HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN COUNCIL 2016/06/03 2014-2016
Hawaiʻi County Council
rd
43 Session
Hawaiʻi County Building
25 Aupuni Street
Hilo, Hawaiʻi
June 3, 2016
INVOCATION: Reverend Bryan Siebuhr of Honpa Hongwanji Hilo Betsuin gave the morning’s
invocation.
CALL TO The regular meeting of the Hawaiʻi County Council was called to order at
ORDER: 9:05 a.m., in the Council Chambers, Hilo, by Mr. Dru Mamo Kanuha, Chair.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Mr. Dru Mamo Kanuha, Chair
Ms. Valerie T. Poindexter, Vice Chair
Mr. Aaron S. Y. Chung, Member
Ms. Maile “Medeiros” David, Member
Ms. Karen Eoff, Member
Mr. Greggor Ilagan, Member
Mr. Dennis “Fresh” Onishi, Member (came in later)
Mr. Danny Paleka, Member
Ms. Margaret Wille, Member
PLEDGE OF The Chair directed the Council to the next order of business, Pledge of
ALLEGIANCE: Allegiance.
(At this time, Mr. Paleka 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
EXPRESSION OF (Note: At this time, Council Member Chung presented Certificates of
CONDOLENCE: Merit to island-wide student athletes who had competed and excelled at the 2016
Hawaiʻi High School Athletics Association Track and Field State Championship
Tournament.)
Recess: At 9:51 a.m., the Chair called for a recess.
Reconvene: The meeting reconvened at 10:01 a.m.
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
CHR. KANUHA: Okay, we are now coming out of recess. Mahalo, Mr. Chung
for those great certificates, the presentations. We will move on with the agenda.
Next up on the agenda is Statements from the Public on Agenda Items. I know
we have quite a few here in Hilo, I just want to check with the rest of the sites.
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:
Gary Harrold: Bill 140, Draft 2 (Comm. 664.101), in support.
(representing Sierra Club)
John Matson: Bill 140, Draft 2 (Comm. 664.101), in support.
James Weatherford: Bill 140, Draft 2 (Comm. 664.101), in support.
David Ewing: Bill 206 (Comm. 876), in support.
Jeramiah Morgan: Bill 140, Draft 2 (Comm. 664.101), in support.
(representing He Ali’i Ka
ʻᾹina LLC)
Sarah Rafferty: Bill 140, Draft 2 (Comm. 664.101), in support.
Anna Peach: Bill 140, Draft 2 (Comm. 664.101), in support.
Kaimana Freitas: Bill 140, Draft 2 (Comm. 664.101), in support.
Sheri Silva-Evangelista: Bill 140, Draft 2 (Comm. 664.101), in support.
Janice Palma Glennie: Bill 101, Draft 3 (Comm. 494.18);
Bill 140, Draft 2 (Comm. 664.101);
Bill 150, Draft 2 (Comm. 694.4);
Bill 154, Draft 3 (Comm. 705.15); and
Bill 205 (Comm. 874); comment.
Courtney Meiselman: Bill 140, Draft 2 (Comm. 664.101), in support.
Raghu Giuffre: Res. 537 (Comm. 901); and
Res. 539 (Comm. 903); comment.
Abigail Rotholz: Bill 140, Draft 2 (Comm. 664.101), in support.
Page 2
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
Kathleen Crabill: Bill 140, Draft 2 (Comm. 664.101), in support.
K. Lindsey Kramer: Bill 140, Draft 2 (Comm. 664.101), in support.
Stacey Breining: Bill 140, Draft 2 (Comm. 664.101), in support.
Megan Lamson: Bill 140, Draft 2 (Comm. 664.101), in support.
(representing Hawaiʻi
Wildlife Fund)
Eva Hillman: Bill 140, Draft 2 (Comm. 664.101), in support.
Demian Barrios: Bill 140, Draft 2 (Comm. 664.101), in support.
(representing Surfrider
Foundation)
Madalyn McWhite: Bill 140, Draft 2 (Comm. 664.101), in support.
Lauren Ruotolo: Bill 140, Draft 2 (Comm. 664.101), in support.
(representing Surfrider
Foundation)
Nelson Ho: Bill 140, Draft 2 (Comm. 664.101), in support.
(representing Sierra Club)
Jen Ruggles: Bill 101, Draft 3 (Comm. 494.18); and
Bill 140, Draft 2 (Comm. 664.101); in support.
Alan McNarie: Bill 140, Draft 2 (Comm. 664.101), in support.
Kaiuluakane Tiogangco: Bill 140, Draft 2 (Comm. 664.101), in support.
Laura Dvorak: Bill 140, Draft 2 (Comm. 664.101), in support.
Justin Avery: Bill 140, Draft 2 (Comm. 664.101), in support.
Catherine Spina: Bill 140, Draft 2 (Comm. 664.101), in support.
Dexter Yamada: Bill 140, Draft 2 (Comm. 664.101), in opposition.
(representing KYD Inc.)
Recess: At 11:22 a.m., the Chair called for a recess.
Reconvene: The meeting reconvened at 11:30 a.m.
Page 3
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
CHR. KANUHA: Council Members, we are coming out of recess and moving on
with the agenda. First up, we have Approval of Minutes for August 6, 2014 and
February 4, 2015.
APPROVAL The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business, Approval
OF MINUTES: of Minutes.
Vote on Approval of Mr. Paleka moved to approve the Minutes of August 6,
Minutes: 2014 and February 4, 2015. Seconded by Ms. Eoff and
(Approved) carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Ilagan,
Onishi, Paleka, Wille, and Chair Kanuha – 8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Poindexter - 1.
Excused: None.
COMMUNI- The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business,
CATIONS: Communications.
(There were none.)
CHR. KANUHA: Moving on, I don’ t see communications. We did have—oh
sorry, there are communications but we did have—I did want to take a few items
out of order before we go through the entire agenda. Mr. Clerk, if we could,
Order of the Day, Second or Final Reading, Bill 101, Draft three.
Change Order As directed by the Chair and with no objection from the Council Members, the
of Business: following items were taken out of order.
Page 4
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
Bill 101 INITIATES AN AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE XIV, SECTION 14-5 OF THE
(Draft 3): HAWAIʻI COUNTY CHARTER (2014), RELATING TO THE BOARD OF
ETHICS
The amendments would: 1) increase membership from five to nine members;
2) decrease member’s term from five to four years; 3) allow members initially
appointed for a term of less than two years to be eligible for an additional four-
year term; and 4) require a minimum of three hearings per year in the windward
and leeward areas of the County.
Reference: Comm. 494.18
Intr. by: Ms. Wille
Postponed: December 14, 2015; January 22 and
April 6, 2016
First Reading: May 17, 2016
2/3 Vote: Second of three required readings,
Section 15-1(a), Hawai‘i County Charter
Motion to Approve: Ms. Wille moved to pass Bill 101, Draft 3 on second and
final reading. Seconded by Ms. Eoff.
CHR. KANUHA: Ms. Wille.
MS. WILLE: Yeah, I’m going to be quick here. I think we have gone through
these issues. Basically, you know, ethics is important and you have
accountability for ethical standards as by way of the Board of Ethics. We’ve
talked about the best method to deal with issues is through the systemically—
change the system so that it promotes the ethical goals that we’re all seeking.
And in terms of functionality and the current Board of Ethics with only five
members has, I think, in majority of times this year, has not been able to function
properly. Even since it’s gone up to five members, even at the last meeting, it
takes—you know, one member is out sick, one recuses themselves for conflict of
interest or whatever. So, this would really make it so that we can—if you have
nine members, you can have four people missing and still have a quorum.
There were some concerns in terms of the—in other words, the point that we
should also have meetings on both sides of the island and that, you know, maybe
there would end up being meetings where all the people involved are on one side
of the island. So, I’ve tried to make this a little bit more balanced to ensure that
there are meetings held on both sides of the island, but at least with a minimum of
three hearings scheduled annually on the windward area as well as the leeward
area.
So I’ve tried to, basically, do each of the things that the Council Members have
requested, other than where it was just a position of being opposed to the bill. If
anyone has any questions, I’d be happy to address them and I’m going to yield.
Page 5
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
CHR. KANUHA: Thank you, Ms. Wille. Mr. Chung was next.
MR. CHUNG: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Of course, I’m going to be opposing
this bill, like I’ve been doing so all of these weeks. But I wanted to say, and I
think all of us recognize the importance of ethics in government, and my no vote
is certainly in no way any indication that I’m against meaningful ethics reform. I
just think this is not meaningful, in my humble estimation.
One of the speakers here said that the system isn’t working, well the Board of
Ethics or something is not working. It may not be working because of the
problems we all know occurred and nominees were not being advanced by the
administration. But the system is not broken. It may not be working, but the
system itself is not broken, and I think five people is a more manageable amount
to perform a quasi-judicial function rather than nine members.
And you know, quite frankly, when you do it by districts, and I think Ms. Eoff
said it, of course, in support of it though, but ethics really transcends district
sensibilities. So, you can have all the people from Hilo, all the people from Kona,
all the people from Puna, but I think ethics really is ethics no matter where you
go. I would hate to think that depending on where you live, you have a different
sense of ethics. Ethics is clear. So having said that, I will again, be voting against
this measure. Thank you.
CHR. KANUHA: Thank you, Mr. Chung. Mr. Ilagan.
MR. ILAGAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chung actually said some of the
things I wanted to mention. On top of that, I also want to make sure that the
Council understands that adding this to a nine-member board will definitely be
more difficult to fill. As there are many volunteer boards here in the County and
making it nine members instead of five, on top of having to have the meeting
from the east side and also on the west side, this is definitely hurts the volunteer
members who want to participate in these boards.
And I really am concerned about some of the policies that needs to be in place for
some of the issues that were brought upon the ethics. For example, I’m not sure,
Mr. Chairman, if this is an appropriate time to bring it up, but I guess what I
wanted to bring up, and I guess should clarify, is that the problems right now with
the Ethics Board are not going to be fixed with the amendments that are being
made here. I feel that bringing this number from five to nine, or fifteen or twenty,
it’s not going to fix the problems that the Ethics Board has, which I feel are
policies that they need to enact within the Ethics Board.
And if the Council Members need clarification, I can expand more on it, but I’m
going to leave it to the Chairman to decide on the leeway. But it does—these
provisions I feel, does not help the current situation and at this time. I want to let
Page 6
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
the public, and also the Council know that I am supportive of the ethic’s process.
I’ve appeared and respected their procedures and participated in it as well, and by
no means my vote is against ethics. I’m against the provisions that are put in
here, and I believe that these provisions do not help out the current problem that I
believe ethics has. Thank you.
CHR. KANUHA: Thank you, Mr. Ilagan. Ms. Eoff.
MS. EOFF: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I’m going to continue my support for this
Charter amendment and it’s not because of any current problems that the Board of
Ethics has been faced with. It’s because it has been brought out that with the five-
member board, only three is required for quorum and I believe that three are too
few to decide some of the ethical questions that may come before them and you
would have a much more full-balanced discussion with at least a quorum, which
would become five. Five would be necessary if this were to pass, out of nine
appointed, five would be the quorum required for decision making. I think that
would provide more input and a better discussion.
I know it’s been said that it could be unwieldy but other counties in our State have
either seven or nine members, we’re the only County with only five. So, I think
that we can handle this expanded board. If not all can show up, then we would at
least count on five members and the fact that they’re designated from the nine
council districts, although I do agree with Mr. Chung, that ethics transcends
district boundary lines and it shouldn’t be the factor, but at least it is a balance. It
provides a perception that we are balancing out some of the more important
boards and commissions this way, and I’m thankful that Ms. Wille took out some
of the problematic areas in the bill that I had taken issue with before, which was
the appointment process completely changing. I didn’t agree with that. So, what
she has here is very similar to what I had tried to do through my original
amendment, which failed, but it’s now just about exactly what I had proposed, or
what was the right thing to do. So, thank you, Ms. Wille. This will have to go
before the voters, it’s a Charter amendment, but I’m going to continue to support
it.
CHR. KANUHA: Ms. Poindexter.
MS. POINDEXTER: I’m not going to repeat anything that was said already. I
just want to say that Council Member Eoff said it so perfectly, so I’m just saying
ditto on that and I’m supporting this.
CHR. KANUHA: Ms. David.
MS. DAVID: Mahalo Chair and likewise, I believe the discussions that we’ve
had in the prior meetings and the efforts that Ms. Wille has done in addressing
those concerns that were raised, I will be also supporting this change. Thank you.
Page 7
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
CHR. KANUHA: Thank you. Still on the first round, Council Members. Okay,
moving on to second round. Ms. Wille.
MS. WILLE: You know, just sort of qualifying, is the system broken or is it not,
or is it not working or is this not working as well as it should? Even the past few
meetings have all been with five members and there have been problems as well.
The last one, it came down to needing two people on either side and one person
missing. I think the meeting before that there was one missing and one recused
themselves so it really—the difference between having the nine members, it
certainly makes it more likely to be functioning properly. There were certainly
many delays for people that were coming before the board and had to wait months
and months before this.
In terms of finding members for this committee, I think that there are, I believe
there are plenty of people that would be willing to apply on this. I would,
personally, if there were nine, if there was a problem and the Mayor was unable to
find it, I would be happy to assist in every district to find someone for this. I
don’t think—I would. So, you know, encourage people to apply for these
positions. So, I think that there’s also—is it work or is it good enough? There’s
sort of like justice and the appearance of justice. I think that really, it’s this is—
we can all say we believe in standards of ethics, but it’s really that this is the one
way there’s accountability and it’s the way that provides accountability isn’t
functioning, you know, that the system breaks down and does not work well.
Anyway, I urge you to please support this.
CHR. KANUHA: Thank you. I saw Mr. Chung’s light on. Mr. Chung.
MR. CHUNG: Thank you for letting me speak again and I’ll be really short.
Ms. Eoff said something that I wanted to recognize. You know, even by voting
no, it’s not ignoring the efforts put forth by Ms. Wille. I think I said it on many
occasions that she has shown a willingness to try to work and integrate all of the
concerns of the various Council Members. She might have even integrated
something that I had, I don’t know, but I’m still voting no.
You know, I said this system is not broken, but you know, I want to reiterate
something I’ve said before. We’re still working within the context of an
inherently flawed system, especially when it comes to matters relating to the
Mayor, who appoints, and a Council Member, who is part of the confirmation
body. But, other than that, I mean, it’s still going to remain the same even under
Ms. Wille’s arrangement. I think what’s really been lacking in this entire
discussion is the role of the proper vetting on the part of the Council. For
example, I’m not trying to put anybody down, but the last members that came
before us, including one person, and we approved both of them, bight after that,
that person didn’t show up for two meetings. I think we have to be more
responsible in the way that we question the applicants or nominees. But really,
Page 8
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
you know, nine members, twelve members, five members, you know, it doesn’t
really matter to me, and I would like to think that on this island, there would be no
dearth of available candidates when it comes to ethics. But I’m still going to be
voting against it and you understand, Margaret. Thank you.
CHR. KANUHA: Thank you, Mr. Chung. Mr. Ilagan.
MR. ILAGAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As well as I had a follow-up
comment with Council Member Eoff’s comment regarding other islands having a
larger number. Well, we live on a very unique island, where it’s the Big Island,
where we can put all the other islands and it can fit in this 4,028 square miles.
And sometimes, when we have meetings on the west side, it leaves people on the
east side not being able to attend. I don’t like pointing out just what the problems
may be on having ethics commission having to alternate from the east to west, I
also like to give some solutions.
One of the idea that might possibly work but I’m not really too sure, is having two
ethics board that is five for one on the west side and one on the east side. Like I
said, I’m just throwing this out. But the reason why is let’s say there’s a person
that needs to go to the Ethics Commission, it’s on the west side and that person is
on the east side. It definitely is going to be a possible issue travelling to the west
side, but I’m not saying that it can’t be done. I’m just pointing out some of the
issues that I do have, having it from the alternate of being it a volunteer board. If
you have two ethics board, let’s say, if you have a west side person violating an
ethics issue, then that person would be seeing the commission on the west side.
Just like we have the planning commissions, leeward and also having the
opportunity, if maybe in the future, I’m not sure if we currently are, but having
the satellite conferences available for the Ethics Commission meetings. But I just
wanted to share that and thank you again for letting me speak.
CHR. KANUHA: Mr. Onishi.
MR. ONISHI: Thank you, Mr. Chair. You know, it was mentioned about having
more members might give a better discussion, but the problem is, it’s not a
discussion you want. You want these members to make a decision if the
violation—so if they broke the law or they did, you know, not do the ethical thing
that they supposed to. So, it’s not like a discussion like how we always have like
the past couple days that lasted three, four, five hours. No, it’s cut and dry, black
and white kind of thing. Either that person violated or they didn’t. You don’t
want where they’re going to be talking stories and talking about other things.
And to have Ms. Wille to go into each district to get someone, I don’t think that
would be great because then, you’re talking about being unethical because then,
she could stack the whole commission, right? And so now, that becomes unfair
again. So, you know, I just had to bring that up because that wouldn’t be great.
Page 9
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
But then, like I said, you know, their job is just to see if something was violated
and that’s all. So, there’s not discussions where you need more people. Thank
you.
CHR. KANUHA: Thank you, Mr. Onishi. Mr. Paleka.
MR. PALEKA: This is an interesting exercise in ethics, but I think it’s more
important that, you know, regards to ethics, one has to also monitor oneself
because we as Council persons, we skirt a real fine line sometimes, and it’s
difficult. At least for myself, I seek advice and I think it’s prudent that we seek
advice in terms of ethics. We come before the board, it functions well for my
case, but I think we should take advantage. The training is offered, thank you
very much to our Corporation Counsel. I’m not going to go into—I would
encourage all of us to attend regularly because there’s things that do come up and
change, that we might not be aware of. You know, working in the State
department, we were always encouraged, well it was kind of mandatory you had
to go to training in the Corrections Department for ethics and use of force and
those—but I would encourage, us as a body also, our employees are required to
go to ethics training. And that’s good.
In terms of this board, which is before us, this piece of legislation, does it actually
accomplish what its intention is? I’m gathering that the intention should be that it
would function more properly. I would have to agree with my colleagues that
five, seven, it depends on participation, really, of the members. So, that brings up
another ethical question. If you commit to being a member of a board, I would
expect that you participate. So, I’m having a difficult time with this bill and I do,
like Aaron did state, I like when Margaret brings this out because it brings up
good questions. Should we make a change? Should we not? Is the change going
to be beneficial or is there going to be any change? So, I’m still willing to listen,
but I think I’m a little bit closer. I’ll yield at this time.
CHR. KANUHA: Thank you, Mr. Paleka. Still on the second round. Okay,
there isn’t a third round, but I’ll give you, Council Members, a little leeway. Last
two to say—Mr. Chung, you can go and then Ms. Wille can finish this off.
MR. CHUNG: I mean because I think the writing is on the wall. We know how
the votes are going to go on this thing and I don’t want to belabor the point. But I
just wanted to make mention, since you brought it up, I mean actually, at first
blush, Mr. Ilagan’s proposal kind of took me aback, right? But then, the more I
thought about it, it’s not a bad idea. It’s consistent with the notion that ethics, you
know, isn’t just confined to a district. You can find all the people from one
district and they should still have the same set of ethics. But it makes it more
practical because what if you have an employee now, who is in Kona and they
have to come—I mean—and you might have several people on the same agenda
so maybe two from Kona, one from Hilo, but they have to go wherever the board
Page 10
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
is meeting that time. But if you have two separate ones, then it makes it very
simple and more efficient. I’m not going to propose that or even suggest that he
propose that, I just wanted to make comment that it’s really not that bad an idea.
Thanks.
CHR. KANUHA: Thank you, Mr. Chung. Ms. Wille, you can finish us off.
MS. WILLE: Yeah, I think in terms of if we want to do a further upgrade from
what I have, that we do it and allow for videoconferencing and then we’re not
getting into different boards. You know, just the experience right here, that just
dealing with five has been problematic and at least, I think it’s at least three times
since there have been five members or three out of the four times.
And it’s really about quorum and really, if there’s not a quorum, it can’t function.
Ethics, there are more issues where people recuse themselves because of conflict
of interest, pulling someone out so that there’s even the more likelihood that
arises and then it is volunteer. There are vacations. I have tried to take out what
was—tried to come to a compromise position of what each thing that the board
spoke of and I’m just trying to come to something that, you know, still has
substance but address much of the concerns from the Council. Thank you.
CHR. KANUHA: Thank you, Ms. Wille. Okay, I will end debate. Just for
clarification purposes, Mr. Clerk, this requires a super majority to pass to third
reading?
MR. MAEDA: Two-thirds.
CHR. KANUHA: Okay, and this is only the second reading of it, right?
MR. MAEDA: This is the second of three readings.
CHR. KANUHA: Okay, just for clarification purposes, Council Members. Okay,
we can take the vote on Bill 101, Draft three. Roll call.
Vote on Bill 101: The motion to pass Bill 101, Draft 3 on second and final
(Draft 3) reading failed by the following voice vote:
(Failed)
Ayes: Council Members David, Eoff, Poindexter,
Wille, and Chair Kanuha – 5.
Noes: Council Members Chung, Ilagan, Onishi, and
Paleka – 4.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
CHR. KANUHA: So does that mean motion fails?
Page 11
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
MR. MAEDA: That’s correct.
CHR. KANUHA: Okay. Bill 101, Draft three fails. Council Members, it’s
twelve o’clock, do you want to continue on?
MS. WILLE: 154?
MR. ONISHI: Mr. Chair, Warren Lee just came in for Resolution 529-16 and
that should be fast.
CHR. KANUHA: No, I really need to hear Bill 154 because I also have to leave.
It’s a Charter amendment as well and I kind of want to be able to vote and discuss
it.
MR. ONISHI: Okay.
CHR. KANUHA: That’s going to take three hours to discuss the styrofoam bill.
MS. WILLE: You think so? I don’t think so.
CHR. KANUHA: We can discuss that now if—
MR. ONISHI: Mr. Chair, what time do you have to leave?
CHR. KANUHA: I have to leave now, but I can—
MR. ONISHI: What is the latest?
CHR. KANUHA: Twelve thirty.
MS. WILLE: Maybe we should postpone the styrofoam. We need to do the
Charter amendment.
CHR. KANUHA: Yeah, I agree.
MR. ONISHI: Let’s do the Charter amendment.
CHR. KANUHA: I think we should take Bill 154, Draft three.
Page 12
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
Bill 154 INITIATES AN AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE III, SECTION 3-2 OF THE
(Draft 3): HAWAI‘I COUNTY CHARTER (2014), RELATING TO COUNTY COUNCIL
TERMS
Amends the term limit for Council Members from four consecutive two-year
terms to five consecutive two-year terms. Would take effect on December 5,
2016, and apply to all Council Members elected in the 2016 elections, regardless
of how many terms an incumbent Council Member has served.
Reference: Comm. 705.15
Intr. by: Ms. Wille
First Reading: May 4, 2016
Postponed: May 17, 2016
2/3 Vote: Second of three required readings,
Section 15-1(a), Hawai‘i County Charter
(Note: There is a motion by Ms. Wille, seconded by Ms. Poindexter, to approve
Bill 154, Draft 3.)
CHR. KANUHA: So there’s a current motion on the floor. Ms. Wille, go right
ahead.
MS. WILLE: Yeah, motion to approve, but I’m—I need to—I think I need to—I
think I’m supposed to amend this with something. Let me just say, as between
working on it, this started out whether we should do it four years or that and there
was not support for that. In terms of—this would allow—what?
CHR. KANUHA: You never made a motion yet on the amendment, right?
MS. WILLE: Okay.
CHR. KANUHA: If you wanted to do the amendment.
MS. WILLE: Okay, 66—no, it’s eight—
CHR. KANUHA: 705.16.
Motion to Amend: Ms. Wille moved to amend Bill 154, Draft 3, with the
contents of Comm. 705.16. Seconded by Ms. Poindexter.
CHR. KANUHA: Go right ahead, Ms. Wille.
MS. WILLE: So, this would be—there was concern at the last meeting, if we’re
only going to be doing it for, instead of two four-year terms, to move it up to two
five-year—five two-year terms, that really, why bother? So I also drafted this to
allow it to be six consecutive two-year terms as the other option. Again, I think
Page 13
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
that I agree with those who had said we really need to have it be two years so that
there is that level of accountability. We discussed that yesterday with the
directors, and again here, it’s just giving an option. This would go to the voters,
it’s very clear, allowing folks to stay in office for that term. I think we all know
what it is if you all said no, we really want to say with five two-year terms, we
can go to that but I wanted to have both options since there were at least two
people here who said they really would rather do it at six two-year terms. So, I
think we’ve discussed it before. If there’s some particular point that someone has,
I’d be happy to discuss further, but I yield.
CHR. KANUHA: Thanks, Ms. Wille. Mr. Ilagan.
MR. ILAGAN: I just wanted to—thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just wanted to also
add into this amendment, Ms. Wille, that even with the main bill, it’s not, for me,
the “No Council Member shall be eligible to run for re-election as an incumbent
after having served six consecutive full two-year terms” is not clear enough to
where I believe it should be no Council Member that was elected on the election
of 2016 shall be eligible to have these two-year terms. And also, any Council
Member that was elected before 2016, I mean before 2016, shall be eligible for
these and Council Members elected—any new Council Members that are elected
after 2016 shall be eligible to the six consecutive years. The reason why I’m
saying that is I know right now, you’re relying on this provision and for me, I
don’t see it that clear to where the ones that I’m suggesting would be a little bit
clearer. Thank you.
MS. WILLE: May I ask him to repeat that?
CHR. KANUHA: Do you want to just repeat your last statement?
MS. WILLE: The wording.
MR. ILAGAN: So Council Members elected before the election of 2016 shall not
be eligible for the six-consecutive full two-year terms and new Council Members
elected after 2016 shall be eligible for the six-consecutive full two-year terms.
CHR. KANUHA: Okay, thank you, Mr. Ilagan. Council Members, any other
discussion on this amendment? Ms. Eoff.
MS. EOFF: I’m not going to be supporting this amendment. In fact, I’ve
struggled with this bill from the beginning. I think I had mentioned that after
serving on the Charter Commission, I believe that a Charter Commission would
be the better body to discuss term limits in the future. I feel uncomfortable
supporting this, especially with the six two-year terms. And as far as the language
being clear or unclear, I think the way the Charter reads currently is very clear,
about whether you’d have to—what the consecutive terms mean and applies
Page 14
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
across the board. So, I know we had made these changes based on some
discussions we had in Kona and it’s clear, but I felt the Charter was okay the way
it was. So, I’m not going to support this amendment.
CHR. KANUHA: Ms. David.
MS. DAVID: Yes, thank you, Chair. Really quickly, I think during all the
discussions we’ve had about this one, Margaret, I think my initial sense of this is
that it should be the Charter Commission also. But then there were several
discussions later on about this and the changes that you’ve been introducing. I
can’t really get away from the idea that this might be self-serving at this point
because of—we are sitting on a Council and wanting to extend our own terms,
basically, is how I see it.
And so, in all due respect, I think I have to agree with comments that Ms. Eoff has
said about the Charter Commission. I think they’re going to meet in a couple
years. With all the potential Charter amendments that you’ve raised and the
issues that you’ve raised, I think gives the upcoming Charter Commission a great
format for things to consider. So, I would really—you know, I thank you for your
efforts, but this one doesn’t sit well as far as term limits because it’s our term
limits. And I think it’s basically up to the people, like you said, but it still has a
feeling, to me, that I’m voting for something I’ll benefit from. So, with all due
respect, I don’t think I’ll be supporting this either. Thank you.
CHR. KANUHA: Mr. Chung.
MR. CHUNG: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You know, I certainly understand
Ms. David and Ms. Eoff, having their reservations regarding the self-serving
nature of this measure. I think other members have stated that from time to time.
I just wanted to make it clear, I’ve done it before, but I want it real clear, and you
guys know this, I introduced almost an exact piece of legislation right at the tail
end of my previous time on the Council, so that—for the specific purpose of it not
being applicable to me. So, I’m in a little bit different boat from you guys
because now, when Ms. Wille brings it up, I’m going to vote against the exact
same measure that I proposed before because it’s self-serving. That would be
kind of crazy, right? It’s almost exactly. I got to support the concept because just
as I did many years ago, I feel that it would be for the best interest of the County
if we had the possibility of members serving longer, and then they could always
be voted out. But if they have the potential of staying in longer, you have that
chance of them looking a little further, long-term vision instead of short-term
vision. But, whatever happens, happens. It’s fine, but I just wanted to say that I
recognize the consternation on the part of some here.
You know, I’m going to be voting against this whole thing now because as I said
the last time, I’m going to be real hard-headed about it because now, we kind of
Page 15
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
compromised to 10 years but for me, it’s twelve years or nothing. So, I’m kind of
going like on opposite way, unless it reverts back to twelve, I’m just going to vote
no because it’s not even—
CHR. KANUHA: That’s on the amendment being proposed.
MR. CHUNG: I didn’t even look at that amendment because it’s not really worth
our energy to try to extend it two more years. That being the case, then sorry, I
didn’t even look at your amendment. But yeah, I’ll vote for that but I think it
looks like it’s going to go down.
CHR. KANUHA: Mr. Paleka, did you want to go?
MR. PALEKA: Yes, please. Thank you, Mr. Chair. You know, I’m glad we’re
kind of coming through the—well it seems like a majority is leaning more toward
what could be and what is being argued a lot is self-serving and there’s a lot of
merit to that. I think I would feel more comfortable and I think we all would if
perhaps this was submitted in a good form with—from someone not sitting on the
board and forwarded or introduced by. I think it would be an easier bill to handle
in terms of is it the right thing to do, voting for it and is it self-serving or is there a
conflict of interest?
Another point, this bill has been all over the place in terms of variations. So,
that’s another reason I cannot support this. I do agree that there has been a body
of work submitted that the Charter Commission might be willing to consider and
maybe perhaps should consider in a future date. But, on this matter, I do have my
preferences. I hear it a lot in terms of the numbers and the terms and the number
of years each term should be. I have a preference. I think many of us on the
board do, but I really feel it’s not—we can voice our suggestion, but I think
another body or someone else should introduce it, preferably, close to something
we can accept and pass and it’s clear and concise. So, if anybody does have ideas
out there and is willing to submit something, please do. Mahalo.
CHR. KANUHA: Ms. Wille.
MS. WILLE: Yeah, in terms of the number of variations, I just tried to work with
listening to the other Council Members. I mean that’s what it’s all about. I’m
not—I try to get out the idea and look at it. I do see this—let me just say in terms
of the Charter Commission, that’s the opportunity for the Mayor to appoint
people, to be on that. I see that really, in between those years is when the Council
has the opportunity to bring up ideas.
I do appreciate the idea of looking at this, whether it is self-serving, whether that’s
the intent or not, that there could be the appearance of that. So, I’m going to
withdraw this at this time.
Page 16
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
Withdraw Motion Ms. Wille withdrew her motion to amend Bill 154, Draft 3
to Amend: with the contents of Comm. 705.16.
CHR. KANUHA: Communication 705.16 has been withdrawn, we are now on
the main motion, which is currently Bill 155, Draft three. This can’t be
withdrawn, this has to be a vote on the Council.
MS. WILLE: Okay, that’s fine. Unless I really had the support and—this is not
something that is—well, I’m not going to postpone it. You know, if there was
really support, I think just in terms of my work and listening to—watching others,
I think that we tend to deal with short-term problems and just what’s on our own
little district and not taking on really big, long-term problems. I think that this
would make it so that we were in a position to do that and I think that we’re
selling ourselves short by not appreciating that. Maybe some of us just want to
look at our own districts or want to look at those short-term problems. But we
really, in terms of improving the real quality of life on this island, I think that you
need that longer-term vision and longer-term approach, and that’s where I was
going and I don’t feel that’s really where the sentiment is. And so, I’m not—it’s
not something like whether I’m here four years or you’re here four years or four
terms or somebody, five. It’s not where I was going and I think that’s where this
is sort of wound down to and I—even if I potentially had the votes at this point, I
would prefer to withdraw. I’m not going to vote for it unless I hear significant
support.
CHR. KANUHA: Mr. Ilagan.
MR. ILAGAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I wanted to comment on the
amendment but apparently, it got withdrawn so I’ll just make this a brief
statement regarding—I did express my no vote last time this went through
because I believe that the Charter Commission should be the one backing this.
And I mentioned that before and I voted no before. On the amendment, I wanted
to kind of take in consideration some amendment that might be able to work so
that’s why I wanted to make it. But at this time, I’m glad that the Council
Members see that the Charter Commission would be the ultimate tool to have any
type of increase, either salary, but we have a Salary Commission for that, term
limits, even the length of those terms. So, I just want to state that I will be again,
expressing a no vote on this. Thank you.
CHR. KANUHA: Mr. Onishi.
MR. ONISHI: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just wanted to make a comment on what
Ms. Wille had mentioned about, you know, like this long-term, thinking of the
future. If I’m not mistaken, her Council Member prior was the one that did the
resolution for the fire ants. Is that correct? Could I ask her if she could answer
that?
Page 17
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
CHR. KANUHA: If she knows the answer to that.
MR. ONISHI: Would you know?
MS. WILLE: The 2008 resolution?
MR. ONISHI: Yeah, you always bring it up about the fire ants. When we talk
about fire ants, you say that the Council did a resolution. Do you know who was
the author of that?
MS. WILLE: I believe it was Hoffman, but I’m not sure.
MR. ONISHI: Okay, so in that case, you know—and Mr. Hoffman had termed
out, so whenever we bring up about the fire ants, Ms. Wille always brings up
about that resolution, right? It was a person from her district that came up about
we need to do, Hawaiʻi County needs to do something about the fire ants. But I
mean, I’ve been working on trying to get funding to get the fire ants and I’ve been
trying to work hard, but I haven’t seen the Council Member in that district who,
the previous Council Member had this vision about the fire ants. And so to me, it
doesn’t matter how long your term is, it’s just that you need to work on projects.
But then also, when you’re going to term out, you get someone who can continue
following your vision and moving things forward.
And so that’s what I’m doing right now in my district, that I’m supporting
someone that is going to continue to go into what my vision was. Or even like I
mean, it’s part of my vision but at least support it where, like if say in Puna, was
really interesting in my eight years because you know, I came in with Aunty
Emily and then came Mr. Blas and then came Mr. Ilagan. So, you also have those
situations too, so you could plan a long term but then you could be eliminated.
You could be voted out and so now, a new plan got to come up again with
somebody new. But I’m just saying that if you’re looking at long-term, I mean
that’s how you have where if previous Council Members in your district had
projects, you would continue that and move forward. I’ll yield.
CHR. KANUHA: Ms. Eoff.
MS. EOFF: And I agree. I agree with Ms. Wille’s objective that we should look
long-term but if you think about it, you’ve accomplished a lot in two years or four
years. The first two years and this two years, there’s been a lot of significant
policies that you’ve initiated. Mr. Onishi is right, if it’s an initiative that’s got
merit, a subsequent Council will take it up and keep moving with it. So, I’m glad
you stated you’re going to vote no at this time. I’m just going to yield now as
well.
Page 18
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
CHR. KANUHA: Council Members, any last discussion before I give Ms. Wille
the final say? Ms. Wille.
MS. WILLE: I disagree with what Ms. Eoff was saying. Yes, I’ve accomplished
things, we all have, but I really think that the more I work, the more I see whether
it’s taking into account water and land-use policies and everything that there’s
many horizons that we—it takes a lot of time to really embrace and work on
together. So, you know, that’s how I saw it. I’m not sure where Council Member
Onishi in terms of the fire ants, I’ve certainly been working on that, even holding
a symposium with UH (University of Hawaiʻi) on that and soil and fire ant,
invasive species, and other things. But we all work in our own different ways. I
appreciate all the work he’s done on that.
So, I think, again, I saw this as a way really to make a quantitative leap towards a
higher quality of work and achievement in terms of improving life on this island.
And I hadn’t really looked at it in terms of that there could be the appearance of
being self-serving, but I do appreciate that point of view and for that reason, you
know, I’ve had questioned it in my own mind since that really came up. So, I’m
going to vote no as well and I think that’s the better thing to do at this point.
CHR. KANUHA: Thank you, Ms. Wille. Okay, I’m going to stop debate and
just real briefly, say that I agree with the opinions on why this was brought
forward. I still continue to believe that was a move in the right direction, but the
introducer stated that this isn’t—that she will be voting against this and I really
can’t vote in favor of it, if that’s the idea of the introducer. So, I will not be
supporting this as well. Mr. Clerk, if we can do a roll call.
Vote on Bill 154: The motion to pass Bill 154, Draft 3 on second and final
(Draft 3) reading failed by the following voice vote:
(Failed)
Ayes: None.
Noes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Ilagan,
Onishi, Paleka, Poindexter, Wille, and
Chair Kanuha – 9.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
CHR. KANUHA: Motion fails. Council Members, it’s almost twelve thirty.
MS. WILLE: Should we postpone the—?
CHR. KANUHA: I think the Council might want to discuss a little bit if that’s—
MS. EOFF: I say we go—
Page 19
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
MR. ONISHI: Mr. Chair?
CHR. KANUHA: Mr. Onishi.
MR. ONISHI: I would say that we should not postpone it because we have
people who came to testify and you know, they spent all that time, so we should at
least have some discussion about it.
MS. WILLE: I agree on that.
CHR. KANUHA: You want to do it now or after lunch?
MR. ONISHI: I would say after lunch because you have to leave—
MS. WILLE: Except you’re leaving, right? And you weren’t here for the first—
one of the discussions.
CHR. KANUHA: I was here to discuss it the last time. Council Members, it’s
twelve thirty, we will take a break for lunch and go into recess until one thirty.
MS. WILLE: Okay, so we’re not postponing it right now?
CHR. KANUHA: No, we are in recess.
Recess: At 12:25 p.m., the Chair called for a recess.
Reconvene: The meeting reconvened at 1:37 p.m.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: I’d like to call this meeting back to order. For
the record, Council Member Kanuha had to leave, so for the record, let it show
that I have assumed the Chair. Mr. Clerk, would you please read in Bill 140,
Draft two?
Page 20
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
Bill 140 AMENDS CHAPTER 20, OF THE HAWAI‘I COUNTY CODE 1983
(Draft 2): (2005 EDITION, AS AMENDED), BY ADDING A NEW ARTICLE
RELATING TO REDUCTION OF POLYSTYRENE FOAM “STYROFOAM”
FOOD CONTAINERS AND FOOD SERVICE WARE
Prohibits food vendors from dispensing prepared food in disposable polystyrene
food service ware effective July 1, 2018. Exempts ice chest and coolers, County
facility users and food vendors with approval by the Environmental Management
Director, and County facility users and food vendors procuring supplies during an
event declared as an emergency by the Mayor.
Reference: Comm. 664.101
Intr. by: Ms. Wille
Approve: EMC-6
Motion to Approve: Ms. Wille moved to pass Bill 140, Draft 2 on first reading
and adopt Environmental Management Committee Report
No. 6. Seconded by Ms. Eoff.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member Wille.
MS. WILLE: I would—okay, let me just say I want to bring to your attention that
the Environmental Management Commission has sent in their recommendation
that they voted unanimously to pass this bill, the Environmental Management
Commission. I worked with the Director of Environmental Management and
amended the bill in the way that she had suggested. There were a number of other
suggestions that were made at the last Council meeting, and in order to make
those corrections or some were clarifications, I would like to move to amend Bill
140, Draft two, with the contents of Communication 664.109.
Motion to Amend: Ms. Wille moved to amend Bill 140, Draft 2 with the
Contents to Comm. 664.109. Seconded by Ms. Eoff.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Go ahead on the amendment, Council Member
Wille.
MS. WILLE: So there were some questions such as how the prohibition was
written and this is on page five, to clarify that. And so I worked with the Director
and LRB (Legislative Research Branch) to make that amendment and another on
page five as well, was that she brought up that you really couldn’t have the
Environmental Management reviewing any compliance complaints because they
would be the appeal board.
Page 21
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
There was also concern or statements that really, that in terms of the fines that
really sort of tried to, you know, we’re not—this isn’t going to be a money-
making thing but just to make it that there is a fine, and I substantially reduced
those, in particular for the first or second violation.
So, I think the other issues were really more either clarifying or wording such as
on page seven, clarifying that it would be appealed to the Environmental
Management Commission, if there was a fine and someone disagreed with that.
And then after that, someone still could take it in theory to court. I mean the
experiences that on programs like this is basically, it’s really a matter of educating
people, not people trying to violate, you know, do something wrong.
Let me just say in terms of talking with vendors, restaurants, you know, the input
I got, various, you know, the positives. I got some who would actually sign
letters and said they didn’t know really what it was they were asked to sign.
Others that said that you know, they really hoped that it would just be across the
board because it made it much easier to—if they were going to implement it, you
know, just that everybody’s implementing it at the same time and with the same
impact on everyone, on all vendors.
The whole idea here is to really do something good in terms of the quality of life
on our land. I don’t think we need to review all the testimony. I do think—I draw
your attention to the Environmental Management Commission’s approval and
recommendation that we pass this and second that we—to that Jean-Michel
Cousteau’s video that’s online.
What I would like to do, you know, we asked to wait and sort of hear something,
but you know, postpone this until the Chair is here and we could take it up when
we’ve got the full Council here. How does the others feel about that?
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Did you want to make a motion to postpone and
then see how—or do you want to hear from others yet before you decide? Or do
you want to do a motion now to postpone?
MS. WILLE: Yeah, I’d like to move to postpone then.
Point of Order: MR. ONISHI: Madam Chair, just a point of order. We did this amendment, we
made a motion, and now we’re going to postpone. How can we not discuss—?
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: We’re on the amendment.
MR. ONISHI: Yeah, and so then—but she wants to postpone.
Page 22
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, so we got to take care of the amendment
first and go back to the main bill or can we postpone it through this process right
now?
MR. MAEDA: Because she spoke on the amendment already, so I think having
others have an opportunity to speak on the amendment would be more
appropriate.
MS. WILLE: I’m open to how everyone else feels.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, thank you, Council Member Onishi.
Okay, so any other members wishing to speak on the amendment? Council
Member Onishi.
MR. ONISHI: Thank you, Madam Chair. For the fines, I look at it, I mean it’s
much more reasonable. I still cannot support the part about the 180 days for say a
food vendor to have enough time to exhaust all their material or their products.
And this is based on, like I mentioned before, if someone was selling their
nd
business in the year of 2018, and say the transaction finalizes on say June 2 and
say the inventory that they had because maybe this food vendor was a bigger
company so they might have about maybe $100,000 worth of products. I don’t
know if that 180 days would be enough time for them to deplete all that because
to me, they shouldn’t be punished to having this leftover product which they’re
not going to be able to use. So to me, like I said, we have it where it’s on the
Director of DEM (Department of Environmental Management), on their
discretion to determine how long that person would need.
The other part is I still don’t see anything for the nonprofits or for organizations
that use these products for their fundraisers. I mean, it’s like if you have, say
you’re going to be having a beef stew sale and you have these biodegradable
products, how long will that last? And so, we need to look at our organizations,
our nonprofits, our churches. We’re going to prevent them from also doing
fundraising and using these products because the thing is, as I mentioned before,
it’s not the food vendor’s fault. It’s people here who purchase the products and
don’t dispose of it the proper way, and that’s why you have the litter. That’s why
it ends up—I mean even if you have other products, like we change and we put
into other—using other products, people who litter is going to litter, so it doesn’t
matter.
So, we’re not solving the problem that—the main problem, and the main problem
is littering. And if you look at the article in the newspaper, when they had the
survey, fifty something percent was plastics. This is styrofoam containers. And
then if you look at that other chart that we had gotten the other week, the time at
the other meeting, China was the top country, country now, that lets a lot of waste
go into the ocean. United States was like down, way low. So, I cannot see—and
Page 23
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
then to me, this is the last thing I’m going to comment, we’re saying that Hawaiʻi
Island, we have a lot of waste, people litter a lot, which I do not think that’s true.
All this foreign material that we are seeing on the beaches and so forth, it’s not
coming from this island. It’s coming from someplace else. I’ll yield at this time
and I’m not supporting this amendment.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Thank you. Council Member Ilagan.
MR. ILAGAN: Thank you, Madam Chair. I have several comments that I want
to make but before I even make those comments, I just want to get a clarification.
On page 15 of this amendment, and I’m guessing this is not correct, that section
three, “This ordinance shall take effect upon approval.”
MS. WILLE: Can I answer that?
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Yes, go ahead.
MS. WILLE: It does take effect upon approval, such as working on education but
nothing mandatory, doesn’t go into effect until 2018. So otherwise, you would
not be doing the education until 2018. So, in working with the Environment
Management Commission, and just let’s get the education going on now and
having a long period before it’s—the ban goes in place.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, continue Council Member Ilagan.
MR. ILAGAN: I’m going to yield at this time. I’m still trying to understand your
amendment to make sure that I fully understand it. Thank you.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Thank you. Council Member Eoff.
MS. EOFF: Thank you. I’ll save the bulk of my comments until we discuss the
whole bill, but on the amendment, the 180 days is in addition to the two years that
they already have to deplete their current supply and make the transition. So, I
think most of the language in this amendment came from the discussion with the
Environmental Management Director at our last meeting. Is that correct,
Ms. Wille?
MS. WILLE: Yes, it did, so you got that on top of the three years.
MS. EOFF: So I appreciate what you’ve done in this amendment because it was
from the discussion and these were the suggestions that you said you would
correct or add in. So yeah, I’ll support this amendment.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member David.
Page 24
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
MS. DAVID: Thank you and following up to Council Member Ilagan’s question
on the effective date of this ordinance. I understand what you’re saying,
Margaret, except some people that I’ve been talking to are assuming that this
won’t take effect until 2018 and in that respect, they’re saying, “Well you know,
we have two years.” It’s not really clear in this effective date section three to me
that I know what the intent is because we’re talking about it and I’m not sure if
there’s something that could be said that the educational aspect of this ordinance
will take effect upon approval and otherwise, the ban or the restriction on
styrofoam will go into effect in 2018. Well, I know within the document it says
but on the effective date, I just thought that might be a clarification that might be
needed to make. I’m not sure, when I just looked at it, so thank you.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, anybody else on the first round? Council
Member Paleka.
MR. PALEKA: Just on the amendment, 664.109, correct?
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Yes.
MR. PALEKA: So on page two, there’s the underscored and I believe that’s new,
right? So, I think we didn’t address that and, “The implementation of this ban
will maximize diversion of compostables, including compostable food ware, from
the waste stream to be available as compost to farmers, landscapers, and residents.
Accordingly, this ordinance is implemented in tandem with the County’s full-
scale compost program, . . .” Okay, that’s good intent but did the Environmental
Management Commission review that?
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: So is that a question for Council Member
Wille? Or is anybody from the Environmental Management Commission here?
No, do you want to ask Ms. Wille that?
MR. PALEKA: I don’t know.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member Wille, do you have the answer
to that?
MS. WILLE: When I met with them, they wanted to emphasize this, that two of
them were going to be—the mandatory ban would be—and they had, I’m not
sure—
MR. PALEKA: You met with the whole body? The complete body? The whole
Commission?
MS. WILLE: All of those who were present, yes. I don’t know whether there
were members absent.
Page 25
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
MR. PALEKA: Okay, so this came up in discussion at the Commission?
MS. WILLE: Yes, it did.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Thank you.
MR. PALEKA: Also page four, “‘Polystyrene foam’ does not include solid hard
polystyrene.” They’re going to create another exemption?
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: So is that a question for Council Member?
MR. PALEKA: I mean any of us. I mean got to make that consideration. Let me
put it this way, it’s kind of a concern.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, so not a question.
MR. PALEKA: And then on the food vendors, I guess we have it in the definition
on page five, that she referred to earlier. Okay. The violation still remains but
they have gone down $10 for first violation, $50 for the second, and then “a fine
not to exceed a $100 for an event of one to 200 persons.” Those are new?
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Yeah.
MR. PALEKA: Okay, so I assume that the Commission also considered that at
the last meeting?
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: I don’t have anybody from the Commission but
do you want to ask Council Member Wille if that was made at the—?
MR. PALEKA: I guess, if she knows the answer.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member Wille, do you know?
MS. WILLE: In terms of the fines, I don’t know if they had these—the Director
went over this so this was based on the testimony. They had another meeting
since we had this—
MR. PALEKA: Let me ask this, if I may, Madam Chair.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Sure, go ahead.
MR. PALEKA: So you met with them on what day?
MS. WILLE: I met with them on, I have to look at my calendar—
Page 26
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
th
MR. PALEKA: Because this memo was dated May 31st, May 25, so this is
stth
after. May 31 is after May 25. Okay? Just to clarify.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay.
MR. PALEKA: Fines, okay. So, these fines would be payable by the vendors
slash retailers or whoever falls within the definitions of this bill. Okay, I’m clear
on that. Okay, I’ll yield, thank you.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, Council Member Wille.
MS. WILLE: Okay, I don’t know for sure if the members received the written
draft. We went over what the Director was proposing at the meeting that I
attended, but in terms of clarifying, if that were an issue, I don’t think there’s—
they were all very supportive. In terms of the—our discussion, in terms of the
fines and that, it was basically deferring to the Director. If that were a question, I
wouldn’t have a problem postponing and letting them see it and referring the final
draft to them.
I also, in terms of if it made a difference with Council Member Onishi to modify
that 180, and that made it that he would be supportive, I would modify that. My
understanding however, is that he—and believes it’s sort of more of a litter issue
than the harm of styrofoam. And if you’ve been here and listened to the
testimony and all, you might have gotten another impression.
Okay, so what I’m saying is there’s litter and there’s litter, and this happens to be
the most harmful and that’s why we sort of pinpointed it. Even in terms of—
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member Wille, you’re still on the
amendment or you’re speaking on the—?
MS. WILLE: Well these are things that came up during the discussion on the
amendment so I wanted to address—
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Yeah, can we address the amendment, please?
MS. WILLE: Okay. So, in terms of changing that language, if there was an issue
there, I would work on that. In other words, where might not be limited to the
180 but could be done more on a case-by-case basis. My sense from—I did go
back over this with the Director and she said she was good with all of these
changes that are here on this draft.
I think the one other thing just what Ms. David brought up, is I do think it would
be good to add a further clarification. I’m not sure it would be down where it says
what the effective date is, but I think maybe right up front where the preamble to
make that clear what’s going on. So, it may be there or it might be someplace
Page 27
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
else, but I think that would be a good modification, although I don’t think
technically, it would be where it says. Anyway, I appreciate that comment so I
think—unless there’s something else that comes up on the amendment, I’ll yield.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member Onishi.
MR. ONISHI: Thank you, Madam Chair. First of all, Ms. Eoff mentioned about
the two years and stuff. This situation could be where a food vendor could have
maybe problems back in like 2017, but then whether financially or whatever, or
maybe somebody passed away, and now, the family cannot agree upon what they
want to do with the business. So, it takes a while before—maybe it might have to
go to court or whatever, right? Then they finally decide okay, they want to sell
the business. So now, they have to find somebody who wants to purchase the
business, okay? So that might take a while, might take maybe three months,
might take one month, might take six months, so forth. So then, within those two
years that we’re talking about, they finally find a buyer, maybe say in the month
of May of 2018, that wants to purchase that company. But now, with that
company, you have all this inventory, so if this goes into effect in 2018, whoever
buys that company now is restricted because of what was in here. But like I said,
so what if they had like $100,000, depending on the size of their company, and
they had, you know, $100.000 worth of products? Would they be able to deplete
that $100,000 worth of products within the 180 days?
So, my request is to just have the Director of the department make that decision
and don’t limit it just to the 30 days or whatever she had before, to the 180 days,
because the Director is going to be working directly with the company to decide,
“okay, you spend or you use x amount of products per day and you have x amount
of products and then that’s how much days you’re going to need to deplete it. It’s
simple. So that’s why I was talking about that, okay? So hopefully that’s clear
with everyone.
Now, this next thing, which Mr. Paleka had brought up and I was going to bring
this up too, about the commission. So it seems to me, now, more clear that
th
Ms. Wille, you approached them at their meeting on May 25 and you gave them
this proposal—
MS. WILLE: Not this draft.
MR. ONISHI: Oh whatever, but for them to decide that they want to support it.
None of us were there to say if we also do the same, like we support it or not. So,
they basically, only heard from one side and that’s the introducer of this bill. So,
we talked about ethics earlier, right? To me, I don’t see that as ethical. I mean I
can see like how we did the process from my committee, we submitted it to the
commission for them to overlook it, where it’s not our responsibility, it’s the
commission now. But now, the commission said they didn’t have quorum so they
Page 28
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
couldn’t do a recommendation. But now, as individual Councils, we go back
because we have this timeline that we have enough time to go and see them again.
Then now, they have quorum and now you make your proposal and they only
hear one side. So, did they really have all the information that they needed to
make the proper decision? So, this concerns me because we talked about ethics
this morning, right? I don’t know, I cannot support this, if you look at it that way.
So, I’m just bringing it up. So, Council Members, we’re going to have to make a
tough decision and like I said earlier, they never had—hear two sides. So, I yield
at this time.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Thank you. Council Member Eoff.
MS. EOFF: Well my understanding is that the commission and the Director
reviewed a bill that we passed last time we voted on this, right? They sent us a
letter saying that they support and agree with Bill 140, Draft two. They voted
unanimously to support Bill 140, Draft two. That’s the bill that we voted on at
our last meeting.
MR. ONISHI: Madam Chair.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Is that a question for—or are you just making a
statement to—?
MS. EOFF: My statement is that I think they voted on that and I don’t know if
we wanted to get clarification to be sure I’m right, but that’s what I think we sent
to them was the draft two, which we voted on. We had a five-member support for
it and they voted unanimously. Now, if we change it with this new amendment,
maybe they haven’t had a chance to vote on the amended version. Maybe that is
why she’s asking that we decide if we’re going to change this amendment
somewhat or if we’re going to vote on it as is, but we should send it to them
again. I think Mr. Onishi is saying they should have another chance to look—
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Yeah, I got to go to Greggor first, so if you’re
going to—when you yield I need to go because he’s wanting—
MS. EOFF: Well that’s just my statement that I believe is what is happening. I
think it’s been—
MR. ONISHI: Madam Chair, I just want to clarify something.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Sure.
MR. ONISHI: Okay, the original bill we voted in committee to refer it to the
Environmental Commission, they had 45 days to look it over. They never had
Page 29
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
quorum so they sent it back with a negative recommendation. We did the
amendments, like you said, we voted on it, but it doesn’t have to go back already
to the Commission. It stays with us.
MS. EOFF: Yeah, but it did go to the Commission.
MR. ONISHI: No, but we never did—we never sent it to them.
MS. EOFF: No, we did.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, hang on one second. Okay, so Council
Member Eoff has the floor.
MS. EOFF: How about I read this?
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, go ahead.
MS. EOFF: It says the Environmental Management Commission discussed
th
Draft two of Bill 140 at its May 25 meeting. The Commission voted
unanimously to provide the County Council a positive recommendation and the
statement of support of this bill.
MR. ONISHI: Because Ms. Wille went to that meeting.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, now we’re getting—okay, point of order.
Okay, so I’m just going to let Council Member Eoff make her statement and
based off of the letter, this is what Council Member Eoff believes to—
MS. EOFF: I believe this is what happened—
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: What has happened.
MS. EOFF: Or they wouldn’t have sent us a letter. I was at the meeting. I left
before they voted on it. I never spoke on this bill, I just attended the meeting
because there was another issue about the Kealakehe Wastewater Treatment Plant
that I was interested in.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Right, okay, thank you. Council Member
Ilagan.
MR. ILAGAN: Thank you, Madam Chair. I had a more mechanical—trying to
figure out how this works. If I could bring up our Corporation Counsel, and I’m
on page seven and on “Other relief.”
Page 30
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
(Note: At this time, Corporation Counsel Molly Stebbins came forward to
address the members of the Council.)
MR. ILAGAN: So, first I was looking at (d), the Fine procedures and then after I
looked at (d), I started looking at “Other relief,” on (a), (b), and then (c), and (c) is
what has been changed. I wanted to ask you, because we went through some
Charter amendments, my staff mentioned that some of these functions are
conflicting. For example, the law enforcement is a police function as required by
Charter and I guess there’s other—I just want to know from your standpoint, can
these departments fulfill these provisions?
MS. STEBBINS: Good afternoon, Molly Stebbins, Corporation Counsel. Let me
see if I can answer your question because I’m not sure if I understand it. But yes,
the Police Department does enforce primarily criminal laws. You’re asking if
because it uses the word in—it has the word enforcement, can the Department of
Environmental Management be charged with that? Yes, they can.
MR. ILAGAN: Okay. And going through these, there would be no problem?
MS. STEBBINS: No problem with?
MR. ILAGAN: The department going through the fine process.
MS. STEBBINS: Oh, yeah. I can give various examples of departments having
the authority to issue fines administratively. I could think of the Department of
Public Works (DPW) enforces a Building Code, the Planning Department
enforces the Zoning Code, and there’s administrative penalties including fines
that you could be subject to for violating those particular laws and it’s the
departments like DPW and Planning that enforce those laws.
MR. ILAGAN: Okay, thank you. I just wanted some clarification. Thanks.
MS. STEBBINS: Okay.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, any other person wanting—Council
Member Paleka.
MR. PALEKA: And collection would go through the same department?
MS. STEBBINS: The collection of the fines? Yes, generally the department
makes the initial efforts to collect the fine and if ultimately, it’s not paid and we
need to file some sort of collection action, then it comes to our office.
MR. PALEKA: Okay, thank you, Molly.
Page 31
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Thank you. Council Member Onishi.
MR. ONISHI: Mr. Clerk, I guess if you can explain the process because to my
understanding, was that we sent it after we—well once we got it introduced, we
postponed it so we could send it to the Commission, right? And then the
Commission sent back a recommendation because they didn’t have quorum, a
negative recommendation. And then after that, we went through a process then
we voted on it in my committee. I didn’t send it to you guys and I don’t think the
Clerk sent it to them, so can you maybe just clarify if I’m correct or not?
MR. MAEDA: It does not have to go back to EMC (Environmental Management
Committee) because it went already and it came back with an unfavorable
recommendation. So, it’s not required to go back again, so it can move forward at
this time.
MR. ONISHI: So then the question would be, how did they get it to go on the
agenda? We wouldn’t know that unless—Ms. Leithead-Todd, if you can come
forward.
(Note: At this time, Environmental Management Director Bobby Jean
Leithead-Todd came forward to address the members of the Council.)
MS. LEITHEAD-TODD: Aloha, good afternoon, Bobby Jean Leithead-Todd,
Director for Department Environmental Management. What happened is the
Commission didn’t have quorum one month so they couldn’t meet, and under the
way the rules work, if you don’t meet, and get a vote one way or another, then it
acts as if it’s a negative recommendation rather than an automatic positive.
MR. ONISHI: Right, so we’re just looking at the second time.
MS. LEITHEAD-TODD: So happened is the next time we met, the
commissioners expressed the fact that they were interested in weighing in on the
bill, and so then, they asked that it be put on the agenda. By the time we had it on
the agenda, I think it was draft two because they wanted to provide input. And
there’s nothing that prevents them from weighing in on a matter. There is a
process that says in some matters, you have to send to them but there’s nothing
that precludes them from weighing in on State legislative bill or any legislation in
front of the County Council, as long as it’s within their area of kuleana. So, they
wanted to weigh in because they all felt that it was an important bill. So at the
next meeting, where it was on the agenda, they voted and made a
recommendation.
MR. ONISHI: So then why do we have the 45-days then? I’m sorry for going off
subject, but I just, you know, want to know because there is a requirement that
need to respond back to us by 45 days.
Page 32
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
MS. LEITHEAD-TODD: That’s the case if they can’t do it in 45 days, you are
not precluded from moving forward.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, so can I just ask that we stay on because I
asked Council Member Wille to stay on the amendment? So, let’s work on the
amendment and then we can move into the main bill.
MR. ONISHI: Okay, thank you, and I yield.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, thank you. So, on the amendment, is
there any other discussion? Council Member Ilagan.
MR. ILAGAN: Thank you, just one more clarification. On page five, (c) (1), so
this “set forth in the article for a period of time not to exceed one hundred eighty
days,” I know Councilwoman Eoff said that keeping in mind that this prohibition
would come into effect in two years, and then if a food vendor were to—would
result in undue hardship, then they are—would ask for an exemption, and they
have a max of 180 days, that’s the limit? Council Member, Wille?
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Is that a question?
MR. ILAGAN: Yes.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member Wille, can you answer?
MS. WILLE: That’s what it has here. If that were a stumbling block for the
Council Members, what I said on that amendment is—
MR. ILAGAN: No, I’m just trying to understand, is that—?
MS. WILLE: Okay, I would modify that to be a reasonable time.
MR. ILAGAN: Is that—when you say not to exceed, so there’s not—let’s say
they don’t meet that 180 days, because from what I’m looking at, there’s no
extension of that. It just does not exceed that 180? That’s yes or no.
MS. WILLE: I’m saying that is how it’s written. It’s not a stumbling block if
that’s the critical issue for you.
MR. ILAGAN: It’s not a critical issue, I’m just trying to understand.
MS. WILLE: Okay, that’s what it is here.
MR. ILAGAN: Okay, thank you.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Thank you, anybody else on the amendment?
Page 33
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
MR. PALEKA: Just a small clarification too, so I’m—
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, Council Member Paleka.
MR. PALEKA: I want to make sure I’m correct in my mind. Director Todd, just
one really quick one, I’m sorry. So, draft two was reviewed by the Commission
but this amendment that we’re currently overlooking was not?
MS. LEITHEAD-TODD: Draft two was reviewed, not any other amendment
since then.
MR. PALEKA: Thank you.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, thank you. Council Member Wille.
th
MS. WILLE: I just want to make a clarification. I did not go to the May 27 or
th
25, whatever date it was. I went and listened on the meeting that was the month
before where they didn’t have it on quorum and made some questions and it
was—they then said they were going to be putting it onto the agenda for May. I
did not attend that meeting but this is draft two, this is the draft that they did
review. So, just because those points came up I wanted to clarify when I was
there.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, Council Member Chung.
MR. CHUNG: Thank you, Madam Chairman. I think there’s some weaknesses
in the amendment, but I’m going to be supporting it because really, it comes down
to which is better, you know, with the amendment or without the amendment.
When I look at the penalty provisions, actually, it’s really less severe on the
amendment. So, I’ll support that I guess, and hopefully, Ms. Wille can make
some corrections from now until the time it reaches us again. I’ll support this.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, thank you. Any other discussion?
Council Member Ilagan.
MR. ILAGAN: Thank you, Madam Chair. Yes, after reviewing the amendment,
I feel it’s better and I will also be supporting the amendment.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, thank you. Any other discussion on the
amendment? Okay, then I can just do a roll call. I don’t need to do a roll call, I
think I can do “all in favor.” All in favor of Communication 664.109 say “aye.”
Vote on Motion to The motion to amend Bill 140, Draft 2, with the contents of
Amend: Comm. 664.109 was carried by the following voice vote:
Page 34
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
(Approved)
Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Ilagan,
Paleka, Wille, and Acting Chair Poindexter – 7.
Noes: Council Member Onishi – 1.
Absent: Council Member Kanuha – 1.
Excused: None.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: So now we’re back to the main bill, Bill 140,
Draft two as amended with Communication 664.109. I’m going to give it to
Council Member Wille first.
MS. WILLE: I appreciate several of the issues that have been brought up, in
particular Ms. David’s about clarifying that it’s going into effect now and that we
make that—explain that so that it’s—the mandatory ban won’t go into effect. If it
would make a difference to Council Member Onishi, I would change the
provision on the 180 days. I think the idea is that people know this is coming
about so things are not likely to happen in 2017. But you know, this isn’t a
sticking point and I think that working with the Director or whoever’s in charge—
and I would make that change as well so that it was more on a case-by-case basis.
I did want to point out one clarification, and that is one of the things that Council
Member Ilagan had brought up is the polystyrene foam definition and making
clear that this is the bead one that comes apart, and that floats right on the water,
and blows across the way. And so that was—I checked out how to clarify that
and put in the sentence, “‘Polystyrene foam’ does not include solid hard
polystyrene.” And that’s sort of a technical thing but it’s to clarify it’s not the
foam. I looked up and tried—determined what was the best way to express that if
someone felt there was a better way, I’d do that. But based on the person that
came here and testified, that was how that would make that clear.
You know, I’m just trying to do something here that I do think is important. I do
think it’s—we’re having a devastating impact on, I’m just picking out the
albatross, it just blows across the water and lands on the beaches. It doesn’t sink
like other things do, and it doesn’t stay together, and that’s why it’s so harmful to
marine birds. One of the things that one of the restaurant owners said to me, who
happens to be from Waimea, from Germany, that they banned back in the 80’s,
basically from the harm that everybody’s wanting to use it for heat and that’s
where it leaches into it. And a number of people, including that—who had come
here said styrene goes through your body, it’s not really such a big deal.
Polystyrene does not and we’re talking about polystyrene.
But I think, you know, the big picture is we either take this step forward and do
something and be a model. I know that there is, you know, it’s coming from all
over. It happens that this State has the highest amount of polystyrene take out.
Our island has the highest quantity in the State and that the tray—they did studies
Page 35
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
to show where the styrene is coming from and where it’s going, and much of what
is going to like the other islands and the northern islands is actually—and this is
the Hilo students. I went and I gave out their studies. Four of them did studies in
my handouts in the blue folder from Hilo, the Marine Science Department. I
don’t know whether there’s four—eight of them did studies on how important it is
to address this problem. They did studies of following the styrene that floated and
they find it on the other islands.
So, this isn’t the whole thing, it doesn’t address everything there is to change the
world and it’s just one step forward that I feel that we can do for, not just the rest
of the web of life, but also for ourselves and our kids, who are affected more by
all of these cumulative pollutions than us who are older.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Thank you. Council Member Ilagan.
MR. ILAGAN: Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to state that I voted for the
amendment because the existing bill before had fines that up to $100 for the use
of polystyrene containers and the fines can go all the way up to $1,000. Right
now, as the bill is amended, I feel the fines are a bit more reasonable than it was
before.
At this time, I do not support the approach of how the introducer is going with
this issue. I am also concerned about the marine debris, and the marine debris is
made out of many things, such as metals, plastics, rubber, and polystyrene. The
thing about what you’re trying to do, and I’ve always said it, is education is the
core for this, education of litter management. That will go a long way compared
to using the stick over the carrot. At this time, I can’t support this because of the
fact that we can do this the right way, which is to go out and really educate the
different retail establishments and the people and move together as a community.
Let them be part of the decision making rather than us making it for them.
As a testifier mentioned, there were many food establishments that have
converted because they feel and they have their belief that they’re doing the right
thing. Why can’t we start doing the same thing with everyone else? And if it’s a
trend that is going to—only continuously go up, why can’t we push, as a County,
to really focus on the education part rather than, right off the bat, let’s ban it? I
mean if we’re going to continue with this ban approach, then I’m thinking plastic
is going to be the next thing. Having plastic as one of the most marine debris, I
can see so many other plastic containers as being used on the retail food
establishment.
There was also mention about the paper cups. I’ve seen other places use the paper
cups and one of the things that were mentioned to me, and also, I saw it visually,
is that people double-cup their coffee or their hot drink. On top of that, people
who don’t do the double-cup, there’s also a sleeve. So, there’s actually more
Page 36
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
products going into the landfill than a polystyrene container that is more effective
insulating that product. So, one of the things that continuously kept being
mentioned is that these things, polystyrene, doesn’t decompose in the landfill.
The thing is, nothing decomposes in the landfill, but that keeps getting mentioned.
We ‘re putting this in the landfill and it doesn’t decompose. Of course, nothing
decomposes there.
And on top of it going into the ocean, that’s what we want to prevent. Anything
that goes into the ocean becomes marine debris and if we don’t focus on the
management of that litter, regardless if it’s polystyrene or paper, or just
decomposable things, it’s still litter that’s going out into the environment. If we
should really focus, we should focus on not using our time for this but going out
there and educating the public about litter management. Why are we so
concerned about—we should be concerned about the lifestyle and if we change
the lifestyle, that’s a long-term solution. Thank you.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Thank you. I know Council Member Chung, I
thought he had his light on. You didn’t have your light on? Okay, Council
Member Onishi.
MR. ONISHI: Thank you, Madam Chair. Ms. Leithead-Todd, can you please
come back up?
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Ms. Leithead-Todd. Director. Thank you.
(Note: At this time, Environmental Management Director
Bobby Jean Leithead-Todd came forward to address the members of the
Council.)
MR. ONISHI: I just have one question for you. Can you state your name again?
MS. LEITHEAD-TODD: Bobby Jean Leithead-Todd, Director of Environmental
Management.
MR. ONISHI: You know when you were going over this bill, did you get to talk
to Parks and Rec’s Senior Nutrition Program?
MS. LEITHEAD-TODD: No, I did not.
MR. ONISHI: Okay. Now, would this affect their program by serving the foods
to the seniors? The meals on wheels?
MS. LEITHEAD-TODD: I believe it would.
MR. ONISHI: Okay. So now—thank you very much. So now members, this
becomes a burden, okay? Because nobody has foreseen this and I sent an email to
Page 37
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
Parks and Rec to have someone to be here so they could answer some of the
questions because the bottom line is, if this takes effect, then they also are going
to be affected. And now, they’re the ones, what I understand, serves over 100
meals on wheels per day. But also, they have their Nutrition Program Centers,
which they provide food for the seniors and they also provide, you know, like
refreshments like coffee and so forth, okay? And to my understanding, this
funding that they get to purchase these products for the meals on wheels is from
the federal government. The County doesn’t subsidize them. So, if you have
only x amount of money and now, you’re going to have to change but your
funding doesn’t change, then what happens? Does the County have to start
subsidizing them?
So, you know, this is something that was maybe overlooked, but the thing is, our
own County is providing food, lunches to our seniors using the product. But now,
if we have this take effect, what are we going to do? And also, they serve hot
meals and so in the hot meals, to my understanding was that sometimes it takes
like two hours to get the food from A to maybe Z. So, in between, those people
are going to get the hot meals, but when it comes to Z, which might be over two
hours later, they’re food is going to be cold. Then, it becomes a health problem
because the Health Department is going to require the food to be at a certain
temperature level. So, all this now comes into factor, which we never seen that
coming. So, I’ll leave it up to you guys. I’ll yield at this time. Thanks.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, Council Member Eoff.
MS. EOFF: Okay, so I think today we heard some figures about the difference in
cost for the containers. I’ve had some comparison charts but basically, if we were
serving 100 meals on wheels a day, whatever the cost for the containers we’re
using now, using 100 biodegradable containers, I don’t even know if it would add
$10 to that day. And so, if the federal government’s money won’t cover that, I
think the County should help subsidize that or I would as a Council Member. I
could use contingency funds or, I mean I just don’t think the cost is going to hurt
the program and keeping the food warm, I believe that the containers that we’re
seeing now, the newer ones are pretty well insulated, just probably almost just as
much as the—will keep the food warm enough as the polystyrene does, if it has to
wait two hours to get there. That’s my opinion. I’m not a scientific expert on that
but I’m feeling from the amount of testimony we’ve heard about the differences
in cost and the products usefulness, I don’t think that’s a problem.
But while I’m speaking, I guess I’ll go ahead and say why I think this is
something that we should do and why I don’t think it’s really that difficult of a
decision for us. I mean the County has had an integrated Solid Waste
Management Plan with zero waste as its goal for, you know, 10 years or more.
We as leaders should take steps to implement it and I think demonstrate our
commitment to what the County’s direction—where we’re going here. And if we
Page 38
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
can be—we’re not even really cutting edge, I mean other cities and counties have
already adopted this same kind of a law. And I know—unfortunately, I agree,
Mr. Ilagan, I wish education worked and I wish more people, even myself, were
better with recycling and composting but you know, sometimes it takes a ban to
send a stronger message and I don’t think this ban is so onerous that it’s really
that hurtful. I mean it is different than just hoping people do the right thing or
education, but you know, I believe this is, like Ms. Wille said, it’s a step that we
can take. It’s a—we can become a role model.
So, you know, we have a positive recommendation from the Director. She has
urged us to do this because it coincides with our Composting Program in two
years, which we’ll need all the compost it can get and start being a success
venture, so we can contribute to that. The commission has been unanimously on
board and besides that right now, you know first and foremost in my mind, I think
is the message that Hawaiʻi is sending to the world and the Hōkūleʻa, the Mālama
Honua Voyage, currently in its mid of five years, is spreading the message across
the whole world about the importance of keeping our oceans clean. And they are
experiencing all the debris out there and I asked my friend who’s one of the top
navigators, you know, what does he think. He said there is so much debris and
we should be a model. They’re sending our message to the world, so I think we
should support them in this, that yes, Hawaiʻi cares, we care about our ecosystem,
we care about our land, and we especially care about the oceans. We’re an island
in the Pacific, we should, among all states in the nation, take a strong stand about
protecting the oceans and the ocean life.
So, I don’t know, I guess I can yield now, but I’m pretty passionate about this.
I’m thankful Ms. Wille brought it forward. I don’t really like bans, I mean at the
time we did the plastic bag ban, I felt, you know, maybe we should just do
education. I felt that too, but at this point, I think it’s not so harmful of us to
impose a ban. I think people can adjust and establishments won’t suffer as much
as the good that it will bring to us as a leader in the efforts to go towards
composting and composting products, and this is just one step. Thank you.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: I’m going to Council Member Paleka then
Council Member Wille, and then Onishi, so Council Member Paleka.
MR. PALEKA: You know, this is a real difficult issue but I’ve been going back
and forth. So, I went back to asking the people that are actually going to be
penalized on this, not me. I can do it. I can eat out of a container. I choose to use
compostable. That’s easy for me to say but I’m not the one being penalized, it’s
the vendors. We’re not being penalized, but we’re ready to penalize somebody
else. It’s wrong. If we really want to make change on that ocean, then we need to
go to the ocean. That’s where all the ōpala isʻ. Not try and make—we’re going
to ban this, penalize somebody else that’s doing a food service and the rubbish is
still out there. You’re really serious? Go out and clean up the rubbish. Don’t
Page 39
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
make grandstanding, that’s not how you do things. If you’re really committed,
then go talk to sustainable living and ask them about let’s make compostable
products here on our island. If you want to talk long-term, be serious.
I’m not going to support this. I’m all for getting the plastics out of the ocean but
this is the wrong way, I realized, because you’re penalizing somebody else and
you’re trying to make us look good. No way, I’m going to help Megan guys clean
the ocean. CRF (Contingency Relief Funds) money should be given to them.
They’re the ones actually doing the hard work of cleaning the beaches. That’s
who I respect. You really want to make a difference? Grab dragnets behind boats
and go and clean up the rubbish out there. You see it for yourself, go out there.
Let’s be serious. Don’t play games with the people’s money or their violations or
bans, making them pay. That’s wrong. It’s like having somebody else pay the
penalties. They’re not the ones throwing it in the water. Thank you.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member Wille.
MS. WILLE: I obviously disagree with—I do go down and do coastal clean ups
so it’s not do this versus do that. I think a lot of us do. You know, we all talk
about we have certain policies and our policy is zero waste. We’re doing this.
We also have our Compost Program, we’re working this together. In terms of
cost, we’re talking about costing, what most of the vendors said is, some who I
spoke to, said it’s easier for them if it’s just imposed on everybody. It’s all equal.
They all would have that same cost and it’s across the board that we as a
County—is where the cost of the residents of the County—but in terms of specific
to the County, we spend much more in terms of landfill and the cost. We had
testimony on that. The cost of what it cost to put in all this styrofoam versus
having compostables, and I agree with you, things don’t degrade in the landfill.
It’s what goes out there. Do you remember those bottles that they showed us?
You know, the styrofoam and it just leaches right into the water.
And I think that it is—Council Member Ilagan brought up that it’s a better, you
know, it insulates, it does insulate better. There are pluses and minuses but it is
that heat where it leaches, and it hurts people, and it hurts kids, and we need to
think about that, and there are different qualities of plastic. When people say,
“Well, look at all this plastic.” If we care about the marine birds, they are the
ones that—it’s the styrofoam that’s the major harm. They don’t eat the solid
plastic, they don’t eat the metals that are out there. They eat if—just like that
little thing that Dr. McCauley or whoever was showing us, is these stingrays were
all sitting there and it’s the styrofoam that they were eating.
So, you know, I think I would just urge you to support this. I would—Dru isn’t
here, we could—I want everybody to speak but I think that it would be good to
postpone it.
Page 40
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Are you making a motion to postpone?
Motion to Postpone: Ms. Wille moved to postpone Bill 140, Draft 2, as
amended. Seconded by Ms. David.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Any discussion on the postponement? Council
Member Onishi.
MR. ONISHI: Thank you, Madam Chair. I’m not going to support because I had
some questions. I wanted to clarify what Ms. Eoff had brought up about products
that we have now that’s going to keep heated foods still heated. And so I wanted
to bring up Mr. Yamada to ask him because he’s a producer and if they were—
but—
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: So you’re not supporting the postponement?
MR. ONISHI: Because—yeah, I’m not going to support it. Thank you.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Thank you. Council Member Chung, on the
postponement.
MR. CHUNG: I’m not going to postpone it as well. You know, I mean, not to
give favoritism towards Mr. Yamada, but you know, he’s been coming here every
time from Honolulu and we’re going to postpone it again and then have to go
through two more readings. I mean if we’re going to go, just go through. That’s
my feeling anyway.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Thank you, anybody else on the postponement?
Okay, we’re going to do a roll call on the postponement.
Vote on Motion to The motion to postpone Bill 140, Draft 2, as amended
Postpone: was carried by the following roll call vote:
(Failed)
Ayes: Council Members David, Eoff, Wille, and
Acting Chair Poindexter – 4.
Noes: Council Members Chung, Ilagan, Onishi, and
Paleka – 4.
Absent: Council Member Kanuha – 1.
Excused: None.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: So that fails. So, back to the main bill, Council
Member Onishi.
MR. ONISHI: Mr. Yamada, can you please come forward?
Page 41
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
(Note: At this time, Dexter Yamada came forward to address the
members of the Council.)
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Just for the public’s—whenever I see some
confusion on the—when there’s a tie vote, then it’s a negative. Thanks.
MR. YAMADA: I’m Dexter Yamada.
MR. ONISHI: Good, so you had comment about like if we do away with the
styrofoam containers, that there’s other products out there, biodegradable that
would continue to keep that heat. Now, you’re a producer, what are your
thoughts?
MR. YAMADA: My thought is, you know, it’s always been a problem for you
know, restaurant users to contain the heat and polystyrene in itself is the best
material out there.
MR. ONISHI: What about the ones that are out there?
MR. YAMADA: The ones that—you know, we’ve had problems. We sell
compostable products too, and some of the PLA (Polylactic Acid) products even
have melted—sending it to the other islands. In fact, I do have samples of that
but, you know, it just doesn’t hold up. And the science is not there, that’s the
biggest problem with using other types of products.
You’ve asked me about what alternatives you have, and I just will tell you, the
alternatives have not worked well.
MR. ONISHI: Okay, and then you know, they mentioned about pricing, it’s not
that much difference. Can you kind of—?
MR. YAMADA: Yes, I will explain that. The pricing that I originally sent was
mainly for pulp fiber. Now that was on the lower end stuff.
MR. ONISHI: Can you kind of explain what that means and so forth?
MR. YAMADA: Well the pulp fiber is mainly paper products and you know, it’s
not lined properly so when you have things like stews or chili, or you know, that
Page 42
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
kind of hot food products, it just doesn’t—it’ll soak in and—unless you line it.
Now, when you line it with something, that’s additional cost and on top of that,
additional labor.
MR. ONISHI: Any other comments about the pricing?
MR. YAMADA: Pricing, you know, other alternatives—you have other
alternatives that can possibly work better, but there again, you limit yourself to
what you’re going to use. And although you might look at it as a better product,
the price goes up depending on what kind of alternatives you use.
MR. ONISHI: The quality then?
MR. YAMADA: Quality and also the type of material they use. Like a lot of the
compostables right now is coming out of—the material itself is coming out of
China and I’ve noticed that. If I was to eat out of something, I’d rather eat out of
the polystyrene, you know, because at least you know what you’re getting. Ours
is all FDA approved and it’s been FDA approved for over 50 years. If they were
going to decide not to use it, the federal government should have banned it a long
time ago. They haven’t.
MR. ONISHI: And then, you know, I remember the younger days when you had
those trays and it was kind of like a wax or some kind of shiny coating inside of
that.
MR. YAMADA: Yeah, a lot of it, you know, to avoid the absorption, they used a
plastic lining. Now, when you have that, they have a problem with recycling.
They have to separate that.
MR. ONISHI: Okay, and then like when you put in hot things in there, does it—?
MR. YAMADA: It’ll hold up.
MR. ONISHI: But will it melt it down or something?
MR. YAMADA: No, because you have the plastic lining and it’ll withstand a lot
of heat, but if you’re going to use just the cup itself, you know, paper cup, it
doesn’t hold up well.
MR. ONISHI: Okay, thank you very much.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: I’m going to just call a short recess because
several of us need a break. I know Mr.—I’m sorry, he just took a break but I
know—I just want to take a 10-minute break, so we’re in recess.
Page 43
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
Recess: At 2:47 p.m., the Chair called for a recess.
Reconvene: The meeting reconvened at 2:56 p.m.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, I’m calling this meeting out of recess,
back to order. We’re still on Bill 150, Draft 2, as amended. Council Member
Chung.
MR. CHUNG: Thank you, Madam Chairman. Very quickly, I know you have to
leave. I want to accommodate you in that regard. I just wanted to make a few
points, I see a lot of passion here on both sides of the equation and I certainly do
respect all of that. You know, I wanted to address something that this beautiful
woman here brought up earlier when she mentioned me bringing up names of the
different vendors. I wanted to make sure that everyone understood, I didn’t solicit
these comments. They actually came in a packet to each of the Council Members,
so I was just kind of reading off the names of all of these people. But the theme
that I wanted to, at least, portray when I read all of them, because I made some
comments about how many years these people have been in business as well.
You know, Kandi’s Drive Inn, probably 50 or more years and these are people
who have really been the foundation of our community for a long time.
So, what I found objectionable about this is not so much the cost because I think I
made the statement the last time, life will go on, they’ll probably tack the cost on
to their customers. But why are we focusing on only these restaurant people?
The people who have really stood up for this community for a long time. So
that’s why I think it’s wrong, it’s just unfair, patently unfair, but it’s only my
opinion. It has nothing to do with the cost, life will go on. It’s just the fairness
issue, and that’s all. Thank you. I’ll be voting against, as I have been doing for
the last several times.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Thank you, any other discussion? Council
Member David.
MS. DAVID: She was first.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: No, go ahead, Council Member David.
MS. DAVID: Certainly true, Mr. Chung, that this is definitely a very difficult
issue to decide because we’re deciding people’s livelihoods. We’re deciding
people’s way of life and their business. I think that puts us—I appreciate both
sides, very passionate on both sides, and so our decisions become very difficult
because we have to take both sides and weigh it out so that it doesn’t impact
either side so negatively that we avoid things like Mr. Chung is talking about.
And that’s very difficult to do as we sit here because I totally agree with what
Ms. Eoff said about our being responsible for this island.
Page 44
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
As a native generational Hawaiian from this island, I’ve seen the changes. I’ve
benefitted from all those establishments that Mr. Chung speaks of but at the same
time, I have witnessed our land and our ocean, and our way of life change because
of the convenience, the technology, and the need to compete in a world that, you
know, for us, it’s like while the world is moving forward, we’re trying to catch up
and make use of these things that are supposed to make our life easier. I really
appreciate that because being raised off the grid for most of my life, we made do
without and now we have all these conveniences. So, where do we draw the line
and where do we stop, and where do we make ourselves aware that we have to
start somewhere?
I know this three-letter word “ban” is very obnoxious, to me, because I don’t
believe we should be banning anything either. But I think we need to be very
conscious that we have to be mindful that when we see things that’s taking a turn
that will have a potentially negative impact on all our lives, we have to stop and
think hard.
I appreciate Mr. Yamada. I’ve talked to you and I’ve also talked to other people,
you know, and there are both sides. I have to vote with my conscience and I have
to vote for what I feel is my responsibility in taking care of this island, whether
it’s trash from around the world, or whether it’s trash from our back yard, and
from us as residents here, being totally disrespectful, and that’s an educational
issue. I, you know—so I’m not going to say much more than that. I just wanted
to explain the fact that I think this decision is something that I do not take lightly
because I respect both sides and I really have to vote my conscience right now.
I think Ms. Wille has actually cooperated and tried to make her bill—her first bill,
I would have voted it down in a heartbeat, but throughout this whole discussion, I
think I’m—in myself, I can be satisfied that there is enough time to allow the
transition and really, if there’s something that is terribly wrong within these two
years that this will—it’ll take for this bill to—the ban to be in effect, then if I’m
still here, I would do my best to fix it so that—you know, this isn’t a done deal. I
mean this is an effort, this is the first step and I really believe that it’s not going
to, I hope, it’s not going to impact the group of people that Mr. Chung is speaking
of. Thank you, I’ll yield. Thank you very much.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, Council Member Eoff.
MS. EOFF: I’m kind of glad you ended there because that’s what’s on my mind
now, it’s just to change our thinking in that we are not really penalizing these
established businesses. The penalty is minimal, it’s not even a penalty, it’s
anywhere between three cents and 10 cents are the different amounts I’ve heard,
difference for a container cost. If you average that, it’s probably an average of
five cents per container generously, as a difference. I don’t really see that as a
penalty and you know, the restaurants and establishments that Mr. Chung speaks
Page 45
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
of, maybe they aren’t aware of some of the alternative products and how other
restaurants have converted over and are doing just fine by either passing the few
cent costs along to the customer or even absorbing it. I mean it doesn’t seem like
that cost is enough to even speak of it as a penalty, that we’re penalizing anybody.
I just don’t see it that way.
I see it like more that if they contribute to helping our island and contribute to the
zero-waste initiative and our integrated solid waste management plan for this
County, then they are not being penalized. They are being afforded an
opportunity to contribute to what, you know, what direction I think we should be
going in. So, I just wanted to clear that up because I really believe this cost factor
is maybe just something that people need to become more clear on. I mean at
first, yeah, a changeover is hard for anybody. Maybe they’re imagining a higher
cost that it’s going to be than it really is, and the fact that these containers, the
more that they are in demand and the more that people move over towards them,
not only will the price go down but the quality will go up. So, I think we need to
make this step. As you know, I’ve already given an impassioned few minutes
earlier. I just wanted to clear up this penalized or penalty feeling because I don’t
feel that way and I would hope that the businesses who would participate don’t
feel penalized if we were to enact this.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, Council Member Chung.
MR. CHUNG: Thank you. If I use the word penalty or penalized, I really do
apologize. I don’t think I did but I could have. I think what I wanted to stress
was that they are being targeted because I don’t know if everyone here knows, but
it only relates to restaurants and what’s the other class of people? Restaurants and
food retailers. It doesn’t preclude Walmart from bringing in polystyrene or any
other place or even having fund raisers, the weekly fund raisers. It doesn’t
preclude them from using polystyrene. It’s only the restaurants and food retailers.
I find that hard to accept. If it’s a penalty then so be it, but all I know is they’re
being targeted.
Now, I’ve had an opportunity to speak with them since our last hearing and I
wasn’t going to speak anymore Madam Chairman, you know, but since she said—
and I think the common thread is that they want to do their part despite what
Ms. Eoff, you know, is kind of suggesting and they’re all environmentally
conscious. They know, you know, and they want to help. But, what’s being lost
in all of this, and you know, I wish we wouldn’t bring up the word cost anymore
because I just said I’m not really looking at the cost factor.
What we’re doing to these people—Zippy’s brought—I just looked at my packet
of papers and Zippy’s, I just really looked through this thing quick, they say how
conscious they are of the environment and they’ve tried to convert everything
they could but they found that there were just some things that they were not able
Page 46
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
to do. They just couldn’t do it, and this is Zippy’s now. This is the big restaurant
chain in the State of Hawaiʻi. What about these small guys? It’s very difficult for
them. These guys can absorb, I’m going to use the word cost, they can do the
humbug that it takes to convert, but what about these small food establishments?
It becomes very difficult for them and it depends on what kind of food they’re
serving. We cannot just take a real simplistic look at it and say, “Well, because
some people converted then it’s everyone can convert.” It’s not fair. It’s not
right. So that’s my point, thank you.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Thank you. You know, Council Member Wille
had her light on for the longest time and I know she was the introducer, and she
will get another turn too, but I’m going to honor her light and call on her. Council
Member Wille.
MS. WILLE: When the plastic bag bill came about, I think there were very
similar arguments made and that’s how some, you know—was really converted
and others couldn’t and this. You know, it just didn’t work that way. I mean it
really was very smooth. We’ve got several years in here. You know, if it really
made a difference, I’d change it from 2018 to 2019, but it’s really that if we don’t
have that horizon, it doesn’t happen. The State in, I think it was 2008, they had a
resolution that was basically all of—just embodied what Council Member
Ilagan—I can’t talk when you guys are talking over there—about education and
the whole carrot approach. I mean we all would much rather educate and if it had
worked, we would be doing that. I mean there’s certainly no one here that doesn’t
prefer carrots to sticks, you know? But it didn’t happen in Honolulu as well.
They did something where they would do a study and they would check out—
nothing happened. So, I’m just trying to be realistic if we do it and we have this
lead-in period and then we’re looking towards the horizon, you get to this point.
I also think some of the people that I spoke to made a good point, they’re not
going to end up absorbing it. if it costs more they all are going to hit them the
same way and they would pass it on, whatever those number of pennies to each
other’s—so I don’t, you know—and I think that in terms of targeting them, if it—
right now, we’re sort of going with what, like Bobby Jean had said we’ve got an
interstate commerce issue if we were to go beyond this. And so, we’re just trying
to keep something where we’re not—don’t have another case in court and doing it
and that if there’s some way we could do something more so you know, I think it
is all doing our part and I can, you know, I hear clearly, we don’t all agree and it
makes me really sad that we don’t have the support here. Hopefully, if we don’t
pass it this term they’ll be enough different people on next term to pass it. So,
that’s all I can say.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, thank you. Council Member Paleka.
Page 47
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
MR. PALEKA: You know, I appreciate everyone weighing in on this issue
because this is a really difficult issue. But you know, I’m going through the study
our own R & D (Research and Development) Department made for this matter,
and it did point out that the most vulnerable in this, if we were to go ahead with
the expanded polystyrene ban, would be the elderly and the most vulnerable or
lowest income, and that’s in our districts, mine and Greggor’s. That’s facts. Now
this measure might be intended to get rid of styrofoam in our ocean. To me, it’s
not going to have that great of an effect because those current lines out there,
where you notice the most collection on the current lines and the beach itself,
those current lines are full of all kinds of stuff, not only plastics, that fish would
eat, birds come down and mistake for other things.
We really got to get out there and clean up the ʻōpala, and doing legislation on
food service establishments that affect the food service establishments really
doesn’t go to the problem itself of cleaning up the styrofoam and whatever types
of debris that are being mistaken—our marine life is actually eating. To me, I’d
rather put my money in the people who are actually doing the cleanup. That’s
where we should be concentrating on, actually doing cleanup and voicing to our
federal representative, our State representatives. If they’re really serious about
cleaning up and caring for our marine life, then we should—the real answer to the
problem is doing it in the ocean. That’s where we’re going to have the most
effect.
Some might disagree, but I really believe it and I do trust our younger generation
to come up with solutions in terms of compostable products, and I would love so
much and I’m going to continue to work on doing it here because there are
opportunities. Unfortunately, the most compostable products that do come into
our State is not from here, not even from the United States. It’s from China and
fortunately, they’re one of the biggest polluters and sources of the rubbish you see
around here. It’s not only America, it’s the Pacific Rim that’s responsible. So,
this measure is for Hawaiʻi Island as a County to help with the cleaning,
preventing styrofoam, expanded polystyrene, getting into our oceans and
waterways.
I thought it was a good intention. I really do support getting it out of our ocean
and I’ll continue to do what I can, but this measure, I think, doesn’t concentrate
really on that, and I would agree with my colleague Aaron that the people that are
going to be affected would be who’s defined in the measure and who’d suffer. I
don’t care what you call it, but it’s citation, violation, whatever they come up with
it’s still the same and the stigma that comes attached to that. To me that’s not fair
because some of the individuals and organizations and food servers, I know them
and they voice—some are willing to do it but some of them also said why is the
burden falling on us? We’re not the ones throwing it in the ocean. And I have to
Page 48
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
agree, they’re correct. But I look forward to working with Megan. I hope
everybody else does because if you really want to help cleanup that ocean, I think
they’re the ones that do the best job. Thank you.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, Council Member Onishi. You know,
we’ve had—yeah, your light was on before—we had so many rounds before so at
one point, we got to—
MR ONISHI: This is going to be my last time, Madam Chair.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, because we’re going to end—this is
going to be the last time, okay? Council Member Onishi.
MR ONISHI: Madam Chair, I just wanted to clarify because people talked about
cost, people talked about like pennies, two or three cents increase. Okay, so I did
get some information from Parks and Rec about the Nutrition Program. So right
now, they’re paying like eleven cents per container, okay? If this ban goes into
effect, they’re going to have to pay, and they’ve been crunching the numbers
already, they went out and look. It’s going to cost them 33 cents per container.
They serve over 75,000 meals per year. Their increase in expenses is going to be
over $21,000. So, I just wanted to get that out and so, instead of like pennies like
some people mentioned, Council Members mentioned, for the Nutrition Program,
it’s like 20 cents more per container. Thank you.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Thank you. Council Member Ilagan.
MR. ILAGAN: Thank you, Madam Chair. And is that going through
procurement? Where they have three bids and try to get the lowest?
MR ONISHI: I don’t know, but like I said, all this funding that comes to the
Nutrition Program is all federally funded. So they cannot get more money from
them, so the County would have to subsidize, which would have to go through
procurement. Correct.
MR. ILAGAN: A lot of things have been said and I’m trying to understand some
of the underlying principles that were mentioned. One of the things that keeps
going back in my mind is the whole zero-waste belief. I feel with zero-waste, it
shouldn’t be starting off with bans. It actually should be with, I’m going to say it
again, education and creativity, trying to figure how we can move forward and be
part of the decision towards zero-waste. With this, it’s more of like, some
Council Members mentioned, we should be leaders for the environment and we
definitely need to be leaders. We can lead in different ways. One is to lead in this
ban. Another is to lead through education. Others is lead through example. So,
there’s many ways to lead and to be honest with you, our policies in this Council
Page 49
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
Chambers, in this department, I don’t feel like we’re even living up to what we’re
trying to say. We’re far behind and we call ourselves leaders? That’s not—here
we are, trying to put this ban where—when I look at our practices, it’s terrible.
I want to point out that education, like Council Member Wille said, was tried and
nothing happened. I don’t think that’s true. I don’t think we tried hard enough. I
don’t believe that we should stop with the education and just fall onto this ban. If
we push harder on education, then let the people who are using these containers
make those decisions. They’ll be part of the solution. You’re not going to be part
of the solution if right of the bat you put a ban and you tell them you can’t do this.
Most people will just go around and look for loopholes, will just rebel. It’s
human nature. You won’t get any cooperation, you won’t get collaboration, and
we’re all for the same thing.
I don’t want to use up all of my five minutes, you understand where I’m at. I
have a different approach. I don’t believe in the ban, I believe that we need to
focus on our litter management. There’s polystyrene through our shipping, we
use that, why aren’t we targeting people who ship out—who use those foams?
Why are we only targeting retail establishments? What’s next? Are we going to
target the plastic? So, if I start banning everything then what’s going to be left?
That’s like if I invite people to my party and I just don’t like this person because
he’s annoying, this person looks like a downer, and this person just has the worst
taste, nobody’s going to be at my party afterwards. So what I’m trying to say is
we can do this through education, and we need to be creative in our litter issue,
and I hope we can continue and move towards that effort. Thank you.
Motion to Call for the Mr. Paleka moved to call for the question.
Question:
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, call for the question, no debate. Okay,
on the call for the question, Mr. Clerk.
Vote on Motion to Call The motion to call for the question was carried by the
for the Question: following roll call vote:
(Approved)
Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Ilagan, Onishi,
Paleka, and Acting Chair Poindexter – 6.
Noes: Council Members Eoff and Wille – 2.
Absent: Council Member Kanuha – 1.
Excused: None.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, on the—so now we’re going to be voting
on—
MR. MAEDA: Bill 140, draft two, as amended with Communication 664.109.
Page 50
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Mr. Clerk, roll call
please.
Vote on Bill 140: The motion to pass Bill 140, as amended to Draft 3, on first
(Draft 3) reading and adopt Environment Management Committee
(Failed) Report No. 6 failed by the following roll call vote:
Ayes: Council Members David, Eoff, Wille, and
Acting Chair Poindexter – 4.
Noes: Council Members Chung, Ilagan, Onishi,
and Paleka – 4.
Absent: Council Member Kanuha – 1.
Excused: None.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Motion fails. So, Bill 140, draft two as
amended with Communication 664.109 moves forward for one more reading. Oh
no, this is it. I thought had one more reading. Okay, it’s done. I wish I could
have said something, but that was the call for the question so there was no debate
on that. But anyway, okay, so we got to continue, so bill fails.
MR. ILAGAN: Madam Chair?
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Yes.
MR. ILAGAN: Mr. Ewing has been waiting in Pāhoa, could we take his bill out
of order? It’s over Bill 206.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, Mr. Clerk, Bill 206.
Bill 206: AMENDS SECTION 25-8-26 (PĀHOA ZONE MAP), ARTICLE 8, CHAPTER
25 (ZONING CODE) OF THE HAWAI‘I COUNTY CODE 1983 (2005
EDITION), BY CHANGING THE DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION FROM
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL – 10,000 SQUARE FEET (RS-10) TO
VILLAGE COMMERCIAL –10,000 SQUARE FEET (CV-10) AT NĀNĀWALE
HOMESTEADS, PĀHOA, PUNA, HAWAI‘I, COVERED BY TAX MAP KEY:
1-5-011:008 AND 1-5-011:009
(Applicants: David and Charlene Ewing) (Area: Approx. 17,994 square feet)
The Windward Planning Commission forwards its favorable recommendation for
this change of zone, which would allow the applicants to develop a 2,400 square-
foot commercial building into an internet coffee shop and retail business complex
on Pāhoa Village Road in downtown Pāhoa.
Reference: Comm. 876
Intr. by: Mr. Ilagan (B/R)
Approve: PC-62
Page 51
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
; and
Comm. 876.1: From Council Member Greggor Ilagan, dated May 10, 2016, transmitting
proposed amendments to Bill 206.
Motion to Approve: Mr. Ilagan moved to pass Bill 206 on first reading and
adopt Planning Committee Report No. 62. Seconded by
Ms. David.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Mr. Ilagan.
MR. ILAGAN: Thank you, Madam Chair. At this time, I’ve been having
conversations with the applicant and also the Planning Director. There are things
that needs to be worked out before we move Bill 206 and I’m going to make a
motion to defer Bill 206 to the Planning Department.
Vote on Motion to Mr. Ilagan moved to refer Bill 206 to the Planning
Refer: Department Pursuant to Section 25-2-43(b), Hawaiʻi
(Approved) County Code. Seconded by Mr. Paleka and carried by the
following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Ilagan,
Onishi, Paleka, Wille, and Acting
Chair Poindexter – 8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Kanuha – 1.
Excused: None.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: This shall be referred to the—Bill 206 is being
referred to the Planning Department. Okay, so let us—I know it’s out of order, if
we could take Resolution 536-16. That’s the fourth one—
Res. 536-16: AUTHORIZES THE EXEMPTION OF CERTAIN CODE REQUIREMENTS,
PURSUANT TO SECTION 201H-38 OF THE HAWAI‘I REVISED STATUTES
FOR PHASE 4 OF THE MOHOULI SENIOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING
PROJECT IN SOUTH HILO, HAWAI‘I
Authorizes exemptions from Total Unit Count restrictions and a change of zoning
district classification from Agricultural to Multi-Family Residential to allow
development of 32 additional affordable housing units.
Reference: Comm. 900
Intr. by: Mr. Ilagan (B/R)
Waived: PC
Page 52
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
Motion to Approve: Mr. Ilagan moved to adopt Res. 536-16. Seconded by
Mr. Paleka.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member Ilagan.
MR. ILAGAN: If you have any questions, we have the applicants here. Thank
you.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Does anyone have any questions? Council
Member Onishi.
MR. ONISHI: Maybe Jeremy, you guys can come up and just give a, for the
public’s information, of what’s going on because I do support it and it’s great. I
guess it did take back some of our comments where we want them to increase the
density of that facility, the housing. Go ahead.
(Note: At this time, Jeremy McComber Development Director of
Hawaiʻi Island Community Development Corporation came forward to
address the members of the Council.)
MR. MCCOMBER: Hi, my name is Jeremy McComber, I’m with Hawaiʻi
Island Community Development Corporation. We are the sponsors and
developers of the project and I guess since the last time we met, you know, after
receiving some feedback on the number of units in the project, what we did—
because we were still in the predevelopment stages, so we were just working off
of conceptual ideas and estimations at that point. But since the last meeting that
we had with you folks, we actually cleared the property, surveyed it, and worked
with an architect to do some schematic designs. What we determined was that
there actually was the ability and capacity to take on additional units.
In predevelopment, you know, having a vacant property that has just trees
everywhere, you sort of have to estimate and guess at your slopes and so we had
based our initial estimates off of our experiences with the first phase of Mohouli.
But what we found out with the more makai area of the parcel is that it sloped in
our favor, which means we can do more units there because the cost of
development won’t be as impactful.
So, the resolution that is before you today, because we represented to the Council
and to the community that we weren’t going to exceed the initial number of 160
units, and now we’re wanting to do that, we just want to get the Council’s
blessing. We actually held a community meeting where we sent out notices to
neighbors within 300 feet of the property and to share the same information. The
general consensus was that they were in support of the project and they just had
some issues with maintaining privacy and ensuring that the emergency access
road that goes through our project will remain for emergency access only.
Page 53
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
MR. ONISHI: Great and you know, I really appreciate you guys’ hard work and
you know, you guys always doing great for our seniors, especially for the
affordable part. And you know, to me, it’s a little bit different from what we had
yesterday with that assisted living facility. But you know, they’re proven—you
folks do a great job and I will always support you guys. Thank you and I’d like
to see more happen. Okay, thank you.
MR. MCCOMBER: We’re going to try.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Thank you. Okay, any further discussions?
Seeing or hearing none, all those in favor say “aye.”
Vote on Res. 536-16: The motion to adopt Res. 536-16 was carried by the
(Adopted) following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Ilagan,
Onishi, Paleka, Wille, and Acting
Chair Poindexter – 8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Kanuha – 1.
Excused: None.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Resolution 536-16 is filed—moves forward to
Council with a positive recommendation. Sorry, that’s a resolution not a
communication. Okay, so can we go to the top of the agenda.
MR. ONISHI: Madam Chair, maybe if you can skip that one for about five
minutes because I was hoping Mr. Warren Lee would be here so I can praise him.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, so let’s go to number two,
Resolution 531-16.
Res. 531-16: AUTHORIZES THE OFFICE OF THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO AN
AGREEMENT WITH THE OFFICE OF THE AUDITOR, STATE OF
HAWAI‘I
Agreement would allow the County to request assistance in conducting an audit
of the schedule of employer allocations of the Employees’ Retirement System,
which is needed for the County’s 2016 financial statements.
Reference: Comm. 894
Intr. by: Ms. Eoff
Waived: FC
Motion to Approve: Ms. Eoff moved to adopt Res. 531-16. Seconded by
Mr. Onishi.
Page 54
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member Eoff.
MS. EOFF: Well my understanding is that we would be requesting the State
Auditor to audit the ERS Program info and that’s to meet the requirement of
GASB, the Government Accounting Standards Board, but if Ms. Sako wants to
explain that any further, she is here.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, does anybody have any questions or
discussion? Seeing or hearing none, all those in favor say “aye.”
Vote on Res. 531-16: The motion to adopt Res. 531-16 was carried by the
(Adopted) following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Ilagan,
Onishi, Paleka, Wille, and Acting
Chair Poindexter – 8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Kanuha – 1.
Excused: None.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, Mr. Clerk, will you please read in
Resolution 532-16?
Res. 532-16: AUTHORIZES THE OFFICE OF THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO AN
AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE OF HAWAI‘I EMPLOYEES’
RETIREMENT SYSTEM (ERS)
Agreement would allow the County to obtain information provided by the ERS
actuary needed for the County’s 2016 financial statements.
Reference: Comm. 895
Intr. by: Ms. Eoff
Waived: FC
Motion to Approve: Ms. Eoff moved to adopt Res. 532-16. Seconded by
Mr. Paleka.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member Eoff.
MS. EOFF: This is a related item.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, any discussion? Seeing or hearing none,
all those in favor say “aye.”
Page 55
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
Vote on Res. 532-16: The motion to adopt Res. 532-16 was carried by the
(Adopted) following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Ilagan,
Onishi, Paleka, Wille, and Acting
Chair Poindexter – 8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Kanuha – 1.
Excused: None.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Resolution 532 moves forward to Council with
a positive recommendation. Mr. Clerk, please read in Resolution 537-16.
Res. 537-16: APPROVES THE HAWAI‘I STATE ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES (HSAC)
FISCAL YEAR 2016-2017 PROPOSED OPERATING BUDGET
Requests the Council’s approval of HSAC’s proposed operating budget for
Fiscal Year 2016-2017.
Reference: Comm. 901
Intr. by: Mr. Onishi
Waived: GREDC
Motion to Approve: Mr. Onishi moved to adopt Res. 537-16. Seconded by
Mr. Paleka.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member Onishi.
MR. ONISHI: I’m just asking for your support.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Any discussion? Council Member Ilagan.
MR. ILAGAN: Council Member Onishi, how’s it going with this?
MR. ONISHI: Good.
MR. ILAGAN: How’s it going?
MR. ONISHI: Good.
MR. ILAGAN: Good? You want to update us with anything?
MR. ONISHI: It’s just status quo, the same, continued budget.
MR. ILAGAN: Okay.
Page 56
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Any other discussion? Seeing or hearing none,
all those in favor say “aye.”
Vote on Res. 537-16: The motion to adopt Res. 537-16 was carried by the
(Adopted) following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Ilagan,
Onishi, Paleka, Wille, and Acting
Chair Poindexter – 8.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Member Kanuha – 1.
Excused: None.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Okay, Resolution 537 moves forward to
Council with a positive recommendation. One excused on that vote. Mr. Clerk,
Resolution 538-16.
Res. 538-16: APPROVES THE HAWAI‘I STATE ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES (HSAC)
SLATE OF OFFICERS, NOMINEES TO THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
OF COUNTIES (NACo) BOARD OF DIRECTORS, AND NOMINEES TO THE
WESTERN INTERSTATE REGION (WIR) BOARD OF DIRECTORS FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2016-2017
Requests the Council’s approval of the following: 1) slate of HSAC officers and
their alternates: Michael P. Victorino, President (Gladys C. Baisa, Alternate),
Maui County Council; Dennis “Fresh” Onishi, Vice President
(Daniel K. Paleka, Jr., Alternate), Hawai‘i County Council; Mel Rapozo,
Secretary (Ross Kagawa, Alternate), Kauaʻi County Council; and J. Ikaika
Anderson, Treasurer (Joey Manahan, Alternate), Honolulu City Council; and
2) slate of officers for the NACo and WIR Board of Directors: KipuKai Kualiʻi,
Kauaʻi County Council (NACo); J. Ikaika Anderson, Honolulu City Council
(NACo); Mike White, Maui County Council (WIR); and Daniel K. Paleka, Jr.,
Hawaiʻi County Council (WIR).
Reference: Comm. 902
Intr. by: Mr. Onishi
Waived: GREDC
Motion to Approve: Mr. Onishi moved to adopt Res. 538-16. Seconded by
Mr. Paleka.
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Council Member Onishi.
MR. ONISHI: No, just asking for support.
Page 57
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
ACTING CHR. POINDEXTER: Just for—I just want to apologize to the public
because I’m thinking I’m in committee. I’m in Council. I’m not so used to
running the Council meetings and I’m forwarding it to Council on my resos. So,
it’s approved so I’m sorry on the previous resos. So, when I’m saying moves
forward to Council, we are in Council, so I apologize for that. Council Member
Wille.
MS. WILLE: I have a couple of questions. One thing when we were working on
the TAT (Transient Accommodations Tax), it came up that perhaps we’ve
changed the percentages around, that Hawaiʻi Island would receive, or the other
islands was going to go up. Ours is 18 and would go up to 24 percent, and the
House was supporting that. I was trying to work on that and I know Council
Member Onishi, you said no, you were opposed to it, you were afraid it was going
to hurt Maui some and I was really concerned. I didn’t think that was very good
judgement on that.
MR. ONISHI: Your opinion. Who’s going to Chair? Okay.
Relinquish Chair: At this time, Acting Chair Poindexter relinquished the chair to Acting Chair Eoff.
MS. WILLE: You know, that was an opportunity for the County of Hawaiʻi to
bring in considerably more funds and that was sort of an issue. In other words,
when they turned down that we were still—the four counties is going to get $101
million and split it, it was still—one issue that wasn’t decided that the House was
pushing, is that Honolulu would get considerably less and the other counties
would go up. Our County would go from 18 to 24 and I felt that was something
we should be pursuing. I didn’t understand why you and HSAC (Hawaiʻi State
Association of Counties) would not be supporting what would be, obviously,
beneficial for our County. I wanted to give you a chance to explain.
MR. ONISHI: Well, ask the Chair for me to respond.
MS. WILLE: Okay Chair, can he respond, please?
ACTING CHR. EOFF: Mr. Onishi.
MR. ONISHI: Thank you, Madam Chair. Yes, HSAC—well first of all, the
House and Senate had two different versions. Then the House, what they did is
they put in part of their amendment about having the percentages change to, kind
of in a way, to screw Oʻahu and made it like us to go and fight among each other
at HSAC. Because then, we would have dysfunction, okay? But we as the HSAC
Executive Board decided no, we’re going to stick with what our original plan was
because we didn’t want them, which is the State House, which had recommended
and not really supported it, they just had a proposal. So, we didn’t want to fight
among ourselves, so we wanted to stay as one, and so that’s why we didn’t want
Page 58
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
that. Now, if you find out at the end of what happened, everything stayed the
same. The House dropped that percentage and they went with the Senate’s
proposal. Thank you.
MS. WILLE: I just want to say I don’t think it was screwing Oʻahu because
basically, the additional money for the State would proportionately go to Oʻahu.
Anyway, I felt that was one example of poor judgement, so I’m not going to
support this.
ACTING CHR. EOFF: Okay, other Council Members, do you have any
comments or questions? Mr. Paleka.
MR. PALEKA: I’m just going to support what Councilman Onishi said because I
attended the last HSAC meeting this Monday, and that was communicated. In
fact, that was their intent, was to divide and conquer and to break ranks amongst
our HSAC group and HCOM (Hawaiʻi Conference of Mayors), the Mayor’s. So,
that was their intention, is to create the infighting and I understand and it’s—I can
verify.
In moving forward, there’s some—we might have another chance so—but I’ll
leave it at there, I know we—for time constraints but I just wanted to say that.
Thank you.
ACTING CHR. EOFF: Okay, thank you. Any further comments? Seeing none,
Mr. Clerk, can you please call the roll for Resolution 538?
Vote on Res. 538-16: The motion to adopt Res. 538-16 was carried by the
(Adopted) following roll call vote:
Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Ilagan, Onishi,
Paleka, and Acting Chair Eoff – 6.
Noes: Council Member Wille – 1.
Absent: Council Members Kanuha and Poindexter – 2.
Excused: None.
ACTING CHR. EOFF: Okay, thank you. Resolution 539.
Page 59
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
Res. 539-16: TRANSFERS/APPROPRIATES AN APPROPRIATION OUT AND FROM A
DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT AND CREDITS SAME TO A
DESIGNATED FUND ACCOUNT TO COVER EXPENSES IN THE HAWAI‘I
STATE ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES/NATIONAL ASSOCIATON OF
COUNTIES (HSAC/NACo) ACCOUNT
Transfers $4,000 out and from the Clerk-Council Services Other Current
Expenses, Miscellaneous Charges account; and credits the same to the
HSAC/NACo, Travel/Conferences account. Funds would be used for the Western
Interstate Region Conference held in May and monthly HSAC Executive
Committee meetings for the remainder of Fiscal Year 2015-2016.
Reference: Comm. 903
Intr. by: Mr. Kanuha
Waived: FC
Vote on Res. 539-16: Mr. Ilagan moved to adopt Res. 539-16. Seconded by
(Adopted) Mr. Paleka and carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Ilagan, Onishi,
Paleka, Wille and Acting Chair Eoff – 7.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Members Kanuha and Poindexter – 2.
Excused: None.
MR. ONISHI: Madam Chair?
ACTING CHR. EOFF: Go back to number one on the agenda?
MR. ONISHI: Yeah, correct. Thank you.
ACTING CHR. EOFF: Mr. Clerk, Resolution 529. I’m sorry Council Members,
I was supposed to see if you wanted to let me—
MR. ONISHI: It’s okay.
ACTING CHR. EOFF: To continue to run the meeting or go—
MR. ONISHI: Continue.
ACTING CHR. EOFF: Okay. Resolution 529.
Return to Order The Chair directed the Council to return to the order of business.
of Business:
(Note: Items in this category were taken up previously, out of order.)
Page 60
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
ORDER OF The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business,
RESOLUTIONS: Order of Resolutions.
Res. 529-16: AUTHORIZES THE OFFICE OF THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO AN
AGREEMENT WITH THE STATE OF HAWAI‘I, PURSUANT TO HAWAI‘I
REVISED STATUTES SECTION 46-7, TO RECEIVE FUNDS FOR THE
PLANNING, DESIGN, AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE COUNTY OF
HAWAI‘I’S KALANIANAʻOLE AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECT
Accepts grant funds in the amount of $3 million for the State’s portion of the project
from Railroad Avenue to Kauhane Avenue in Hilo.
Reference: Comm. 891
Intr. by: Ms. Eoff
Waived: FC
Motion to Approve: Ms. David moved to adopt Res. 529-16. Seconded by
Mr. Onishi.
ACTING CHR. EOFF: Mr. Lee, I think Mr. Onishi was waiting to praise you.
(Note: At this time, Public Works Director Warren Lee came forward to
address the members of the Council.)
ACTING CHR. EOFF: Director Lee.
MR. LEE: Warren Lee, Director of Public Works.
ACTING CHR. EOFF: Thank you. Mr. Onishi.
MR. ONISHI: Thank you, Madam Chair. Director Lee, you know, I’m really
happy to see this reso because, you know, just to let Council Members know, my
last term, one of my major projects was to get Kalanianaʻole from Ice Pond, all
the way to Kauhane Avenue paved, right? And then having like maybe sidewalks
put in and so forth to give that kind of complete street for that area. And so,
working with the Mayor, also working with Public Works, we found out that
section by the harbor entrance is all State. So, the project would be a County
project from Ice Pond to a certain area, and then it would be State, and then
County again.
So, knowing that, I asked Director Lee, “Oh, so how much would we need to
secure doing the whole thing one time, getting the State to do it all one time?”
So, he gave me a price. I went to Honolulu, met with Director Fuchigami, and
they agreed. Then we, I guess had other plans yeah, Director Lee? I guess some
Page 61
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
things changed so we needed to get more money, right? And then I went back,
talked to Director Fuchigami again, and then he agreed that he would turn over
the funds. I think it was a little over a million something, right? Or a million.
MR. LEE: It was about a million dollars, yes.
MR. ONISHI: So then he agreed, so it came back and everything was good.
Then maybe, I don’t know, like early last year, I met with the Director, with
Finance and asked, “Okay, so what’s going on? Do we need to confirm all this?”
Then it kind of like I got busy and so forth. But then I saw this reso and I want to
thank the Director because we were only up to like one million dollars and now,
it’s up to three million. They got the extra two million to do the extra work for
this area. And then—not too often do we have this partnership where the State
just turns over the money to the County.
MR. LEE: That happens once in a while when we have County projects that are
part State Highways. More recently, Kuauli in middle Puna I guess.
MR. ONISHI: So, I really wanted to thank Director Lee and his crew at
engineering because I was worried, and every time, I was trying to remember I
got to schedule a meeting with the Director because I got to make sure this thing
happens before I term out, right? And to see this here, and we’re going to be
accepting, I’m so happy. It’s like we have to celebrate. But Director, I want to
just say thank you very much for all of your support and for all the hard work that
you guys do. I mean, this is to me, a major project and to get us the money for us
to do the complete street, that’s awesome. Any comments?
MR. LEE: First of all, Council Member Onishi, I think we got to thank you for
getting the ball rolling with the Hawaiʻi Department of Transportation. You
know, we do have a good working relationship with the Big Island community
and with the leadership in Honolulu, so anytime there’s an opportunity to partner,
we always look forward to it. As this project on Kalanianaʻole developed,
initially, the State was just thinking that the pavement needed to be redesigned,
whereas, you take out the AC (Asphalt Concrete) and you take out the base
course. But really, when you look at it, what our philosophy is with the counties
at any major road renovations, we want to design it to a complete street type
criteria, especially now with the participation of most of the County, and the Blue
Zones Project. We certainly want to make our streets walkable, be used for
recreation, and yet at the same time, functional.
So, the project is little over a mile, about a mile, and it goes from Ice Pond, as you
mentioned, to Kauhane. So, we were able to convince the, not convince, but tell
the Department of Transportation that we’ll be doing curbs, gutters, and sidewalks
that—for an additional two million dollars. You could do that also and improve
the drainage because the flooding occurs mostly at the harbor area. So, I think
Page 62
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
they saw the—understood and they were able to come up with the additional two
million dollars. So, it’s a—we have a mutual admiration society between the
Department of Transportation and the County of Hawaiʻi Public Works.
MR. ONISHI: So Director Lee, I really appreciate and thank you very much for
all you guys’ hard work and then also, to Director Ford Fuchigami for supporting
Hawaiʻi County and this project. So, thank you very much and thank you for
coming back.
MR. LEE: Thank you for having me.
ACTING CHR. EOFF: Thank you. Okay, any other comments? Mr. Paleka.
MR. PALEKA: I’d just also like to thank the Director because he brought up
Kuauli and then—thank you. I didn’t get a chance to personally thank you for the
Kuauli right-turn lane. I mean we did it electronically, but I really want to thank
you, Warren. Mahalo.
MR. LEE: It came out pretty good, yeah?
MR. PALEKA: Beautiful. Right on. Mean work. I got to say, the work and how
quick—outstanding job.
MR. LEE: That was done by our Highway’s group.
MR. PALEKA: Thank you very much. Right on.
ACTING CHR. EOFF: Okay, Council Members, all in favor of
Resolution 529-16, please say “aye.”
Vote on Res. 529-16: The motion to adopt Res. 529-16 was carried by the
(Adopted) following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Eoff, Ilagan,
Onishi, Paleka, and Wille, – 7.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Members Kanuha and Poindexter – 2.
Excused: None.
ACTING CHR. EOFF: Ms. Wille, can we go to Bill 150 now? Okay, Mr. Clerk,
I think that’s the next one on the agenda, would be Bill 150, Draft two.
BILLS FOR The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business,
ORDINANCES Bills for Ordinances (First Reading).
(FIRST READING):
Page 63
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
Bill 150 AMENDS CHAPTER 16, ARTICLE 3, SECTION 16-5 OF THE HAWAI‘I
(Draft 2): COUNTY CODE 1983 (2005 EDITION, AS AMENDED), RELATING TO
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN ACTION COMMITTEE
MEMBERSHIP AND TENURE
Vacancies would be filled before filling expired positions occupied by members
willing to continue serving.
Reference: Comm. 694.4
Intr. by: Ms. Wille
Approve: PC-61
Motion to Approve: Ms. Wille moved to pass Bill 150, Draft 2 on first reading
and adopt Planning Committee Report No. 61. Seconded
by Mr. Onishi.
ACTING CHR. EOFF: Go ahead, Ms. Wille.
MS. WILLE: Okay. This I started out with a number of provisions here that
would allow the Council Members to make nominations in case the Mayor did not
do so after 90 days. A number of you stressed that you didn’t feel that was
important. So, I did remove that and we really, I think discussed this at the last
meeting and I didn’t hear any—I don’t recall any opposition. What this would do
on the CDP’s would allow a member, at their discretion, to continue to serve until
the successor is appointed and that existing, vacant positions would be filled
before filling any position occupied by a member whose term has expired but
who’s willing to continue serving until their position is filed. The last time
something came up, I know that Council Member Paleka asked me to speak with
the—make sure I’ve spoken—you know, meet again with the final language with
Director Kanuha. He came here and explained that he supported this as it is. So,
I don’t recall any other particular concerns, but we’re missing a number of
members here.
Anyway, so that’s—this just would allow the Director right now, basically, the
members, if their terms expired, even if there are other vacancies, they are
basically knocked off after 90 days and so this makes it so that they are able to
stay on the committee until the vacancies are filled.
ACTING CHR. EOFF: Any other questions or comments, Council Members?
Okay, Mr. Clerk—do I still have enough—? Okay, we can continue on then? I
guess we’ll do a voice vote. All in favor of approving Bill 150, Draft two please
say “aye.”
Page 64
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
Vote on Bill 150: The motion to pass Bill 150, Draft 2 on first reading and
(Draft 2) adopt Planning Committee Report No. 61 was carried by
(Approved) the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members David, Onishi, Paleka, Wille,
and Acting Chair Eoff – 5.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Members Chung, Ilagan, Kanuha, and
Poindexter – 4.
Excused: None.
ACTING CHR. EOFF: Bill 150, Draft two will move to second reading. Go
ahead, Bill 205.
Bill 205: AMENDS CHAPTER 24, ARTICLE 10, DIVISION 5, OF THE HAWAI‘I
COUNTY CODE 1983 (2005 EDITION, AS AMENDED), RELATING TO
PARKING
Amends Section 24-280 (No parking any time), by revising existing provisions
and adding new provisions for portions of Ali‘i Drive, Subsection (f), Kona.
Reference: Comm. 874
Intr. by: Ms. Poindexter
Approve: PWPRC-45
Motion to Approve: Ms. David moved to pass Bill 205 and adopt Public Works
and Parks and Recreation Committee Report No. 45.
Seconded by Mr. Paleka.
ACTING CHR. EOFF: You know, I know some questions were raised regarding
Bill 205 and I do not have the answer to it. This would be in Dru’s district, he’s
more familiar. But I believe that it does increase the amount of parking on Aliʻi
Drive, even though the Code change falls under where no parking is allowed.
Director Lee just left. We have one more reading so I think we can go ahead and
move forward on this. If we need clarification we can get it next time. All in
favor of Bill 205, please say “aye.”
Vote on Bill 205: The motion to pass Bill 205 on first reading and adopt
(Approved) Public Works and Parks and Recreation Committee Report
No. 45 was carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Ilagan, Onishi,
Paleka, Wille, and Acting Chair Eoff – 7.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Members Kanuha and Poindexter – 2.
Excused: None.
Page 65
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
ACTING CHR. EOFF: Bill 206.
MR. MAEDA: We’re on Bill 200, second reading.
ACTING CHR. EOFF: Oh, we’ve already done everything up until there?
MR. MAEDA: Yes.
ACTING CHR. EOFF: Okay, thank you. Bill 200.
ORDER OF The Chair directed the Council to proceed to the next order of business,
THE DAY Order of the Day (Second or Final Reading).
(SECOND OR
FINAL READING):
Bill 200: AMENDS CHAPTER 24, ARTICLE 10, DIVISION 6, OF THE HAWAI‘I
COUNTY CODE 1983 (2005 EDITION, AS AMENDED), RELATING TO
LOADING ZONES
Removes portion of Keawe Street from Schedule 36 (Freight loading zones),
Subsection (c), South Hilo.
Reference: Comm. 865
Intr. by: Ms. Poindexter
First Reading: May 17, 2016
Vote on Bill 200: Ms. David moved to pass Bill 200 on second and final
(Adopted) reading. Seconded by Mr. Paleka and carried by the
following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Ilagan, Onishi,
Paleka, Wille, and Acting Chair Eoff – 7.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Members Kanuha and Poindexter – 2.
Excused: None.
ACTING CHR. EOFF: Bill 201.
Page 66
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
Bill 201: AMENDS CHAPTER 14, ARTICLE 1, SECTION 14-2 AND SECTION 14-2.1
OF THE HAWAI‘I COUNTY CODE 1983 (2005 EDITION, AS AMENDED),
RELATING TO CONSUMPTION OF INTOXICATING LIQUORS AT PARKS
Adds Hawaiian Ocean View Park to Section 14-2 (areas requiring permits for
intoxicating liquors between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.) and removes
Hawaiian Ocean View Park from Section 14-2.1 (intoxicating liquors allowed
between the hours of 6:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m.).
Reference: Comm. 866
Intr. by: Ms. David
First Reading: May 17, 2016
Motion to Approve: Ms. David moved to pass Bill 201 on second and final
reading. Seconded by Mr. Paleka.
ACTING CHR. EOFF: Any discussion?
MS. DAVID: Yes, I think we discussed this, the importance of this, and I just
would ask for your support. Mahalo.
ACTING CHR. EOFF: Okay, thank you, any other comments? All in favor
please say “aye.”
Vote on Bill 201: The motion to pass Bill 201 on second and final reading
(Adopted) was carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Ilagan, Onishi,
Paleka, Wille, and Acting Chair Eoff – 7.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Members Kanuha and Poindexter – 2.
Excused: None.
ACTING CHR. EOFF: And the last item, I think, is Bill 207
Page 67
Hawaiʻi County Council-43 June 3, 2016
Bill 207: AMENDS ORDINANCE NO. 15-58, AS AMENDED, RELATING TO PUBLIC
IMPROVEMENTS AND FINANCING THEREOF FOR THE FISCAL YEAR
JULY 1, 2015, TO JUNE 30, 2016
Adds the Parks and Recreation Waiākea Uka Community Center – State project
for $600,000 to the Capital Budget. Funds for this project shall be provided from
State Grants Receivable ($600,000). Funds would be used for land acquisition
and design for a community center in Waiākea Uka.
Reference: Comm. 879
Intr. by: Ms. Eoff
First Reading: May 17, 2016
Note: Requires 2/3 vote of the entire
membership to amend, pursuant to
Section 10-6(e), Hawai‘i County Charter
Motion to Approve: Mr. Onishi moved to pass Bill 207 on second and final
reading. Seconded by Mr. Paleka.
ACTING CHR. EOFF: Is there any discussion?
MR. ONISHI: Yes, Madam Chair.
ACTING CHR. EOFF: Mr. Onishi.
MR. ONISHI: Okay, I just want to say again, thank you to my brother Richard,
who is a House Representative for District three. He was the one who had gotten
this funding. This is like needed funds because if people know when there’s
activities at Waiākea Uka, either at the gym or at the baseball fields, I mean it’s
really packed and cars line up on the side of the roads, on both sides. And like
what we’re worried about is that one day, a child might be running across the
street to the car, either way, and cars do speed sometimes on that road, so we
don’t want something to happen. So, with this fund, it’s going to be building a
parking lot for that park or the gym and for the baseball fields on the back side of
it. And also, with some of the extra funding, there’s going to be having some
plans and designs to do a community center. And what my understanding is, my
brother will be also looking to get funding for building that center too. So, I want
to thank him very much.
ACTING CHR. EOFF: Thank you, Mr. Onishi. Okay, Council Members, ready
to vote? All in favor please say “aye.”
Page 68
Hawai`i County Council-43 June 3, 2016
Vote on Bill 207: The motion to pass Bill 207 on second and final reading
(Adopted) was carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Ilagan, Onishi,
Paleka, Wille, and Acting Chair Eoff—7.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Members Kanuha and Poindexter—2.
Excused: None.
ACTING CHR. EOFF: Mr. Clerk, is there any items we didn't cover?
MR. MAEDA: Everything was taken care of.
ACTING CHR. EOFF: Okay.
ADJOURN- There being no further business, at 4:01 p.m., Mr. Onishi moved to adjourn the
MENT: meeting. Seconded by Mr. Paleka and carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Council Members Chung, David, Ilagan, Onishi, Paleka,
Wille, and Acting Chair Eoff— 7.
Noes: None.
Absent: Council Members Kanuha and Poindexter—2.
Excused: None.
ACTING CHR. EOFF: We are adjourned. Thank you very much Council
Members.
Council Approval: MAR 1 4 2018
COY TY CLERK
SM/jm
Page 69