page 13 -23 October 4, 2017 Vote on Res. 297-17: The motion to adopt Res. 297-17 was carried by the (Adopted) following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kanuha, Chair Poindexter 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. POINDEXTER: Resolution 298-17, Mr. Clerk. Res. 298-17: TRANSFERS/APPROPRIATES AN APPROPRIATION OUT AND FROM A DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT AND CREDITS SAME TO A ISLAND UNITED WAY FOR THE PURCHASE OF MATERIALS AND SUPPLIES FOR ITS MARKETING INITIATIVE Transfers $3,000 from the Clerk-Council Services Contingency Relief account (Council District 3); and credits to the Liquor Control, Public Programs account. Reference: Comm. 456 Intr. by: Ms. Lee Loy Motion to Approve: Ms. Lee Loy moved to adopt Res. 298-17. Seconded by CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: support this. This particular program is one of those wrap around services, you know, they give a lot of serving almost 70 or 75 percent of our community. So, I urge your support. Thank you. CHR. POINDEXTER: Thank you, any other questions? Seeing or hearing none, Page 14 -23 October 4, 2017 Vote on Res. 298-17: The motion to adopt Res. 298-17 was carried by the (Adopted) following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kanuha, Chair Poindexter 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. POINDEXTER: Resolution 299-17, Mr. Clerk. Res. 299-17: TRANSFERS/APPROPRIATES AN APPROPRIATION OUT AND FROM A DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT AND CREDITS SAME TO A DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT TO PROVIDE A GRANT TO THE TO PURCHASE MATERIALS AND SUPPLIES FOR ITS 2018 COMMUNITY OUTREACH AND MARKETING INITIATIVE Transfers $3,000 from the Clerk-Council Services Contingency Relief account (Council District 2); and credits to the Liquor Control, Public Programs account. Reference: Comm. 457 Intr. by: Mr. Chung Motion to Approve: Mr. Chung moved to adopt Res. 299-17. Seconded by Mr. Richards. CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member Chung, I know you just said ask for the support. Is there any other discussion? Seeing or hearing none, all those in favor Vote on Res. 299-17: The motion to adopt Res. 299-17 was carried by (Adopted) the following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kanuha, Chair Poindexter 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. POINDEXTER: Resolution 300-17, Mr. Clerk. Page 15 -23 October 4, 2017 Res. 300-17: TRANSFERS/APPROPRIATES AN APPROPRIATION OUT AND FROM A DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT AND CREDITS SAME TO A DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT TO PROVIDE A GRANT TO THE BIG ISLAND RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL VETERANS DAY PARADE Transfers $500 from the Clerk-Council Services Contingency Relief account (Council District 3); and credits to the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney, Other Current Expenses account. Reference: Comm. 458 Intr. by: Ms. Lee Loy Motion to Approve: Ms. Lee Loy moved to adopt Res. 300-17. Seconded by Ms. David. CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: Yeah, thank you, I do urge my colleagues support. This is a perfect way to honor so many people who have made so many sacrifices. Thank you. CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, any other discussion? Seeing or hearing none, all those in favor sa Vote on Res. 300-17: The motion to adopt Res. 300-17 was carried by the (Adopted) following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kanuha, Chair Poindexter 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. POINDEXTER: Resolution 301-17, Mr. Clerk. Page 16 -23 October 4, 2017 Res. 301-17: TRANSFERS/APPROPRIATES AN APPROPRIATION OUT AND FROM A DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT AND CREDITS SAME TO A DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT TO PROVIDE A GRANT TO THE BIG ISLAND RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL TO ASSIST WITH EXPENSES RELATED TO THE 2017 HAWA VETERANS DAY PARADE Transfers $1,000 from the Clerk-Council Services Contingency Relief account (Council District 6); and credits to the Office of the Prosecuting Attorney, Other Current Expenses account. Reference: Comm. 459 Intr. by: Ms. David Motion to Approve: Ms. David moved to adopt Res. 301-17. Seconded by Mr. Kanuha. CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member David. MS. DAVID: Thank you. I just really ask your support and thanks, Ms. Lee Loy, for her contribution also, mahalo. CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, any other discussion? Seeing or hearing none, all Vote on Res. 301-17: The motion to adopt Res. 301-17 was carried by the (Adopted) following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kanuha, Chair Poindexter 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. POINDEXTER: Resolution 302-17, Mr. Clerk. Page 17 -23 October 4, 2017 Res. 302-17: TRANSFERS/APPROPRIATES AN APPROPRIATION OUT AND FROM A DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT AND CREDITS SAME TO A DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT TO PROVIDE A GRANT TO THE Transfers $1,800 from the Clerk-Council Services Contingency Relief account (Council District 4); and credits to the Parks and Recreation, Administration Other Current Expenses account. Reference: Comm. 460 Intr. by: Motion to Approve: adopt Res. 302-17. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy. CHR. POINDEXTER MS. : Thank you. I just ask for your support. We heard testimony on this issue, and there are a lot of children in my district who can be accommodated with this funding to visit this event, so, very important for us. Thank you. CHR. POINDEXTER: Any other discussion? Council Member Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: Justreally, thank you, again. I appreciate how much we are, as a Council, rallying behind this message of taking care of our aina and using our canoe as a perfect educational tool. So, thank you very much. CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, any other discussion? Seeing or hearing none, all Vote on Res. 302-17: The motion to adopt Res. 302-17 was carried by the (Adopted) following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kanuha, Chair Poindexter 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. POINDEXTER: Resolution 303-17, Mr. Clerk. Page 18 -23 October 4, 2017 Res. 303-17: TRANSFERS/APPROPRIATES AN APPROPRIATION OUT AND FROM A DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT AND CREDITS SAME TO A TH ANNIVERSARY POLICE FUN DAY CELEBRATION Transfers $2,000 from the Clerk-Council Services Contingency Relief account (Council District 6); and credits to the Liquor Control, Public Programs account. Reference: Comm. 461 Intr. by: Ms. David Motion to Approve: Ms. David moved to adopt Res. 303-17. Seconded by Mr. Kanuha. CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member David. MS. DAVID: Yes, I would just really like to thank, Community Police Officer this morning. And I ask your support. CHR. POINDEXTER: Thank you, any discussion? Seeing or hearing none, all Vote on Res. 303-17: The motion to adopt Res. 303-17 was carried by the (Adopted) following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kanuha, Chair Poindexter 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. POINDEXTER: Resolution 304-17, Mr. Clerk. Page 19 -23 October 4, 2017 Res. 304-17: TRANSFERS/APPROPRIATES AN APPROPRIATION OUT AND FROM A DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT AND CREDITS SAME TO A DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT TO PROVIDE A GRANT TO COMMUNITY ENTERPRISES FOR ITS MONTHLY COMMUNITY Transfers $2,000 from the Clerk-Council Services Contingency Relief account (Council District 7); and credits to the Research and Development, Reference: Comm. 462 Intr. by: Mr. Kanuha Motion to Approve: Mr. Kanuha moved to adopt Res. 304-17. Seconded by Ms. Eoff. MR. KANUHA: I request your support CHR. POINDEXTER: Any other discussion? Seeing or hearing none, all those Vote on Res. 304-17: The motion to adopt Res. 304-17 was carried by the (Adopted) following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kanuha, Chair Poindexter 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. POINDEXTER: Resolution 305-17, Mr. Clerk. Res. 305-17: TRANSFERS/APPROPRIATES AN APPROPRIATION OUT AND FROM A DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT AND CREDITS SAME TO A DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT TO REIMBURSE THE DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION FOR EXPENSES RELATED TO ITS Transfers $1,500 from the Clerk-Council Services Contingency Relief account (Council District 3); and credits to the Parks and Recreation, Recreation Division Other Current Expenses account. Reference: Comm. 463 Intr. by: Ms. Lee Loy Page 20 -23 October 4, 2017 Motion to Approve: Ms. Lee Loy moved to adopt Res. 305-17. Seconded by Mr. Richards. CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Chair. I ask for your support. I just want to take a moment to share. This is a program that normally would have been housed in our County gyms, but because of the decision of the Parks Department and the Mayor, this is where we had to go in and fill the gap. And this is those unintended consequences where, you know, an educational group with very limited funds had to be a little bit more resourceful. I think all my Council Members know how I feel about that situation. So having said that, I urge your support to help take care of our educational piece for our kids. Thank you. CHR. POINDEXTER: Thank you, any other discussion? Seeing or hearing Vote on Res. 305-17: The motion to adopt Res. 305-17 was carried by (Adopted) the following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kanuha, Chair Poindexter 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. POINDEXTER: Resolution 306-17, Mr. Clerk. Res. 306-17: TRANSFERS/APPROPRIATES AN APPROPRIATION OUT AND FROM A DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT AND CREDITS SAME TO A DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT TO PROVIDE A GRANT TO THE COVO FOUNDATION TO SUPPORT THE 2017 FILIPINO-AMERICAN HERITAGE MONTH CELEBRATION AND BARRIO FIESTA Transfers $500 from the Clerk-Council Services Contingency Relief account (Council District 4); and credits to the Liquor Control, Public Programs account. Reference: Comm. 464 Intr. by: Motion to Approve: Ms. moved to adopt Res. 306-17. Seconded by Ms. David. CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member . Page 21 -23 October 4, 2017 MS. : I simply ask for your support for this. As you know, October is the Filipino-American History Month and there are many events planned. Some have already occurred, and I just ask for your support. CHR. POINDEXTER: Thank you, any other discussion? Seeing or hearing Vote on Res. 306-17: The motion to adopt Res. 306-17 was carried by the (Adopted) following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kanuha, Chair Poindexter 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. POINDEXTER: Resolution 307-17, Mr. Clerk. Res. 307-17: TRANSFERS/APPROPRIATES AN APPROPRIATION OUT AND FROM A DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT AND CREDITS SAME TO A DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT TO ASSIST THE DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION WITH PROVIDING PUBLIC SAFETY AT Transfers $2,500 from the Clerk-Council Services Contingency Relief account (Council District 2); and credits to the Parks and Recreation, Culture and Education Other Current Expenses account. Reference: Comm. 465 Intr. by: Mr. Chung Motion to Approve: Mr. Chung moved to adopt Res. 307-17. Seconded by Mr. Richards. CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member Chung. MR. CHUNG: Yeah, I was very happy to contribute to this event and make up had the courage to go down to the downtown area during this event because it really is quite a crowded thing. Instead, I went to the Portuguese Chamber of Commerce event, which was attended by our Chairman and we got our pictures in the paper as I recall two times. But, thank you, I ask for your support. CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, any other discussion? Council Member Lee Loy. Page 22 -23 October 4, 2017 MS. LEE LOY: really crowded down there, but thank you for your support. We really appreciate it. CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, thank you, any other discussion? Seeing or hearing none, Vote on Res. 307-17: The motion to adopt Res. 307-17 was carried by the (Adopted) following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kanuha, Chair Poindexter 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. POINDEXTER: Resolution 308-17, Mr. Clerk. Res. 308-17: TRANSFERS/APPROPRIATES AN APPROPRIATION OUT AND FROM A DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT AND CREDITS SAME TO A DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT FOR THE OUTSTANDING OLDER AMERICANS AWARD LUNCHEON Transfers $2,000 from the Clerk-Council Services Contingency Relief account (Council District 2); and credits to the Office of Aging, Other Current Expenses account. Reference: Comm. 466 Intr. by: Mr. Chung Motion to Approve: Mr. Chung moved to adopt Res. 308-17. Seconded by Ms. Eoff. MR. CHUNG: Move to approve and ask for your support. Page 23 -23 October 4, 2017 CHR. POINDEXTER: Is there any discussion? Seeing or hearing none, all those Vote on Res. 308-17: The motion to adopt Res. 308-17 was carried by the (Adopted) following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kanuha, Chair Poindexter 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. POINDEXTER: Resolution 309-17, Mr. Clerk. Res. 309-17: TRANSFERS/APPROPRIATES AN APPROPRIATION OUT AND FROM A DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT AND CREDITS SAME TO A TH RURAL HEALTH COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, INC., FOR THE 7 ANNUAL FLOATING LANTERN CELEBRATION Transfers $1,000 from the Clerk-Council Services Contingency Relief account (Council District 6); and credits to the Liquor Control, Public Programs account. Reference: Comm. 467 Intr. by: Ms. David Motion to Approve: Ms. David moved to adopt Res. 309-17. Seconded by Mr. Kanuha. CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member David. MS. DAVID: Yes, I just want to thank Aunty Jessie for her testimony this . So, I ask for your support, mahalo. Page 24 -23 October 4, 2017 CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, thank you, any other discussion? Seeing or hearing Vote on Res. 309-17: The motion to adopt Res. 309-17 was carried by the (Adopted) following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kanuha, Chair Poindexter 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. POINDEXTER: Resolution 313-17, Mr. Clerk. Res. 313-17: TRANSFERS/APPROPRIATES AN APPROPRIATION OUT AND FROM A DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT AND CREDITS SAME TO A DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT TO PROVIDE A GRANT TO THE Transfers $2,000 from the Clerk-Council Services Contingency Relief account (Council District 9); and credits to the Parks and Recreation, Administration Other Current Expenses account. Reference: Comm. 472 Intr. by: Mr. Richards Motion to Approve: Mr. Richards moved to adopt Res. 313-17. Seconded by Ms. Eoff. CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member Richards. MR. RICHARDS: Thank you. I just ask for my colleagues support. This is supported by other Council Members and, as was stated by Kalani, we wait a little bit longer; we get to keep the canoes longer, so, looking forward to that. Page 25 -23 October 4, 2017 CHR. POINDEXTER: Thank you, any other discussion? Seeing or hearing Vote on Res. 313-17: The motion to adopt Res. 313-17 was carried by the (Adopted) following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kanuha, Chair Poindexter 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. POINDEXTER: Resolution 315-17, Mr. Clerk. Res. 315-17: AUTHORIZES THE ACCEPTANCE OF A MONETARY DONATION OF $1,727.58 TO THE DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION Donated by the Hilo Rotary Club Foundation. Funds would be used to install Reference: Comm. 474 Intr. by: Ms. David (B/R) Waived: FC Motion to Approve: Ms. David moved to adopt Res. 315-17. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy. MS. DAVID: I ask for your support. CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, any other discussion? No discussion, all those in Vote on Res. 315-17: The motion to adopt Res. 315-17 was carried by the (Adopted) following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kanuha, 8. Noes: None. Absent: Council Member Richards 1. Excused: None. CHR. POINDEXTER: Resolution 316-17, Mr. Clerk. Page 26 -23 October 4, 2017 Res. 316-17: AUTHORIZES THE ACCEPTANCE OF A DONATION OF A NAUTILUS UNIVERSAL WEIGHT MACHINE TO THE DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION Donated by Mark and Felina Sakumoto with an estimated value of $400, the Reference: Comm. 475 Intr. by: Ms. David (B/R) Waived: FC Motion to Approve: Ms. David moved to adopt Res. 316-17. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy. CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member David. MS. DAVID: Yes, I just would like to thank, Mr. and Mrs. Sakumoto, for their donation. Mahalo and I ask for your support. CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, any other discussion? Seeing or hearing none, all Vote on Res. 316-17: The motion to adopt Res. 316-17 was carried by the (Adopted) following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kanuha, 8. Noes: None. Absent: Council Member Richards 1. Excused: None. CHR. POINDEXTER: Resolution 317-17, Mr. Clerk. Res. 317-17: AUTHORIZES THE ACCEPTANCE OF A DONATION OF A CHAMPION DUEL FUEL GENERATOR TO THE DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION Donated by Robert Peahu with an estimated value of $800, the fuel generator would be used by the Parks Maintenance Fence and Wax crew for its operations. Reference: Comm. 476 Intr. by: Ms. David (B/R) Waived: FC Motion to Approve: Ms. David moved to adopt Res. 317-17. Seconded by Mr. Lee Loy. Page 27 -23 October 4, 2017 CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member David. MS. DAVID: generator and ask for your support, mahalo. CHR. POINDEXTER: Any other discussion? Seeing or hearing none, all those Vote on Res. 317-17: The motion to adopt Res. 317-17 was carried by (Adopted) the following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kanuha, 8. Noes: None. Absent: Council Member Richards 1. Excused: None. CHR. POINDEXTER: Resolution 318-17, Mr. Clerk. Res. 318-17: AUTHORIZES THE PAYMENT OF FUNDS OF A LATER FISCAL YEAR AND OF MORE THAN ONE FISCAL YEAR FOR A MULTI-YEAR LEASE FOR ONE DIGITAL MULTI-FUNCTION COPY MACHINE FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT Authorizes the Mayor to enter into a five-year lease for one copier to be used by cost of $85. Reference: Comm. 477 Intr. by: Ms. David (B/R) Waived: FC Motion to Approve: Ms. David moved to adopt Res. 318-17. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy. CHR. POINDEXTER: Any discussion? MS. DAVID: I just ask for your support, thank you. Page 28 -23 October 4, 2017 CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, no other discussion, Vote on Res. 318-17: The motion to adopt Res. 318-17 was carried by the (Adopted) following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kanuha, Chair Poindexter 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. POINDEXTER: Resolution 319-17, Mr. Clerk. Res. 319-17: AUTHORIZES THE OFFICE OF THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH THE UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY (USGS) The agreement would provide $44,696 from the Department of Public Works to the USGS to continue the cooperative flood-monitoring program on Island. Reference: Comm. 478 Intr. by: Ms. David (B/R) Waived: FC Motion to Approve: Ms. David moved to adopt Res. 319-17. Seconded by Mr. Richards. CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member David. MS. DAVID: Yes, mahalo. I would ask your support, and I see Mr. Brown is in the audience if Council Members has questions. Mr. Kanuha doesMr. Brown, could you please come up? CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member Kanuha. (Note: At this time, Public Works Business Manager Aaron Brown came forward to address the members of the Council.) MR. BROWN: Aloha, everyone. Aaron Brown, Business Manager of Public Works. Page 29 -23 October 4, 2017 MR. KANUHA: Aloha, Aaron, good morning. Just a basic question, I understand the need to cooperate with the USGS (United States Geological Survey) and that we put this money towards the monitoring programs, but where are these monitors located? MR. BROWN: Multiple streams around the island and they give us real time continuous flowing streams. MR. KANUHA: The actually flowing streams, because you know Kona side MR. BROWN multiple streams around the island. I can look into that for you. MR. KANUHA: Ok and I can get that info later on, but just seeing how they monitor. I can understand monitoring these easy to monitor the streams that , where if there is a pretty good chance that with the big rain it will flood and to monitor to see how all that are MR. BROWN: Okay, I will look into that. CHR. POINDEXTER: Thank you. Council Member Richards. MR. RICHARDS: Thank you, Mr. Brown. So this is an on-going program; this is just to re-up it? MR. BROWN: To re- Corp. of Engineers and the USGS, and from my understanding, our Engineers and I think Civil Defense might use this too, because it gives us live time data so we sure on the ones that may usually be dry, you know, what happens when it rains, but I can look into that. MR. RICHARDS: same information, too, just because islands are a little bit different and when we get the events of flooding, you know, dry just curious on that. Is this information real time shared with USGS and is that how that works? MR. BROWN: It is and I believe know there is some that you can actually go onto the website and you can see the pretty much real time. So, I can give you guys that also. Page 30 -23 October 4, 2017 MR. RICHARDS: Councilman Kanuha. There are areas that, maybe because of the areas we know, we may have a little bit of insight and maybe a little bit of input where something might needs to be put, so. I look forward to that. I yield. CHR. POINDEXTER: Thank you, any other discussion? Council Member : I would just like to ask Mr. Brown that that information be disseminated to me as well, because we have the same kind of situation of intermittent streams. MR. BROWN: Okay. CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member David. MS. DAVID: Yes, thank you. Mr. Brown, I would also like that information, particularly in the Kala flooding area. Thank you. MR. BROWN: No problem, CHR. POINDEXTER: Thank you very much, a Vote on Res. 319-17: The motion to adopt Res. 319-17 was carried by the (Adopted) following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kanuha, Chair Poindexter 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. POINDEXTER: Mr. Clerk, Resolution 320-17. Res. 320-17: AUTHORIZES THE ACCEPTANCE OF A DONATION OF A CAMERA, DEPARTMENT Donated by the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children with an estimated total value of $899.97, the equipment would be used by the Juvenile Aid Section to document investigations involving children. Reference: Comm. 479 Intr. by: Ms. David (B/R) Waived: FC Page 31 -23 October 4, 2017 Motion to Approve: Ms. David moved to adopt Res. 320-17. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy. CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member David. MS. DAVID: exploited children for their donation, and ask your support. Mahalo. CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, any other discussion? Seeing or hearing none, all Vote on Res. 320-17: The motion to adopt Res. 320-17 was carried by the (Adopted) following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kanuha, Chair Poindexter 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. Recess: At 10:27 a.m., the Chair called for a recess. Reconvene: The meeting reconvened at 10:44 a.m. CHR. POINDEXTER: now we are on Bills for Ordinances, First Reading. Mr. Clerk, Bill 67. Page 32 -23 October 4, 2017 BILLS FOR The Chair directed to Council to proceed to the next order of business, ORDINANCES Order of the Day (First Reading). (FIRST READING): Bill 67: AMENDS ORDINANCE NO. 07-136, WHICH RECLASSIFIED LANDS FROM SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL 10,000 SQUARE FEET (RS-10) TO INDUSTRIAL-COMMERCIAL MIXED 20,000 SQUARE FEET (MCX- MAP KEY: 2-2-036:090 (Applicant: Rodney Tanaka) (Area: 22,500 Square Feet) The Windward Planning Commission forwards its favorable recommendation for this amendment, which would allow a five-year time extension to Condition C, time to complete construction. The project is located at the corner of the square foot building to be used as warehouse space, an office, and a showroom. Reference: Comm. 443 Intr. by: Ms. Eoff (B/R) Approve: PC-31 Motion to Approve: Ms. Eoff moved to pass Bill 67 on first reading and adopt Planning Committee Report No. 31. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy. CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member Eoff. MS. EOFF: I believe Mr. Arai and Mr. Tanaka were here, if anyone has any questions. I think this is pretty self-explanatory as a time extension. Did you CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, any discussion? Seeing or hearing none, all those Vote on Bill 67: The motion to pass Bill 67 on first reading and adopt (Approved) Planning Committee Report No. 31 was carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kanuha, Chair Poindexter 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. POINDEXTER: Now we move into Second and Final Reading. Bill 52, Mr. Clerk. Page 33 -23 October 4, 2017 ORDER OF The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business, Order THE DAY of the Day (Second or Final Reading). (SECOND OR FINAL READING): Bill 52: DEVELOPMENT PLAN (CDP) The Windward Planning Commission forwards its favorable recommendation for General Plan to create a framework for residents and other stakeholders to participate in regional planning for their communities. The planning area for the Reference: Comm. 351 Intr. by: Ms. David (B/R) First Reading: September 20, 2017 Motion to Approve: Ms. David moved to pass Bill 52 on second and final reading. Seconded by Mr. Kanuha. CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member David. MS. DAVID: Mahalo, Chair, and mahalo, Director Yee, for being here this morning and Deputy Director, and also April Surprenant. I would like to just say thank you, again, to the testifiers who have faithfully showed up to support this important piece of legislation. And also expressing that their desire that we approve Bill 52 in its present form without any amendment berated this to a degree that I think I am still very much comfortable in moving forward. I still believe strongly that this document in its current form needs no amendments at this time. I stand by that very strongly. I think I would like to reiterate that the Planning Department and discussions with Corporation Counsel only validates my strong position to support this document as is. So I would ask that my fellow Council Members continue to support this very meaningful document as is and CDP. I do also note and I want to thank Corporation Counsel for the communication that I think we all your continued support based on the recommendations of the Corporation sler decision Page 34 -23 October 4, 2017 continued support and I will yield at this time. Mahalo. CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member Richards. MR. RICHARDS: Thank you, Chair, and thank you, Councilman David. Though I thoroughly enjoy working with you and agree that this is a great document as a planning too have respectfully disagree about needing an amendment. I do have an amendment coming forward and before I present that, I just want to give some context. We have discussed this at great length and I conversation I would argue that this is the will and this is the expressed desires of ted several times both by Planning, both by our Corporation Counsel, that this is truly a planning tool and not a mandate, yet, language within the CDP seems contrary to that. communica Counsel this morning. I had asked our Corporation Counsel to have a review of it and give an opinion as far as whether or not this is mandated. Do we have a Mr. Kamelamela. In there I specifically asked a question. Is this planning or is this statutory? Is this binding? The conclusion as you see on page 3 is that it is not binding. That being said, when I go back and I read through the CDP, and I have spent hours reading and re-reading this, as an articulation, if you look to policy 10, it mandates on page 40 that the Planning Director hands are bound bycan only give a favorable approval if it agrees with the CDP. So, in my mind that is a mandatory, not a planning document. So with that, and as it has been l because it expresses the concerns and the wishes of the community as a whole and about. If we tie the hands with a Community Development Plan that amends code covered. So I offer the amendment, which is 351.7 to clarify that this is language and this is a planning tool. Now, not a planning tool to be used cavalierly, a concerned because of the Missler decision. Page 35 -23 October 4, 2017 Mr. potential liability for the My concern is So with that, I would move that we adopt 351.7 as an amendment to the bill. Now in talking story about this, and so CHR. POINDEXTER: need a second though on that? Motion to Amend: Mr. Richards moved to amend Bill 52 with the contents of Comm. 351.7. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy. CHR. POINDEXTER: Now, we are on the Communication, itself; the 351. 7. Discussion on that, Council Member Richards? MR. RICHARDS: Okay, thank you, Chair. I appreciate the consideration from talking about in the CDP. Like I said, I do not argue the content of the CDP. There are concerns with some of the content. If it is a planning tool, then that mitigates the concerns for the document from other constituents that have I have some issues with that going forward. So, I would ask you to consider this. It has been articulated by Planning, by Corporation Counsel, by people on the Council itself, that this is truly a planning document and all my language does is specifies and articulates CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, any other discussion on the amendment? Council Member Eoff. MS. EOFF two community development plans for each district, but it was and continues to be a very collaborative process; community ba concerted effort to adopt a Community Development Plan. Now my understanding is that it is adopted by ordinance, it is a planning tool, there are provisions in it that are legally binding if they have a shall and the most of it is Page 36 -23 October 4, 2017 just a directive and a planning tool, not completely legally enforceable. So, ut adopt it all have exactly the same language. They are adopted by reference and they state adopting this plan, at this time. That is my stand, thank you. CHR. POINDEXTER : We had this discussion before during first read, and my only objection to the previous attempt to amend the Bill no. 52 was that it targeted just the , and did not give that overarching language that I felt needed to be in place in Section 16-2, which would apply to all . And since Mr. Richard had offered his amendment prior to mine, I simply paraphrased his amendment and put it in a different section, because I have said all along I feel that all need to be treated similarly with regard to any additional language and oversight claiming that these documents are providing guidance, providing policy direction. But they dont have necessarily the force of law, simply because were adopting them by ordinance. We need to make that clarification. So thats why I would not support this amendment, but would move forward my amendment for consideration after. CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member Chung. MR. CHUNG more encompassing. It will ht be just a bit better. MR. RICHARDS: Chair, can I respond? CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member Richards. MR. RICHARDS: Thank you, Chair. Mr. Chung, I can answer that question. Initially my amendment was exactly where Ms. Os was and its my understanding and again what werre talking about procedural. This whole discussion is a procedural deal and its not about content. Procedurally as I understand, because of the name of the bill specifically points out that , we have to address the . So for Page 37 -23 October 4, 2017 that reason, I made it for the I dont disagree with you that I think we have to do it as a whole, but its my understanding that its best done in a separate piece of legislation where the title is accurate reflecting that. MR. CHUNG: Do I still have the floor? CHR. POINDEXTER: Yeah, I just allowed him to answer the question. Council Member Chung. MR. CHUNG: And that makes perfect sense actually. I mean, these two amendments are not mutually exclusive I think. You could probably approve with another one, which would be properly agendized, and that would take care of Thanks. MR. RICHARDS: As would I. CHR. POINDEXTER MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Chair. I would also request that maybe Mr. Richards hold this in abeyance for a little bit, or maybe even table this motion so we can have full latitude and discuss another amendment that is before us? And then kind of utilize our Planning Department and our Corporation Counsel to help us vet through the different areas of the section of the code that were clearly looking for clarification on. I expressed this at the last meeting. We also seem to want to clarify this, but we need to put those words on the paper, and not just guess at it down in the document. I also know we have some backdrop with the Corporation Counsel. So I would love to kind of put all of that on the table, so we can be extremely transparent and get through a process that we are bound by Sunshine Law and cannot do it anywhere else. That is my suggestion. Im just hopeful that we dont close the door on one thing to get to someplace else to find out that it doesnt work because its not properly titled. And it needs to go through its own vetting process. Thats where I stand right now, and trust that everybody is listening on how to have a very full conversation about this particular planning tool, I yield. CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, first round, anyone on first round? Okay, on second roun Member David. Page 38 -23 October 4, 2017 MS. DAVID: Thank you, Chair. I do appreciate the thoughtful position that you folks are taking about having to make an amendment right now, here and now. But I really believe that this type of amendment can be brought forward in its own time, not as part of this adoption process, because I see this ordinance as adopting the . It doesnt say adopt it and clarify the CDP at this point in time. Im not saying that you guys cant amend it right now. That is your choice. Im saying that I would not support an amendment because I believe any amendment to this document needs to be vetted through the proper process of going through the community public input, the Planning Commission input process, and also the recommendations from our department. If we pass something right now to make it part of this adoption process, weve actually not allowed this discussion to go further than public testimony where I think what the clarification is important. I believe it is important. But I also believe s important to have it vetted in the full process that is afforded to the community, to the departments, and also Corp Counsel. Right now I view this as if this amendment, because of the degree of what is being asked to be done here, I think to just include it as part of this process will be a very huge disservice to what I believe is the process that is necessary for any amendments to go through, especially with this degree. So Im not going to apologize, but Im just very firmlymy position stays the same only because I think any amendments, like you are saying, Mr. Richards, on getting clarification, I really want that, too. But I also want the ability of the people to weigh-in at a public venue, and go through the planning process. So that process, if we amend it right now is going to be eliminated. And for that reason, I really will not support any amendments at this time, mahalo. CHR. POINDEXTER : Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Ms. David, as the sponsor of this bill for explaining your position. And as Ive said, I offer a separate amendment and we cant actually discuss it since it hasnt been read into record. But in that process, I did have that vetted through our Legislative Reference Bureau and our attorney there assured me it was in compliance with title, et cetera. We could have a different opinion from our Corporation Counsel, if that amendment comes up for consideration. I mean we could have his opinion, it may be different. I dont know, but the point is that I dont believe the amendment as were considering right now is specific to the . Does it change anything within the t. Would it need to go out for additional review? I t know; the Planning Department needs to come up and answer that question. But it doesnt actually change the document as we have it before us now. If someone wants to speak for the Planning Department and come forward and answer that question, would this have to go back for additional reviews with this amendment, perhaps someone could come forward? I dont think anybody is jumping up for joyIm not sure who to call forward? Mr. Arai, Ms. Surprenant. Page 39 -23 October 4, 2017 (Note: At this time, Planning Deputy Director Daryn Arai came forward to address the members of the Council.) MR. ARAI: Good morning, Chair Poindexter and members of the County Council. I think with the adoption of the amendment, with an amendment to code and its not affecting the actual plan itself, does not require it to be revisited or re- vetted. But, I do agree with the discussion that has been going on regarding the effect of the two amendments being introduced. I do believe that the amendment introduced by Council Member does potentially conflict with Charter, because the Charter says that the title of a bill shall embrace just one subject- matter. And the subject-matter before you today is the adoption of the . The amendment introduced by Council Member Richards, while it does attempt to provide greater clarity, it may have also the effect of also creating greater ambiguity. The reason I say that is because where did it go? It speaks to all statements of policy controls in the shall not constitute amendments to existing codes or rules. If I were to read this passage in the Code ten years from now, Im going to be thinking existing as of ten years from now. So what does that really mean? So as you can see, while we appreciate the concern for greater clarity, one could reinterpret this and it creates greater confusion when it comes to applicability. Sowhich is why we have always tried to stay on-point by saying that throughout the development of the , over many, many years, there was a deliberate attempt to not replicate some of the unintended consequences that occurred in the Kona CDP. And theres a point where you have to rely on that deliberate process built in collaboration with the community over so many years. And if you ask me, now, can I provide you with 100 percent guarantee that the adoption without any further amendments could withstand a legal challenge? Of course I can assurance. But in the absence of that, you know, should that paralyze us from doing what we think is the right thing to do, you know? I hope I answered your question, maybe not? But I stand ready to provide further clarification, if needed. Or if Ms. Surprenant had anything, okay. : Thank you, Mr. Arai. Mr. Kamelamela, could you come forward, because we seem to have a point of law question? (Note: At this time, Corporation Counsel Joseph Kamelamela came forward to address the members of the Council.) MR. KAMELAMELA: Good morning, Chair, and members of the County Council. Joseph Kamelamela, Corporation Counsel. : The matter that is up for question is regarding how this bill is titled, and whether or not anything can be done to change the section about the adoption of community development plans within this specific bill? And is it your opinion that it is not appropriate under the charter to add additional language to Section 16-2, which is the front-end to the adoption of all of the ? Page 40 -23 October 4, 2017 Point of Order: MS. LEE LOY: Chair? Excuse me, point of order. CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: I understand her question, but her question discussion. So, I want a point of order to kind of refocus us and redirect us. If Mr. Richards is willing to either withdraw his motion or table his motion or hold Mr. Kamelamela answer that question. And, then, we can have better understanding. Good information helps us make good decisions asking for right now, so. CHR. POINDEXTER the communication that is before us until such time that changes and that is still with Council be according to that communication, we would appreciate it; so the 351.7. : Then I will hold off on that question. Thank you, Mr. Kamelamela. CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, so on the second round, we have Council Member Richards and then Council Member Eoff. MR. RICHARDS: Thank you, Chair, what were trying to do is get down and were all wanting the same thing, again. re just trying to figure out how to get therehang on, Mr. Kamelamela. Lee Loy has said if I will put my amendment on the table the best procedural MR. MAEDA: You cannot put that amendment on the table. It has to be a main motion. So, it can be withdrawn and then reintroduced later, but it cannot be put on the table. MR. RICHARDS CDP. I this a planning document or is it a statutory document, yes or no? Which way is matter. It has nothing to do with the content of the document. It has to do with the procedural process of handling this document. And Councilwoman David, if The missler has changed a -sighted for the County. And so I ask that question, which way Page 41 -23 October 4, 2017 MR. ARAI: Not m trying to be very cautious about the words I use. Im not maybe crystal clear on the word statutory, and all of its implications, but honestly, I dont see a problem on why a planning tool cannot be both, you know? There are things that we look at, even the General Plan. The General Plan is adopted by ordinance. It is law. And it contains both expressions of policy guidance, and there are things in there that mandates us to seriously consider within our planning regulatory framework. I think I mentioned at the last meeting how the s are just one of a myriad of planning tools that we use when we consider how we administer the requirements of the zoning code and the subdivision code and all the other things that we do in the office. So its not totally linear. We look at a number of different things and I try to apply reasonable and firm balance when making a decision, or a recommendation. I hope that answers your question. MR. RICHARDS: It does, because what you are telling me is, its mandatory then. We can have suggestions, but either all of the content is not mandatory or parts of it are, correct? MR. ARAI: Again, it depends on how the plan is structured and each plan for each district can be entirely different. MR. RICHARDS: And thre having this conversation. MR. ARAI: wrong, I should say. It depends on how the community wishes to express itself and the type of directives and guidance that it wants to provide to the department. MR. RICHARDS: So I understand that. So as an example, on page 24, policy 10, it says the Director of Planning shall offer favorable recommendation to the Planning Commission subject to propriety conditions only for those proposed zoning code amendments that would further the intent and ensure consistency with the objections and policies of the . So my concern with this and again, this is procedural. Were now changing our land use policies based upon a CDP plan without going through the whole process that we have articulated and that our County functions on. And it has very little to do with the content itself, but the procedure. And that is what my concern is and this is where I raise the concern, Council Members. And that is an example of what Im talking about. It directs the Planning Director cannot issue a favorable, unless its in compliance with the CDP, but that circumvs where my concern is. And that is why I offer the amendment. Do you see page 24, policy 10? That is where my concern is, again, kudos to the community for putting the efforts of nine years plus to get this done. I support it with the understanding as we have been led to believe both through committee and through first reading that this is an advisory document, and nothing in it can Page 42 -23 October 4, 2017 be construed as statutory and mandatory. That is how it was presented to me, but now Im not hearing that and it concerns me. MR. KAMELAMELA: Can I speak so that we can get certain thingsfrom what I understand that Daryn said, which I totally agree with is that the CDP is a legislative planning tool that offers both guiding and binding policies that directs the Planning Department to implement certain various policies throughout its regulatory framework. So what the CDP isit is a planning tool and this type of development, parties to provide information, addressingthat have been described within the code and with other pertinent laws, which also includes the CDP. And then this, whatever the process is. If you look at the regulatory framework, this will determine whether a particular planning decision will be considered and eventually made later on. So, this planning tool does not mandate a change in the code. What it does do, it helps with the planning use process and down the road, whatever approval has to be made, you know, will be made by the appropriate decision-maker, whether that be the Planning Director, the Planning Commission, or the County Council. So when you speak about the Planning basically it is telling the director, you know, you can recommend either approval or denial of a proposed amendment to the Planning Commission, subject to conditions, which would further the intent of the zoning code, general plan, and other related ordinances. So thisso they are looking at a lot of things, because there is also State statute that might apply, there might be some administrative rules that apply. So they are required to look at everything. And so that is the function of having a plan like this. And so, they would also take into preserve certain kinds of resources that they have there. So that is what this plan is. MR. RICHARDS: Okay, so to respond to that, the CDP is a document written by , not the entire population. And as a planning tool, I think its outstanding. The problem is it doesnt represent the will of all of the constituents. And if we dont recognize that then going forward I think were going to be short sighted and that is where my concern is. If we have a problem with a zoning concern, we have a process to address that. But this limits that by circumventing the whole process, and that is where my concern is. I cant read it any other way. I ham starting to dream about it. CHR. POINDEXTER: Thank you. Okay, Council Member Eoff and then Council Member ? Okay, Council Member Council Member David. Page 43 -23 October 4, 2017 MR. CHUNG: Thank you. Let me just tell you what my concerns are, and they are all borne out of confusion, okay, because over the course of all of these meetings that we have been having, I never heard once and I could be wrong, until today, when Joe said is both mandatory and what did he say? That its both binding and guiding. Even Daryn, with all due respect when Mr. Richards asked you a question, if is it see why a planning document cant be both That is not really answering the question. All I wanted to know, is it binding or is it just advisory? That is all. But I take exception to this memo that was written by Joe, which we just received a half an hour before our meeting. So I had to go through it really quickly. I know Joe put it together as quickly as he can to accommodate us. I appreciate that. But first, it starts out by saying, Mr. Richards inquired as to whether the control policies were advisories or mandates? so that seems to be the issue. You want to address that issue. the issue is whether the County Council may adopt the as written?urse we can adopt it. I dont even have to have a legal memo to know that we can adopt it, right? That is not the issue. The issue is what was stated in this first paragraph regarding Mr. Richards question, is it mandatory or advisory? And then so during the course of this memo, it sort of explains it, but what is really lacking in all of this is a really detailed description of the missler decision, and how it relates to Mr. Richards question? s almost like you talk about missler and you just say its missler decision supports , but its hard for us to understand how it supports it, unless we truly understand what missler stands for? So that is lacking. And then you have all of these policy intent, policy control, County actions and all of this. t really answer the question that was asked of you guys, until today, Joe. So now we understand. There are some statutory provisions, and some binding provisions, and some advisory provisions and that is what I thought anyway to begin with. But all I wanted was a straight answer; right? My personal feeling is I take exception to the fact that we have this mish mash of plans throughout the County. t make for a real good situation because there is no uniformity throughout the island. I was hoping that all of these would be advisory only. And that whenever we make a decision, we would take these things into consideration and really show that we took those things into consideration. But now you have these statutory components in there. still going to votes for this thing and in deference to all that was put into it and with the hope that we can somehow correct the situation to get more s are supposed to be. But Im just one vote and that is only my opinion. The other members of this board may feel otherwise, that it should be statutoryI mean binding and advisory and I certainly respect that. Im just telling you how I feel about all of these things. I might be in the minority and thats fine. But thank you for finally just telling us it has two components and that if we approve it today, that is how its going to be, unless its corrected later on. Okay, thank you. Page 44 -23 October 4, 2017 CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, Council Member Eoff. MS. EOFF: Thank you. I also thank you for all of the clarification today. But it doesnt seemwell, it makes it easier to understand how we are to consider a CDP or the CDP when you explain that its similar to how we see a general plan. The County general plan is also adopted by ordinance. It contains directives that are not legally binding, they are descriptive policy. There are some parts that we shall legally uphold and you do when you give recommendations for zoning, et cetera. So for me, that is a very easy and good and clear way to look at this as a planning tool that has bothhow did you say it; both binding and non-binding policies or guiding and binding policies. So I think its very clear. I think weve exaggerated the concerns that some people have brought up, I think, over the last several discussions on this. To me, the missler case reaffirmed things within the Kona CDP that were mandated by a shall and as it applies to this CDP, I think its very clear that as I said before and I think you have reiterated that the shalls are not cause for concern within this document. So I dont think the missler case does anything that we cant really understand today. It cleared up, and as you said, supports what you are saying about the , that we shall consider legally binding, but the rest of it is guidelines and a planning tool. So I t know if how I feel is correct? I think its in line with what you have told us today and I feel we should I go ahead and not amend with this other language. In fact, the language that is contained in the amendment is actually stated right within the CDP, similarly. So I think its safe to say that is clear in the CDP. I think its in Joes memo, and its also within the document. That exact same language. So I dont really see why we would need to do anything different than we have in past with adoptions? If we need to discuss later on clarification of this Chapter 16, and 16-2, I think that is definitely a newshould be done in a new discussion, not within this particular bill. I think that is a much larger discussion, much more comprehensive, if you are going to add language in any way to Chapter 16-2 generally. So, thank you for another opportunity to talk on this amendment. CHR. POINDEXTER: Thank you. Council Member David and then Im going to go to Council Member Ruggles. MS. DAVID: I yield. CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member Ruggles. MS. RUGGLES: Thank you. First I would like to thank Mr. Richards for being specific about what within the CDP were concerned about, because that was my biggest question. But, first, I want to talk about what Mr. Chung mentioned about it being mandatory or advisory and how the missler case applies? This is not a new conversation for us. This has come up since the first time this was heard and as a result of that we did get a document from Mr. Kamelamela describing how Page 45 -23 October 4, 2017 the missler case impacts this CDP. And that is what we talked about at the last Council hearing. And in the first Council hearing when I went through the minutes, it was very clearwe discussed whether or not this was mandatory or advisory? And they explained how the shalls referred to already existing codes and rules, and the are recommendations and none of the shalls conflict with any current codes and rules. So I just dont understand why we keep bringing this up, when this has already been confirmed? And furthermore, policy 10. So planning shall offer a favorable recommendation to Planning Commission subject to appropriate conditions for those proposed zoning code changes consistent with objections and policies within the . Now Ive heard us say over and over again how we all give kudos to the Action committeenot the action but the ommittee for putting in nine-plus years of very thorough work into this, and how we want to support this, and acknowledging and appreciating it as being direct will of the people. And if this is true, why would we have concerns about applicants wanting to zone things contrary to what the people wanted? And what the people have expressed they wanted? If we truly believe and if we truly appreciate this being a direct will of the people, we would not be concerned about something not being consistent with it. We would be supportive of zoning changes being consistent with the objectives of what the people wanted and worked so hard to get. And Mr. Arai, you mentioned that theres a title that says that we cannot adopt more than one matter at a time. What was that title? MR. ARAI: It was actually a provision within the County Charter that says the title of a bill; an ordinance shall express no more than one subject-matter. MS. RUGGLES: Thank you. Mr. Kamelamela, would these amendments cause the title to express more than one subject-matter? MR. KAMELAMELA: What Im going to do, Im just going address Mr. Richards amendment. So, his amendment I believe would violate the one subject rule only because it is just talking about the . MS. RUGGLES: Okay, thank you. The Planning Department this point. Thank you. CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member David. MS. DAVID: Thank you. I want to thank the Planning Department for the clarification on bind and non-binding. Because I think its not a yes-or-no answer. Is it one or the other answer, because its the planning document that contain both. Thank you, Mr. Chung for clarifying that. With respect to Mr. Richards amendment, I sense that you feel strongly about certain policies within the CDP that once we adopt this, this is going to be cut in stone. But, I Page 46 -23 October 4, 2017 would like to suggest that those kinds of amendments can be brought up or can be brought forward before this body as amendment to the CDP, which would then engage the process of any amendment that you might want for a specific issue that you are having some concerns with that would go through vetting here before this body, and then be referred to the Planning Commission for further review and recommendation. So I would like to suggest that as opposed to doing it here, that maybe the policies you are having some real concern and difficulty with be welcomed and brought forward after we adopt the CDP. And thats my suggestion, because I think s a cleaner process and I think it affords the public an opennessan open government that we all strive for because it would engage them on a level that would allow them tonot be clouded by this whole confusion of the CDP and policies within the CDP, but it would afford some participation that I think your concerns deserve. Because they are concerns about specific policies within this document that you are not comfortable if we adopted and not change it this point in time. Im just suggesting that you bring forward any possible changes that were authorized to do that. So I would welcome that and then we can give it its proper attention and focus at a different time. s my suggestion, and I also respectfully didnt say that I would not support the amendment at this time, but I would support an amendment to the CDP at a later time to be vetted through a proper process. Thank you. CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member Richards. MR. RICHARDS: Thank you. I appreciate thisoh, I defer. CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, Council Member Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Mr. Richards. I think Im going to try and drill-down a little bit. So of the policies that are being mandated through the , have they gone through the appropriate vetting process, like any other statutory rule change would go through within the land use process? MR. KAMELAMELA: Ill have planning go first, because planning has been involved with this entire process. MR. ARAI: I believe that the proper protocols were followed. s like any other plan, whether its the General Plan or other s. Binding policies were clearly expressed within the plan itself. And anyone following the evolutionary development of the plan then should have been aware. You are not going to go through something as comprehensive as a CDP and have to outline it in an enabling ordinance. You have an ordinance probably hundreds of pages thick. So it is something that is enacted by plan, but I think over the course of review, over manynine years. I think were comfortable where we land, that it has been vetted. The intent was communicated to the community and others who Page 47 -23 October 4, 2017 were engaged in the process. So, I personally feel that the intent of going through that protocol was basically has been followed. So I hope that provides you with enough assurance. MR. KAMELAMELA: from where I sit, there are processes that are supposed to be followed. I believe that in this case, too, that there was the proper process that was developed, because what I have here is a very thic two to three hundred pages. These were presented, also, to the Planning that I received through that process, the same document is what was presented to to look at, not only the plan itself, but I had to drill-down and look at the rationale, because for me to have actually worked on that chart that I developed. You know, I had to look back and forth and, then, make sure that I fully understood the sections to do with mandatory and County actionI recalled that the first statements that I made to this County Council was that whatever is mandatory, you know, represent it; what was required by the law. MS. LEE LOY: Okay, so this plan adopts new land use regulations, yes or no? MR. ARAI: Adoption of this plan will establish binding criteria by which the Planning Department must follow in the administration of its fiduciary responsibilities, whether its the application of other codes and laws in concert with the binding requirements within this document. You know, I know were trying to getI dont know if this is going to help. I hope it does, but regulation seems to imply its black-and-white. And not everything in here is black-and- white. What is binding upon us is binding by process. Meaning that the department shall look at this, the department shall consider this, its a process. So it forces usthats the binding part, it forces us to consider and look at something when we consider everything else that we have to look at, whether its a zoning code or subdivision codes. So Im trying to make that distinction. Regulations is usually setback your house 20-feet; right? I get it. But then at the same time, like for the shoreline setback policy, it talks about application of a quarter mile but at the same time, if there are exceptions, submit it to our office and well consider those requested exceptions. It just defines a process. I hope that is clear. MR. KAMELAMELA: May I respond to your question? And the answer to your question, from what I understand, is yes, i MS. LEE LOY: So for those policy directives that direct the decision-makers to make those decisions and look at this as a planning tool, that decision is made administratively, correct? Page 48 -23 October 4, 2017 MR. ARAI: Im sorry, could you repeat that again? MS. LEE LOY: The way you described this document, and the ones that are mandatory, it forces the department and all the different agencies to go look at this planning tool, correct? MR. ARAI: That is correct. MS. LEE LOY: Okay, so when an applicant is not agreeing, where is the appeal or Chapter 91 or Chapter 92 appeals process for those policy directives that is contained within the CDP? Where is there contested-case process prior to it making it out, like during that review process? Because my concern is there is going to be this evaluating, and I completely trust the technical expertise of all of the people who review our land use documents, but my concern is this policy directives doesnt afford an applicant a contested-case process. It would actually come after the decision has been made. And then thats my big concern, because re going down Supreme Court decision; TMT where they werent afforded a contested-case hearing process during the issuance of the permits and thats whats muddy to me. s why Iurge my Council Members to please consider this amendment, so that we don't need the courts clarifying to us. The clarification is right up front. Were not going to be bogged down with people trying to reinterpret where their first action to make a claim for a contested-case hearing occurs, when some of it is being made administratively. And we wont see itan applicant wont see it until after a recommendation has come out. So, that is kind of where at, and really we keep barking over this at clarity. Because then my concern is that some of this policies that were trying to adopt, have they gone through the appropriate rule- making process that affords those venues for contested-case or for the applicants, the first opportunity to assert their claim? I really dont want an answer. That is my heartburn. It continues to be my heartburn. My time is up, and thats why Im having a hard time with this. I yield. CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member Richards. MR. RICHARDS: Thank you, Chair. And planning, Mr. Arai, Mr. Kamelamela, thank you for sitting up here in the hot set seats . To answer a few things, Councilwoman Ruggles, this is the word of some of the people, yes we understand that. Mr. Arai, I do agree with you that I firmly believe thatand in your words, anyone following the evolution would see this. But that is anyone following the evolution, this has been going on so long, many people arent following it anymore and are fed up with the process. I fully believe, and I believe too, that the intent of the process was followed. I believe that. The problem is when we get down in the weeds again. I think Councilwoman Lee Loy highlighted the fact that the process itself for some of these changes, its actually not followed. I think you are articulated that. The Page 49 -23 October 4, 2017 intent is to go that way, but actually following the process that we have in place now is not followed for this because if we adopt the CDP as written and its not clarified that its strictly advisoryagain, if we have this conversation two months ago, I would be thinking differently. But thats where the concern is. Its been stated, itlanning Commission. Great, but that was before the missler decision. And I cannot only believe that there may be some different thought processes at this point. To answer Councilwoman Davidand I get it, Maile. I get it. I understand where you are coming from. I hear you loud and clear to come forth with amendments to the CDPy intent amend the CDP at all, because this is the will of the people that participated in the process. My intent is to make sure we use the document in the appropriate vein that it was written and presented as has been articulated in previous hearings, and Committees, and all. So, thats where my concern comes from. I will stand with my amendment, because I think it clarifies things. And the more we talk about this, the muddier it does get, and I fully appreciate that. But I want to make sure that we are very clear about going forward. Coming through this whole process, I have always embraced the fact that the CDP is an invaluable planning tool. It is the expressed will of the people in the community that participated in the project, and needs to be enacted by the representation that they elect to the seats that we all sit and share and that we champion that going forward. That we communicate with this. It should be a s a living document and advisory document, that works well for me. The moment we start making it statutory, I think that is where it gets muddier and muddier and muddier. Councilmen and women, again, I know we all want the same thing. We want the of the future generations You mentioned the quarter mile setback. Listen very carefully, there is no appeal process. So its a quarter mile setback if we adopt this. So in my mind, we have circumvented land use, and I see a shaking head, no, I dont agree with that. That is your opinion, and I value that, I do. But, my concern is there is more to it than that. s where Im coming from on this. I dont want to amend this document, because I think its a great document. We just have to use it appropriately. So with that, I yield. CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member Ruggles. MS. RUGGLES: Thank you. I wanted to sort of clarify just for context on the shoreline setback. Having read it, its only for lots that are within special management areas. And it would only apply to those lots created after the CDP is adopted. So lots prior to the CDP, its the 40 foot. And for those who are after the adoption, who would want to build closer to the coastline, they can request a setback be reduced by providing the information to the Planning Department, including info required from the special management area, which I believe is Page 50 -23 October 4, 2017 State mandated which would allow for an assessment of the proposed impacts in consideration of the physical limitations of the property. So I think that there is a lot of reasonable leeway in there and there is also this other consideration, which is State law that the CDP is complying with and that this policy is complying with. That being said, Mr. Arai, could you tell me what the public process laws were that the Planning Committee needed to comply with? MR. ARAI: With regards to? MS. RUGGLES: To creating this document. MR. ARAI: Follow chapter 16, throughout the development of the CDP, we emulated the process defined by chapter 16, which is the General Plan process. So fifteen, Im sorrye comfortable that we did follow proper protocols because we relied on an existingas you may remember the missler decisi are actually a part of the General Plan and that being said, we followed that process, in addition to the Sunshine Law requirements. So again, which is why were assured that we did follow proper process. Did I answer your question? Do you want me to take it further? MS. RUGGLES: Yeah, are there any process laws that they needed to follow that are different from what we need to follow as a County Council? MR. ARAI: I dont believe so. MS. RUGGLES: The 6 days notice and for public testimony and all the meetings need to be in public, the same Sunshine Laws? MR. ARAI: agendized, which is why we have our Community Development Plan website that has all of that information. People can track it. We tried to be as transparent as possible. I know that s, you cannot achieve 100 percent participation. Even if you want something approved by everyone in the community, the only way do is maybe through a ballot initiative, but even at that you only probably get 40 percent of the people showing up to vote. So youre never going to get 100 percent. And towards that end, which is why we believe that tracking it through the General Plan process, having the public meetings, agendizing it, you know, compliance with Sunshine Law is the best way to achieve. MS. RUGGLES: Yes, so I would share Mr. Richards concerns on the public t true. But knowing that they have to follow the same public process that we do and they have been for nine years to create this. You know, it may not express or represent the will of every one in , but nothing really does. Even with the legislation that we pass, it doesnt represent and not everybody participates, just like not everybody participates in the CDP processes. Page 51 -23 October 4, 2017 So to use that logic, then that would mean you have to apply it to everything that we do here too, because its the same process. Meetings were posted with notices and they took testimony and considered it, just like us. And for those who have participated, just like how they do here, this is what was created. With that I will yield. Thank you. CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, anybody else, Council Member Chung. Yes, we are on the amendment. Okay, so now I get to speak on the amendment, because I possible to get all of my community, all of my district 1 people into a meeting or meetings; they work positions. Like the CDP Steering Committee comes from the various groups and associations o CDP. one through, codes that exist and the mandatory things that already exist in code. The suggestions andI agree that the administration should be able to make rules agree with that because I think the rules should be amended to what some of the suggestions are, to make ll cut to the chase. developers has talked to the attorneys, the attorneys have come to talk to many of the Council period, because an example is, some place is zoned industrial and they say no we would state that the CDP would state, heh, I wanted open space. Sorry, you guys need to look at that document and then look, oh no, but he has the right to. done accordingly to t in agreement with that loophole that is being Page 52 -23 October 4, 2017 own opinion and their perception is their reality. So, it is what it is. So, are we ready to vote? Okay, Council Member Chung? MR. CHUNG: I think I have to address some of those comments, Madam Chairman. I think and with all due respect to you, I think youve added up one plus one equals 10, okay? You know, what did you say about some landowners talked to attorneys and theyre concerned about that setbacks and maybe that is something that is going on. But nobody has talked to me about that and, in fact I have stated on the record, and I dont represent any land holding interests in or anywhere else and I am an attorney. You know, nobody has come to speak to me about this matter. I did state on the record that even this setback issue doesnt offend me. I stated that on a previous hearing. What Im just concerned about is the effects of the missler decision on what was the stated intent by some of the people on this Council? And I just wanted to make sure that if that intent was shared by everyone, we better make sure that this thing is all settled; right? But now Im not too sure if that sentiment is shared by all. I know Mr. Kanuha mentioned it once, Mr. Richards, Ms. Lee Loy and myself aboutwere looking at this. We were viewing the CDP process as being one that would offer recommendations, okay? But not be statutory in nature. But it looks like it is. Its a mix and I can accept that, and all I wanted to know was what Im voting on. I had to be 100 percent clear on that, before I moved ahead. Now I know what it isI mean, I read it, and that is what I thought, but I never heard a straight answer from anyone until today. Notwithstanding any thoughts that Ms. Ruggles may have, what did she say? I dont see why we keep bringing this up? I was not clear. Maybe Im not as smart as her, but I wasnt as clear. Now Im clear. Now I know what Im voting on m still going to support it. Talk about deference to the public and all of their hard work. I have got no problem, even if its contrary to what I think this plan should represent. Okay? But one thing, since its been brought up and I have the floor again, but, you know, Ms. Ruggles talked about the process. She wanted to make sure that everything was followed just as we would have to do. Theres one big difference though. What were asked to do here is basically when you really think about it, is just to ratify something. And by ratifying, we are making it legislation; therein lies the problem with that whole missler issue. But we are only called upon to ratify because if we werent and that wasnt the case, then Ms. David would be and no offense would be more amenable to us making changes to this document; right? The only amendment that is really been offered has been to deal with the missler decision. We havent delved into the nuts and bolts of this document. And we are, as Mr. Richards said on many occasions, we are respecting the process. We are giving deference to what was work out. But, really, if it was more than just a ratification we could look at all of those things and make Page 53 -23 October 4, 2017 amendments to each and every proposal. So therein lies in the big difference between this whole process there. There really are not too many, if at all, situations in County Government where we just do that. It might only be where its for pay raises. For example, we have this real perfunctory role in ratifying things. So I just wanted to point those things out, yeah. I mean, I had to take exception, Madam Chairman, because I think that might not be totally correct, at least as it applies to me, not correct. CHR. POINDEXTER: Right and I said some, I didnt say they talked to all of the Council Members. I said they did some. Okay. So are we ready to vote on the amendment, 351.7, Mr. Clerk. The amendment is to add the language in about the code and the rules. So that is Council Member amendment. So Mr. Clerk, roll call, please. Vote on Motion to The motion to amend 52 with the contents of Comm. 351.7 Amend: failed by the following roll call vote: (Failed) Ayes: Council Members Chung, Lee Loy and Richards 3. Noes: Council Members David, Eoff, Ruggles, and Chair Poindexter 6. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, so the amendment fails. Were back to the main Bill 52, Council Member David. MS. DAVID: Given the discussions to this point, I will yield to Council Member CHR. POINDEXTER: MS. O: Okay, I want to be very clear here, since we stated how confused we all are. I will try to be as clear as I can. I do fully support the Development Plan. I think its a great community development plan, the best I have seen of the ones so far. So I do want to support that. And while we have talked about certain attorneys being concerned about the implications of the missler case with regard to how the are implemented or played out, this is true. I have received said visits, Im sorry, Mr. Chung, if you were left out. But maybe because you are an attorney, I dont know. But the real reason I bring this up is the missler case went on for three to four years and that involved County resources. I mean, lets not forget that, folks. That is a lot of County resources that were expended on that case and we dont want to create a situation where we have that same situation moving forward. I did joke with the attorney that visited and said well, it will keep you employed for the rest of your career, but that isnt really the point here. We do not want to waste County resources. So clarity is of Page 54 -23 October 4, 2017 the utmost importance. So I would like to move to introduce an amendment that I wrote, which is a Communication number 351.8. Motion to Amend: moved to amend Bill 52 with the contents of Comm. 351.8. Seconded by Ms. Lee Loy. CHR. POINDEXTER: So on Communication 351.8, : Okay, thank you. The reason Im not really going to press this point, because Im sensitive to some of the things that were already mentioned as Mr. Arai mentioned; that the language could be interpreted in more than one way. I would like to get this straight. Titling, yes, it would be more appropriate to submit this as a separate bill with a title that didnt just reference the . So I would be willing to work on that in the future. But as we know, its impossible for us to talk about these things outside of our public meetings. So I just wanted to add that I want to work with the Planning Department to get said language correct. The missler case, my understanding is it does support this type of amendment under a broader title. But, my question is what would be the process from here? If I were to amend Section 16-2, and you may have seen my amendment, which is in the front-end of the section and would apply to all s, would that also need to be reviewed by the Planning Commission? What would be the process if I came forward with a separate and properly titled bill with language that we could work out as being most appropriate? MR. ARAI: I think it would be appropriate to have it vetted by the Planning Commissions. So they can offer you their thoughts and recommendations before you act. : And would that be both Planning Commissions. MR. ARAI: Both Leeward and Windward Planning Commissions, yes. MS. O: Alright, so this could be a rather long and involved process to get a sentence amended to the code. But it may be something that would make a lot of people feelextend some clarity as to how we view the s and hopefully keep us out of court in the future. That would be my goal here. So with that, I will be withdrawing my amendment. And I just wanted to have that discussion. Thank you for allowing that. Withdraw Motion: Bill 52 with the contents of to Amend: Comm. 351.8. CHR. POINDEXTER back on the main motion on Bill 52. Again, I will forward the opportunity for Council Member David, the introducer. Page 55 -23 October 4, 2017 MS. DAVID: Thank you, Madam Chair. Awesome, I really want to thank all our Council Members for this discussion. t worked so hard. I dont think we have all had an experience such as this, but it was very enlightening and informative s comments and their efforts in discussing this important bill. I actually want to thank the Director of Planning, the Deputy, and Ms. Surprenant, and also Mr. Kamelamela for engaging all of us and giving us good information. So like Ms. Lee Loy says, so we can make good decisions. I just want to say thank you and mahalo to all of my Council Members. Aloha. CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member Chung. MR. CHUNG: Yes. And I guess when a person like me is on the losing end of a lot of major votes, thats when we become fringe players and people dont come and see us. But, I wanted to make one clarification, so you dont think Im talking out of two sides of my mouth. Although nobody did come and speak to me about this, I did make reference at our last meeting about attorneys. There are attorneys likeI think the Carl Smith firm, and others submitted testimony to us the last time; right? And I made a statement that these guys are getting paid big bucks to protect the interests of their clients, of course. Maybe it is for those setback issues or for others, I really dont know. But what I was trying to say is that I think we should at least listen to what they have to say, because these guys are experts in these areas. Whether we agree with them or not, is beside the point. But we should listen to them. But having said that, as I stated earlier, Im going to be supporting this. And I wanted to just make a point, even if it ara brings up her amendment, you have my support. Okay, thank you. CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member Richards. MR. RICHARDS: Thank you and thank you, Chair and thank you, Mr. Chung. Actually, thank you Eileen, for bringing forth that. I was actually going to vote for your amendment and you pulled it back on me. The long and short of it is the intent is to avoid future litigation and because the missler decision, I think were headed in that direction, unless we get clarity. And so, I will be supporting Councilwoman Oaras amendment coming forward and I will happy joint sponsor that with you coming forward. But because of that concern, I cannot support the CDP as its currently written. I think its a phenomenal document and I think its the intent that it was written as supportive for planning document its wonderful. But I cannot support it as written for the reasons I have articulated already. Thank you. CHR. POINDEXTER: Thank you. Council Member Lee Loy. MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Chair. She took it off the tableso I am going to be looking forward to that amendment that amends Section 16-2. And hold my Page 56 -23 October 4, 2017 breath in the meantime with the rest of s, or any other s at the time. And what I clearly heard today is the pledge that that is what these s are intended to do is to be an advisory document. And Imwell see when the rubber meets the road, when that amendment comes forward? Because what is going to happen, there will be a whole number of other communities weighing-in, because its not only going to be about itona and South Kohala and Puna and so it will be real different to hear peoples interpretations of what they think should be binding and mandatory and statutory, and what should be a wish. Im going to be supporting this at this time. But really eager to see that, and almost hope that the Planning Department could initiate that process, so it doesnt have to start here and have to go back down to come back up, just food for thought for our Planning Department. I yield. CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member Eoff. MS. EOFF: Thank you. And thank you all for a lively discussion and thank you, Ms. David, for championing this, and thank you department and attorneys and everyone for helping to clarify. I dont know whether its appropriate to say this at this time, but I agree that I think looking at any amendments to Chapter 16-2 should be initiated from the department. You can engage any of us, I guess, in that process. But I actually know there has already been some thought put into that. So I guess I will leave it at that. We have to be careful, I think, as we go forward on this. As you said earlier, some of the s are different in their format and in their statutory mandates. So its going to be, I think, not a simple process. So yeah, anyway, thank you very much and I will be supporting this bill. CHR. POINDEXTER: light on. Mr. Kanuha. MR. KANUHA: Just briefly. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to just state my support for this. And really congratulate the people of for working extremely hard to get this. You know, its going to pay off to what you really want down there. Mahalo to everybody and mahalo for discussion. I stated my intent for voting for this the last meeting and I still stick with that intent. Im not going to waiver from that. But I support this fully, and look forward to the community really getting down to what they want in that area. So mahalo, everybody, and I support this. CHR. POINDEXTER: Mr. Clerk, roll call, please. Page 57 -23 October 4, 2017 Vote on Bill 52: The motion to pass Bill 52 on second and final reading (Adopted) was carried by the following roll call vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kanuha, Chair Poindexter 8. Noes: Council Member Richards 1. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. POINDEXTER: Bill 52 is adopted. Now, Mr. Clerk, Bill 63. Bill 63: AMENDS ORDINANCE NO. 17-39, AS AMENDED, THE OPERATING ENDING JUNE 30, 2018 Increases revenues in the State Grants - Street Light/Traffic Signal Maintenance account ($400,000); and appropriates the same to the Traffic Signals & Street Lights account. Funds would be used to reimburse the County $400,000 for the conversion of streetlights on lands owned by the State Department of Hawaiian Home Lands from low pressure sodium to light emitting diode. Reference: Comm. 402 Intr. by: Ms. David (B/R) First Reading: September 20, 2017 Motion to Approve: Ms. David moved to pass Bill 63 on second and final reading. Seconded by Mr. Richards. CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member David. MS. DAVID: Yes, I just ask for your continued support, thank you. Page 58 -23 October 4, 2017 CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, any other discussion? Seeing or hearing none, all Vote on Bill 63: The motion to pass Bill 63 on second and final reading was (Adopted) carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, Richards, and Chair Poindexter 7. Noes: None. Absent: 2. Excused: None. CHR. POINDEXTER: Bill 64, Mr. Clerk. Bill 64: 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 Fire Department Haihai Fire Station (Kawailani Station Replacement) project for $154,000 to the Capital Budget. Funds for this project shall be provided from the General Obligation Bonds, Capital Projects Fund - Fund Balance and/or Other Sources. Funds would be used to complete the construction of the Haihai Fire Station. Reference: Comm. 403 Intr. by: Ms. David (B/R) First Reading: September 20, 2017 Note: Requires 2/3 vote of the entire membership to amend, pursuant to Section 10- Motion to Approve: Ms. David moved to pass Bill 64 on second and final reading. Seconded by Ms. Eoff. CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member David. MS. DAVID: Yes, I just ask for your continued support, mahalo. Page 59 -23 October 4, 2017 CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, any other discussion? Seeing or hearing none, all . Vote on Bill 64: The motion to pass Bill 64 on second and final reading was (Adopted) carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kanuha, air Poindexter 8. Noes: None. Absent: Council Member Ruggles 1. Excused: None. CHR. POINDEXTER: Bill 66, Draft 2, Mr. Clerk. Bill 66 AMENDS ORDINANCE NO. 17-39, AS AMENDED, THE OPERATING (Draft 2): ENDING JUNE 30, 2018 Increases revenues in the Transfer from General Fund account ($4,000); and appropriates the same to the Highway Maintenance Administration Other Current Expenses account. Funds would be used for the annual rental of a portable toilet for Banyan Beach in Kona. Reference: Comm. 436.2 Intr. by: Ms. David (B/R) First Reading: September 20, 2017 Motion to Approve: Ms. David moved to pass Bill 66, Draft 2, on second and final reading. Seconded by Mr. Kanuha. CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member David. MS. DAVID: Oh, I just ask for your continued support. CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, any discussion? Seeing or hearing none, all those Vote on Bill 66: The motion to pass Bill 66, Draft 2, on second and final (Draft 2) reading was carried by the following voice vote: (Adopted) Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kanuha, hair Poindexter 8. Noes: None. Absent: Council Member Ruggles 1. Excused: None. Page 60 -23 October 4, 2017 CHR. POINDEXTER: On Reports, Mr. Clerk. REPORTS: The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business, Reports. FC-40 NOMINATION OF GEORGE CAMPBELL TO THE SALARY (Comm. 437): COMMISSION Requires Council Confirmation by: October 15, 2017 (Section 13-4(l), Vote on FC-40: Ms. Lee Loy moved to approve Finance Committee (Adopted) Report No. 40. Seconded by Ms. Eoff and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kanuha, Ruggles, and Chair Poindexter 9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. REFERRALS FOR The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business, EXECUTIVE Referrals for Executive Session. SESSION: (There were none.) OTHER The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business, BUSINESS: Other Business. (There was none.) ANNOUNCE- The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business, MENTS: Announcements. (There were none.) Page 61 Hawaii County Council-23 October 4, 2017 ADJOURN There being no further business, at 12:26 p.m., Ms. Lee Loy moved to adjourn MENT: the meeting. Seconded by Ms. David and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Kanuha, Lee Loy, O'Hara, Richards, Ruggles, and Chair Poindexter—9. Noes: None. Absent: None. Excused: None. CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, this meeting is adjourned. DEC 0 5 2017 Council Approval: if0 1 CO , Y CLERK SM/slm Page 62