HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN GREDC 2019/01/08 2018-2020Committee on Governmental Relations
and Economic Development
11t Session
Hawaii County Building
25 Aupuni Street
Hilo, Hawai `i
January 8, 2019
CALL TO The regular meeting of the Committee on Governmental Relations and Economic
ORDER: Development was called to order at 2:47 p.m., in the Council Chambers, Hilo,
by Ms. Ashley L. Kierkiewicz, Chair.
ROLL CALL:
Present: Ms. Ashley L. Kierkiewicz, Chair
Ms. Susan L. K. Lee Loy, Vice Chair
Mr. Aaron S. Y. Chung, Member '
Ms. Maile Medeiros David, Member
Ms. Karen Eoff, Member
Mr. Matt Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Member
Ms. Valerie Poindexter, Member
Mr. Herbert M. "Tim" Richards, III, Member
Ms. Rebecca Villegas, Member
STATEMENTS The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business,
FROM THE Statements from the Public on Agenda Items.
PUBLIC ON
AGENDA ITEMS: The following individual registered to speak and came forward when called
by the Chair:
Emily Naeole:
Sara Steiner:
(Representing Laulima
Pahoa)
Nancy Seifers:
Leila Kealoha:
Smiley Burrows:
Comm. 21, in support.
Comm. 21, in support.
Comm. 21, in support.
Comm. 21, in support.
Comm. 21, in support.
Scott Malis: Comm. 21, comment.
GREDC-1 January 8, 2019
Kathy Emery: Comm. 21, comment.
Patricia Leo: Comm. 21, comment
Betty Oberman: Comm. 21, comment.
Julie Reinholtson: Comm. 21, comment.
Kalia Avery: Comm. 21, comment.
Jon Olson: Comm. 21, comment.
Christopher Biltoft: Comm. 21, comment.
Paul Charbonneau: Comm. 21, comment.
Eric Cockcroft: Comm. 21, comment.
Braja RuthAnne Tarletz: Comm. 21, comment.
Josiah Shelton Hunt: Comm. 21, comment.
Mary Fleming: Comm. 21, in support.
Jennifer Perry: Comm. 21, in support.
CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Jennifer. Seeing no more testifiers, I'm
closing testimony at this time. We have no communications, or resolutions today.
So movingI'm sorry we do have communications. Mr. Clerk, if you could
please read in Communication 20.
COMMUNI- The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business,
CATIONS: Communications.
Comm. 20: REQUESTS THE MAYOR, MANAGING DIRECTOR, OR DESIGNEE TO
PROVIDE A BRIEFING ON THE COUNTY'S PRIORITIES FOR THE 2019
SESSION OF THE HAWAII STATE LEGISLATURE
From Council Members, Susan L. K. Lee Loy and Ashley L. Kierkiewicz, dated
December 7, 2018.
Motion to Close File: Ms. Lee Loy moved to close file on Comm. 20. Seconded
by Mr. Richards.
CHR KIERKIEWICZ: If I could call up Mayor Harry Kim. Mayor, do you want
anybody else to join you? Director Sako?
Page 2
GREDC-1
January 8, 2019
(Note: At this time, Mayor Harry Kim and Finance Director Deanna Sako
came forward to address the members of the Committee.)
MAYOR KIM: I haven't been sitting back there as long as you have, but I think I
heard enough to address your concerns. First of all for you to sit there and take
the responsibility and even blame, for some of the things that you had nothing to
do with it and you know that. All of the decisions on the roads were not yours it
was mine. So let me explain just briefly. What I thought we did, a decent job. It
is apparent from today's discussion with members of the affected community we
did not. So we have to do a better job.
Some of you know I've been around since the Pu`u `O`o eruption, Kupaianaha. It
was at that time that places like Royal Garden and Kalapana Gardens, and
elsewhere was totally covered. It was at that time that preliminary type of
decision was made for road repair that we found to be very immature as far as
timing. It was long after work began or even repaired that the eruption would
cover it. It was then that Hawaii Volcano Observatory, which you know is a
Federal funded agency that we depend on in entirety, as our soul source of
information for those related to the volcano also the earthquakes, they're funded
just for that. To work with the local community and the local government in
mitigation as well as preparedness and response.
It was after the, I was going to say eruption but not eruption because it just ended
a few months ago. The eruption of Pu`u `O`o and Kupaianaha we took all of
Kalapana, and Kaimu. The decision was made for guidance to us, that there
would be no major reconstruction of roads or any other resource until a period of
six months would pass. After the eruption would go quiet. We thought that was a
reasonable and a good policy to follow. And we followed it. Yes, there were
numerous concerns by residents of Kaimu and Kalapana, and all those people of
Royal Gardens and Kalapana Gardens, Pacific Paradise that were covered that we
never did make a road till this day. Yes, there were a lot of concerns from those
of Kaimu that are still there that we have not made ingress, egress, too. Because
that six months never came, until just recently.
When this started that ended when the Southeast rift zone erupted on natures ways
you read about I'm sure of all the earthquakes up Halema`uma`u. The drying up
of Pu`u `O`O, Kupaiamaha. Sorry to say that's the drainage. The same policy that
was made then, we decided to, after discussion with HVO (Hawai`i Volcano
Observatory) to follow for this eruption. No major decision on road repairs
especially, because each one will cost millions. And FEMA (Federal Emergency
Management Agency) will not fund temporary. We will wait.
Well that six months ends in April. One month after the last of the surface flows,
and then the six months began. I thought we explained that. None of that
reflected any decision by any person to any subdivision, and individuals that we
Page 3
GREDC-1
January 8, 2019
would not consider it at that time. We'll wait till the experts tell us that they feel
that this is a long term quiet period. There's nobody that's going to sit down
before you here, and say that this is a permanent end of this eruption. Kilauea as
we know is the most active volcano in the entire world. Ask the old time
residents of that, and they'll tell you what is accepted and not accepted. But to sit
here and see you get the blame for so many things that I consider just missed
information. I'll pick the easy ones.
In regards to PGV (Puna Geothermal Venture) restoration, almost an accusation
of that their government, this government, is guilty of favoritism towards PGV.
PGV came to the office, and it's in writing if you want a copy of that, requesting
permission to make a temporary road parallel to Highway 132. They brought
with them Mr. Lyman who is a soul owner of all that property that they were
going to ingress and trespass on. Which he said, I will give permission to PGV to
do that. PGV was assured that any authority to do so must be preceded and
followed by all the rules established by Public Works in regards to grubbing and
grading. That is also inviting, and they did that. Tell me what is a violation?
Because that right is given to any property owner of their property.
But PGV was given one more additional, if you're going to do this and it is your
right to do it, it's your money. Will you proceed with that project with the
possibility of private landowners, whether it be the papaya farmers, or AT&T to
use that ingress egress? And they said they would. There's something that we
know we didn't have the authority too, but we asked them. Because of the
location of their place that they wanted to go and investigate, and begin the
preliminary work of possibly restoring it.
In regards to accusation of PGV funds, in regards to the State and OHA, (Office
of Hawaiian Affairs) yes, County government did get the money but it was
earmarked for the Relocation Fund. None to your General Fund or our General
Fund, it was specified for Relocation. I'm not here to debate what they say, but it
is important we clarify truth. And all of this is opened to your information
anytime you want a hardcopy or even further discussion on it.
In regards to the property owners down there who want to go home. You think
we don't understand that? You think for one individual do not have a personal tie
also with that property they call home. But I know I'm not going back, but that's
my decision. Why? I bought that place because of touch of the ocean. You feel
alive when you go to the saltwater. But I know now that ocean is at least
700 yards ahead of me. And I think I'd rather go sit at Hilo Bayfront and look at
700 yards of lava.
In regards of Pohoiki Road, yeah, that was a personal decision. First question
asked, what will it cost to make a temporary road to just go up and down? And I
have a very, very innovated guy in Public Works, Neil Azevedo, that I joke with
Page 4
GREDC-1
January 8, 2019
him. You're not paying for it, so are you stealing it? And obviously that's just a
joke, because we're talking about the material he got from State Highway to use
as surface material. And he gave me an estimate of less than $200,000 for the
whole thing, and I made a decision that's more than reasonable. That would
allow us for the people of that area one access to the ocean. And people who
went on this, all came back with that should be shared because of the beauty of
the place.
Every agency that had any part of it, had a heavy involvement in assessing
whether it was right to do, including Water Department who looked and said we
can't get the water to you. All of you know that water is semi -tolerance, but they
helped. Obviously the water safety people, what it would take to ensure some
safety. Department of Health to check their water, Public Works to make the
road, Parks and Recreation to fix the park. And then a unanimous decision was
made, this would be good for the public on top of that. It would provide ingress,
egress to a lot of the farmers, it could use the road up to that part. If you disagree
with that decision, I accept that. But I tell you it was a good decision for what we
could do at that time.
To all the people in the back of me, and to testify from us, I don't mind any
criticism in decision we made. That's part of the turf, you know that. But it's got
to be based on good and accurate information, that's all I ask. Money, they said
it's there, I'd sure like to have a part of that. Just to repair 132 is going to cost a
minimum estimate of some kind of restoration that FEMA would approve,
because they have to approve it. It's going to be at least $10 million, at least. I
don't know, because we haven't done the survey yet. And you know FEMA's
rules, we will have to pay for 25 percent of that, doesn't come free.
The total money donated to us, the bulk of it was PGV, which I'm very grateful
for and they had no strings to it except one. The owners of PGV came to my
office and just wanted to be assured that the money would be spent for the good
of people. But that's $150,000, that's a lot. But that won't even pay for one foot
of the road. We will do what we can, unless some of the information comes
forward, I am not going to violate the policy that was established in regard to
when it would be wise to start and take a look at it.
I'll close with this in regards to people that came here and understanding
emotionally what they felt. You know, this job almost prohibits you from
becoming emotional, but I can understand it. They have to also understand that
even after -132 and Pohoiki Road is different. (Highway) 137 and Pohoiki Road
where we open up is different. (Highway) 132 and 137 was your main channel of
the lava. That's 8 million to 10 million cubic meters of hot pouring lava going
over those roads, none of that was up Pohoiki Road that was just an outflow.
Page 5
GREDC-1
January 8, 2019
So we knew that could be done. But even then you would note spots where was
still smoke and steam coming out. I hope this eruption is over for our time. I will
wait. The period will end in April then we'll immediately asses with HVO the
situation. And the possibility of opening up those roads that we can, and coming
to you to fund the 25 percent. I asked Deanna to come up here, because she's the
brains with all the money. I'm the one that goes to her and beg too. I have to run
upstairs for a meeting, but I'll be glad to answer any questions.
CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Mayor for taking the time to be here and
listen to testimony. It's great for you to clarify a lot of the things that were said, I
think there's misinformation that's circulating out there in terms of your position
on wanting to get people on to the road of recovery. So thank you, thank you for
listening. I know you guys are working very hard behind the scenes, and that was
the point of today. To showcase to the community all of the work that's
happening behind the scenes.
I want to take us a little bit back to focus of the presentation, and that is the
legislative priority for this session. Director Sako, it would be great if you could
take us to that list, or Mayor. But I also want to make sure that we're introducing
Andy Levin, who will be, I think someone that's going to be championing some
of these priorities to the legislature. Thank you.
MAYOR KIM: This is Administrative work that's fast and furious and even this
morning changed. I'd like to prepare you for possibilities of changes to this.
What was added recently was TAT (Transient Accommodations Tax) as looking
at old timers, Mr. Chung you're the old timer. But one of the important things as
he knows is the TAT tax that the County government of all four counties have
been fighting annually with the legislature. To go up there as, you know,
Ms. Poindexter you spent a lot of time there last year. Regards to literally
begging for a fair share.
Just a brief background on that, initially when TAT was developed 95 percent of
the funds was earmarked for County Government to help to expenses related to
tourism. As time changed that rapidly changed until what it is now, less than
20 percent of the total. And of that less than 2.5, 2.2 percent for County
Government of Hawaii, because that was a good source of income that the State
needed also.
The Governor promised me some time ago in regards to the TAT this is what he
was going to do. He assured me that Administration of the Governor's office
would submit a bill of division of the TAT funds. My position to him on this was
please whatever you do, it cannot be based on a fixed amount. That is so totally
unfair. It must be, it should be based on a percentage that I would take into
account inflation. As you know that was passed last year in regards to fixed
amount. The cap of $1.3 million for division among the four counties, which I
Page 6
GREDC-1
January 8, 2019
considered to be very unfair to us counties. The reason this is so vague now, up
till this morning in communication with the Governor's office they're not finished
with the bill yet. So how are they going to do it, what percentage, or how they're
going to word it? So I'm very vague on that also.
On bullet number 3, because the homeless as you will know, see that we see and
add the word squatters. We are finding out, not only in Hawaii County obviously
but Oahu and others as well, that you have to address. And Leilani Estates I think
was a perfect example. You have to identify a big part of what you see out there.
And that is not the homeless problem, that is people who voluntarily want that
form of life, and have told authorities they want no help, need no help and they
seek that life.
Well we made a public statement not too long ago on that position, because we
have to. Because they're affecting our home -life and lifestyle where they will
give you a full briefing on the agency's report of the police and parks. The
position is this on the homeless, we will do everything we can within our
authority and resources to help those who want and need help. That's our
responsibility and we will do it. Unfortunately some of it takes a lot of money
and some of it takes time, but we are working on it.
But for those who choose this lifestyle we will publicly say, and I openly said,
public and private facilities is not your private toilet. Private and public facilities
is not your private rubbish dump, nor is it your private camping ground. And we
have to develop programs to address that, so they will have a place to go to live
their lifestyle and we're working on that. And I'll let Deanna handle the hard
stuff.
MS. SAKO: So the two bills that the County submitted to the State were on
general excise tax flexibility to be able to use it for more than just transportation
especially, you know, as we do have some challenges coming up. And then of
course the lava recovery package being submitted to the State. And then the last
one, that I believe whereI'm not sure who submitted it. But I know planning is
supporting a bill that would require the vacation rental's certificate number, you
know, that registration number as each of the vacation rentals start to register on
each of the counties to be required in their advertising. So that there is a way to
crack down and we know whether it's Airbnb or wherever, but it would be
required so that we know that they actually were registered. So those are the five
items that we listed, and you know, as always you know, just like you we'll be
monitoring all the bills to see if there's others that have impact to our County.
CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Director Sako. Andy Levin, could I just call
you forward?
MR. CHUNG: Madam Chairman, could I just make a comment?
Page 7
GREDC-1
January 8, 2019
CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Yes.
MR. CHUNG: Because I see some of the members of the audience leaving, but
there are some matters we're going to be taking up that will address some of the
concerns. It's going to be in another communication. But the reason why
Ms. Kierkiewicz, Mr. Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, and Ms. Lee Loy brought these
things up for presentation today, was that in about a week the legislature is going
to be convening. And we've been working franticly in trying to, you know,
address a lot of concerns with members of the legislature both our delegation as
well as very key, key members of both houses. So if you could just bear with us,
you know, hopefully things will coalesce at some point and we'll be able to
address some of the matters of concern to you, too. Even if it doesn't seem like it
right now, thanks.
CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chair Chung. Mr. Levin.
(Note: At this time, Legislative Assistant Andrew Levin came
forward to address the members of the Committee.)
MR. LEVIN: Thank you Chair, and thank you members. I've had an opportunity
to meet with eight of you and I really appreciate the time that you've given me
and I hope to meet with Chair Chung in the near future.
This is my third time around on contract to work for the Mayor at the legislature,
these are the priorities that he has identified. And we will also, as in the past, be
going through all the bills that have been introduced at the legislature, trying to
determine which ones will affect the County and create testimony on those issues
that the Mayor wants to weigh in on. I will share all those testimonies with you
folks, so that you know where the Mayor is coming from. I certainly welcome
input from all of you as the months go on. I mean, I'll be glad to address any
particular questions you might have.
CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Mr. Levin. Thank you, Director Sako.
Council Members, any questions, comments? Chair Chung.
MR. CHUNG: Yeah, I guess it would be for both of them, and perhaps if Diane
and Ron could come up here too or be available. And it has to do with the
recovery package. I know it's been fluid.
CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Council Member Chung, I just want to point out that in a
few minutes they are going to present formally on the recovery package.
MR. CHUNG: Oh, okay.
Page 8
GREDC-1
January 8, 2019
CHR KIERKIEWICZ: So if we have any specific questions related to the work
that Mr. Levin is going to be doing in terms of championing priorities for this
County at the legislature. Those are the kind of questions that I want to be asked
at this point.
MR. CHUNG: Yeah, well, I guess well my only question would be, you know,
Andy, are you going to be working solely for or with the Administration, or is it
going be with the Council? Who do you represent?
MR. LEVIN: Well I think I represent the Mayor, but I certainly would be, you
know, happy to convey your views to the extent that I can. Please let's keep an
open dialog so that we have a common purpose in pushing forward in county
needs.
MR. CHUNG: For sure. So you would be willing to share with us the Mayor's
positions, his agenda even
MR. LEVIN: Well I think the agenda is before you. And then in terms as bills
come forward and testimonies prepared, I will share them with you as I did a year
ago.
MR. CHUNG: Would it be where we have to ask you, or would it just come to us
automatically?
MR. LEVIN: Well in prior years I sent it to your Clerk and he suggested that I
send it to Shannon and Susan.
MR. CHUNG: Okay.
MR. LEVIN: And then they will distribute among you.
MR. CHUNG: Alright, thank you. That's all.
CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Council Member Chung. Council Member
Lee Loy.
MS. LEE LOY: Yeah, thank you. And just for the rest of my colleagues, the
intention here with Communication 20, and then Communication 21was to
provide a big high-level overview of a look of what we would be championing
from an island -wide perspective. And then we would drill down onto the
specifics of the Puna recovery, which would come later.
But maybe this question is for Deanna. Regarding the GE tax flexibility, the
language, can you just give us a thumbnail sketch on what kind of wiggle we're
hoping or this Administration is hoping to put forward as far as how we wiggle
Page 9
GREDC-1
January 8, 2019
some of this monies loose, or create some flexibility. And then for the
homelessness and the squatter program, I know that the Mayor mentioned that but
I also know there's about $30 million sitting over at the legislature and where that
monies is—how we try and get some of that off the table and down into our
community. If you could speak specifically to those two, thank you.
MS. SAKO: So probably I'm more familiar with GE tax flexibility. And I think
the bill that went in was that we would have the ability to use, you know, that no
less than 50 percent would be spent on transportation; whether it's the bus, you
know, completing the Mass Transit Master Plan and following through on that, as
well as, you know, roads and all of that, that we have. But then in addition, you
know, this year we only have half a year coming to us, but in the following year
we'll have a full year of revenue. Being able to use it on other things that might
help us, you know, basically help ourselves so that we can help balance the
budget or maybe it's on public safety.
So you know, we're open to amendments with the legislature, we want to try and
be flexible with them. But we went to give them a starting point to help us, you
know, the smaller counties don't have the rail system. You know, we need to be
able to use it on what's the most demanding for us. And you know, one of the
things that, you know, the Mayor hears as he goes to every community is more
police officers, more protection. So you know, whether its public safety or other
things, but you know, just basically to help us help ourselves.
On the homeless and squatters, you know, there is a taskforce kind of working
group being formed locally that I think will be the key of that. We have the
homeless coordinator position filled again, so I'm sure that will be one of their
tasks, to see how we can get our share of the $30 million. And then I believe we
are aware that the government will be submitting various bills as well, or that
Administration. So that we'll be able to follow those, and see what will help us
the most on our island as well.
MS. LEE LOY: I just had a follow up question regarding the GE tax flexibility.
Has any thought been given to usingI know public safety is incredibly
important for us, but we're also looking at some statewide initiatives specifically
at it applies to the environment with some of our sustainability goals. And then
the conversion of our wastewater systems. Has any thought, and maybe Mr.
Levin you might want to chime in as far as what strategies to use, because I hear
the idea of flexibility, and public safety completely on board. But there are some
big ticket items related to our environment.
MS. SAKO: There are. That's why the original language went in kind of vague,
so that, you know, Mr. Kucharski talks all the time about some of things coming
up. So we try to leave it vague, but we're just trying to say we're willing to work
with the legislature to help open it up. And whether it's to free up other monies or
Page 10
GREDC-1
January 8, 2019
to use it towards those projects that are coming up. Whether it's the cesspool
conversions or whatnot I mean there's a lot coming down the pike. You know,
we're not going to be able to pay for all of those types things that are coming up,
some of it is going to be placed on the homeowners. But maybe, you know,
helping to find programs that you know, they could utilize or expand our sewer
conversion loan program or something.
MS. LEE LOY: Thank you. You know, Mr. Chung had made it very clear during
his inauguration speech that, you know, we reach out to the legislature. And so I
do appreciate this some kind of thumbnail or bulletin items. I also think it's
actually rather wise that we focus our energies on just a few things, rather than
spread ourselves too thin. And as Mr. Chung has mentioned, you know, we are
working very hard with both houses, to figure out how to leverage some of the
assets that we have and kind of invite them. And maybe some phased way to get
some money back into the community, but I appreciate that. And Mr. Levin, if
we could continue to keep an open dialog on what you're doing there, so that you
know, at strategic times anyone of these Council Members can move forward and
start better dialog with members of the legislature.
MR. LEVIN: The point that you're making is how valuable the input from the
Council can be at the legislature, and you're absolutely right. And I certainly
hope that we can work together and can spend as much time working with our Big
Island delegations as well as the other key legislators to accomplish some of these
goals and get across the finish line this year where we maybe haven't quite
succeeded in the prior years.
MS. LEE LOY: Thank you Chair, I yield.
CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Any other Council Members, comments, questions? If
not, you know, after hearing from Council Member Chung and Council Member
Lee Loy it seems that the Council will like to work in collaboration with the
Mayor's office to champion priorities at the legislature. So I know I talked to you
about this off line, Mr. Levin, but I would formally like to ask if you would come
before the GRED (Governmental Relations and Economic Development) on a
monthly basis to do a 10 -minute presentation. Just giving us an update on what
you're working on. That way we can be working together.
MR. LEVIN: Okay, I'll be very happy to do that, with the only exception being if
I have to be at the legislature on that particular day we might have to postpone,
but otherwise absolutely.
CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Absolutely, we will be flexible. Thank you. All in favor
to close file on Comm. 20?
Page 11
GREDC-1
Vote on Comm. 20
Filed
Comm. 21
Motion to Close File:
Recess:
Reconvene
January 8, 2019
The motion to close file on Comm. 20 was carried by the
following voice vote:
Ayes: Committee Members Chung, David, Eoff,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Lee Loy, Poindexter,
Richards, Villegas, and Chair Kierkiewicz — 9.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Motion carries. Mr. Clerk, if you would please read in
Communication 21.
REQUESTS THE MAYOR, MANAGING DIRECTOR, OR DESIGNEE TO
PROVIDE A BRIEFING REGARDING THE SPECIFIC UTILIZATION OF
STATE FUNDS RECEIVED BY THE COUNTY FOR LAVA EMERGENCY
RESPONSE EXPENSES, AND AN UPDATE ON THE COUNTY'S
REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDING
From Council Members, Ashley L. Kierkiewicz and Matt Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder,
dated December 7, 2018.
Ms. Lee Loy moved to close file on Comm. 21. Seconded
by Ms. Poindexter.
CHR KIERKIEWICZ: We are going to recess for about five minutes, so that we
can set up the presentation. And then we need to change out the tape for our
video archive. Thank you so much, we are in recess.
At 4:19 p.m., the Chair called for a recess.
The meeting reconvened at 4:26 p.m.
CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Good afternoon. The committee on Governmental
Relations and Economic Development is back in session. The time is 4:26. If
everyone could please get seated. We will proceed with a presentation from folks
who are members of our Puna recovery team, Director of Research and
Development Diane Ley, and Deputy Director Ron Whitmore. Thank you so
much for being here and taking the time. I know a lot of work has been
happening on top of your regular work, to support the community with this
recovery plan. And so I justI know that I really want to mahalo you for
everything that you've done, and I know what you'll continue to do, for Puna and
our island. So Diane.
Page 12
GREDC-1
January 8, 2019
(Note: At this time, Research and Development Director Diane Ley and
Deputy Director Ron Whitmore came forward to address the members of
the Committee.)
MS. LEY: Well thank you all very much we appreciate the Council attention and
the community very much, and this opportunity to provide an update to you all on
the Kilauea recovery efforts. But before I start I do want to, you know, I really
want to sincerely acknowledge our residence, our landowners, and businesses
who have gone through these challenging times with us of loss and change. It's
been a journey and we're not over it yet. But you know, we are resilient and we
will come out in a better place. I want to say that while government sometimes
seems sterile and uncaring, I want to say that some of us in County Government
and State Government have lost homes and special places as well.
But we also know, as some of the testifiers said, that those spaces are still there,
they will be what they are today and tomorrow they'll be new. They'll be
different. And so we look forward to that, we look forward to the current families
and our future families being able to enjoy our island. And I also want to say as
well, that it's not only about Puna but it's about this entire island. And when we
talk to the legislature, I think about it as not being just Puna or this island but the
State. We have to stand strong together.
Okay, with that, I want to take a minute to introduce some of the recovery team
members that are here today with us. Ron Whitmore, Deputy for Department of
Research and Development; Roy Takemoto from the Mayor's Office, Michael
Yee from Planning Department; Merrick Nishimoto from Public Works,
Talmadge Magno from Civil Defense. And also Ally Slous has come on board to
kind of wrangle us and keep us all in order and move us forward. And Bob Agres
is helping us with community outreach, and then Mayor Harry Kim. Thank you,
Mayor. And I think I got everybody. But there are a number of others that have
been behind the scenes and working hard both at the County level, State, and our
Federal partners so I do want to acknowledge them. And then we'll go ahead and
get started here.
(Note: At this time, Ms. Ley and Mr. Whitmore provided a PowerPoint
presentation to the members of the Committee. For viewing of the
presentation, see the DVD copy of the meeting proceedings on file in the
Clerk's Office. A copy of the PowerPoint presentation is made a part of
the record, see Comm. 21.1)
CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Director Ley. I'd like to open it up to
discussion among my Council Members. Any questions or comments? Council
Member Richards, you have the floor.
Page 13
GREDC-1
January 8, 2019
MR. RICHARDS: Apparently I pushed the button first. Thanks, Director. Could
you comment on the $4 million for economic recovery? Plans, thoughts on that,
expand on it please.
MS. LEY: For agriculture, the $4 million for agriculture? Yes, Hawaii
Department of Agriculture. The bill we submitted, there were two items that were
appropriated directly to departments. And one was Department of Health for their
existing programs, and this one for Department of Agriculture. The Department
of Agriculture's revolving loan fund is at a very low point. The department has
been requesting expansion of the loan program for a number of years.
Unfortunately the legislature is not taking action to increase the level of that fund.
And so we feel that is a prudent amount given the losses in agriculture.
There's been two voluntary surveys, one by Research and Development, but the
County we surveyed producers in July as well as other businesses. And we came
up with over 20 million in losses. At that point and time, more recently at the end
of August, the College of Tropical Ag and Human Resources came back with a
survey, I believe it was $27.1 million in losses. And that's just for agriculture. So
there are losses, there's need to be able to respond to that. The Small Business
Administration unfortunately does not give out loans to agriculture businesses, so
the two sources of government funding for loans is the State Department of
Agriculture, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture Farm Service Agency.
MR. RICHARDS: I fear we're going to—as you all know, you know, I've
worked together for years keeping these guys—the doors open, because they lost
crop. And it's going to take a year, two years to build back before they can start
the cash flow. I just fear that's not going to be enough to keep a lot of these guys
going. Yield at this point.
CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Council Member Richards. Council
Member Chung.
MR. CHUNG: Yeah. You know, I'd like to make some preferencing remarks. I
echo the sentiments of our Chairperson, really wanted to thank the two of you and
all the others who are involved in this endeavor. And I particularly want to thank
you for engaging the Council, and taking the time to meet with us. That's so
important, because we really want to present a united front in all of this. It's vital,
we can't be going all over the place. So having said that, I think one of the key
message that we've been getting from the legislature, and I think all of you have
been getting it over these last several months, is that—and correct me if I'm
wrong, okay, because you guys have been on the front lines, you know, they've
really been going out to the legislature, and spending a lot of time with our very
key, key members of both the House and the Senate.
Page 14
GREDC-1
January 8, 2019
And the word that we get is, there's still somewhat frustrated of waiting for
specific proposals. Not general amounts, you know, $10 million here for this and
whatever it is. They want to see things in the ground, whether it be paving, you
know, a road on 132 Highway, or something tangible that they can see that they
can affix a specific price tag too. Because the last thing they want to do is give
the County, yeah, carte blanche on money, because they don't know if it's going
to be used for whatever stated purposes there were. Might be used for overtime,
continue doing, you know, they want to see tangible results. And we still haven't
seen it here. I mean, I'm just saying that because that's what the County is going
to have to be prepared to present to the legislature, and they're convening in a
week.
MS. LEY: We appreciate those comments, and it's been a real challenge for the
County. We have not had financial resources to plan for recovery. As I
mentioned State and Counties have not had this level of disaster in many, many
decades. And so as we moved forward we've made do with the resources we had,
and those were in-house resources. And they're in addition to existing
responsibilities. And we're not complaining, but we do have a strategy, we have
a plan, and we're working forward, we do need the resources. And I think we
could pick and choose any one of these components, and do only one or two.
But this community suffered through, and this island has suffered through a major
disaster. It's not about, you know, just putting people back in houses, or putting
roads in. There is major disruption of business, there's major disruption of
families, and so we want to look at this very holistically. We also know that we
live on an active volcano. And as government stewards of public resources we
are required to be prudent and thoughtful about where we put our resources, so
that's what we're trying to do, we have a quick timeline for government. Believe
me this is quick to respond, but we do need resources. And so that's what we're
looking for is a comprehensive. We hope they'll be understanding about that.
MR. CHUNG: Well at the same time, you know, they're stewards too of the
money that they're going to be asked to give. And they'veI mean let's just put
ourselves in their shoes, right. The same thing that you said, is what their looking
out for too. You know, like for example if there were a game plan, you know, we
want to boom, open up Highway 132, maybe go all the way down to four corners
start working our way just, you know, gravel, yeah. And then start talking about
maybe viewing spots, because there was a gentleman here, you know, in the white
shirt and the white cap who was really thinking outside of the box how, you
know, those quarters could actually be used as a vital asset to create the
experience. I think that's what Ashley uses all the time. Creating the experience
for the tourist, and then that would alleviate the pressures off those neighborhoods
that are getting impacted like Leilani and those others, if we can get some place
that's just designated as the viewing site. I'm just saying, if there's a game plan.
Page 15
GREDC-1
January 8, 2019
But there's a lot of non-specific items. You know, Tim brought up the $4 million,
$5 million or whatever to the Department of Agriculture, and we talked about
this, right. That's really something that the Department of Agriculture is
supposed to be asking for, because they're going to be administering it, not us.
They administer the revolving fund, so I kind of find it offensive, not towards you
guys, that they would ask you guys to ask for that money. They should be doing
it themselves. Because that's part of our ask, really.
You know, what Sue and I talked about is, you know, we have a state of the art
composting and we did talk about this too. State of the art composting facility
that's coming online maybe within a year and a half. You know, if we could
somehow fast-track that thing, and in the short term grab some of the surplus that
they have on Oahu. Because this is real top grade compost, and send it over here
and help these guys out. There was another man who left earlier, he said it's
amazing what you can do with that lava, you know, you can crush it and augment
it with some of this real top grade compost. You know, that would again, help out
with the economic recovery.
We got to do whatever we can, and really—the psyche of the Puna residents today
was kind of gut wrenching, I was just—find myself getting smaller, and smaller
over here. You know, seeing people cry, and sharing their experiences, but you
know, we're really lucky we have Matt, Ashley, and Sue and everybody else
really putting their heads together. But Karen and I were on the radio, yeah, the
other day with Sherry Bracken. And we identified as the first thing they really got
to do is open at 132, yeah, because there's so much heartbreak related to it. I
don't know if that's going to be part of the ask though. I don't know if that's
something we can do, if we're just waiting or what, but I think there has to be
better messaging to the community as to what the holdup is. I know there is a real
good reason for it, but
MR. WHITMORE: But you've raised some great questions Aaron, and we talked
about this the other day too. I find it useful, big picture, to think about these three
phases, right. And there's a lot of confusion about when we say plan, you know,
which of those phases we're talking about. But you could think about also in
terms of the funding that has arrived and that we're asking for.
So the initial $12 million really was focused on that very first response phase.
Let's make sure people's immediate needs are met and people are safe, right.
Then that $10 million really was intended for this transition period between the
immediate event. And you know, the conclusion of a more robust long term plan
that clearly addresses some of the big questions that do need to be addressed
before you make some of the decisions about where you rebuild, where you
incentivize or disincentivize further settlement, et cetera.
Page 16
GREDC-1
January 8, 2019
And then there's the plan that is required to inform those decisions. And so that
$10 million provides the planning funds, and then the leg ask is designed really to
meet, really implement what comes out of that planning process. So what I like to
emphasize however, is that while all that is going on we're absolutely doing
everything we can to respond to and address the immediate needs. And that's
how we're trying to use that middle $10 million that the Governor's office has
provided, is to be as responsible as possible.
So to take the 132 for example, so as the Mayor said earlier decisions about
whether that road gets rebuilt long term are on hold as he explained. But in the
meantime we're working very actively with residents in the area, all the related
departments, landowners, PGV, to identify the best options for getting people
access to their isolated properties as quickly as possible. And then assuming if
there was cost associated with that and if the Mayor signs off on some proposals,
then we would use the available funds to move on that as quickly as possible.
That is not the kind of thing that we would wait. And to address your point we're
trying to do those concrete things that the legislature and other people are saying
"Why don't we see that in the package," is because we're trying to respond to
those in the nearer term then when these monies would be available in the
legislature July or later, right. And as we discussed the other day, big picture
items, where people resettle, where infrastructure is rebuilt, those require robust
planning process. So what the legislature has to address earmarks dollars to do
those big picture infrastructure projects. Build housing where it's needed,
permanent housing, that sort of thing.
MR. CHUNG: Right, and I understand that. And when many of us say that
plowing a hole through that former quarter of 132 should be the immediate
priority it doesn't mean you've got to do it like this. But at the very least, you
know, like the Mayor did today explain to the public why, and what we're waiting
for, and you know, it is a priority, but can't do it right now, hopefully we can.
But at least explain to the public why, and I'm not saying it has to be part of the
State ask. Because if not, we're going to be waiting until they make the
appropriation, so I'd like to kind of move on this quicker.
But what happened, somebody said, I don't know if it was Deanna or one of you
said, that out of the $12 million—that's the initial $12 million, right? There was
$4.8 left, was that correct? Did I hear that correct? So then after that another
$10 million came in, right? And I don't know what happened to that. If you guys
separated it out, or—but that would mean we have about $14.8 million left.
That's a pretty good chunk of money actually. And so the legislature is going to
ask us
MS. LEY: Excuse me, if I may. So the first $12 million that came in, that was
restricted to response, okay.
Page 17
GREDC-1
January 8, 2019
MR. CHUNG: Okay.
MS. LEY: So there's $4 million left in that. And then $10 the million, we just
recently received it. So we've been moving forward to work on expenditure of
those resources.
MR. CHUNG: Like for what, what kinds of things for example?
MR. WHITMORE: Can I apologize, it's my fault the numbers are reversed here.
But both sets of funds have been severely restricted on how we can use the
dollars, and so the language you see here which says $12 but it's really the $10
million can only be used for these things that are listed here.
MR. CHUNG: You mean the food, water?
MR. WHITMORE: Yes.
MR. CHUNG: That was the $10 million?
MR. WHITMORE: Yes.
MR. CHUNG: And how much of that $10 million did we use for these items?
MR. WHITMORE: I don't have the—Deanna do you have roughly a small
amount?
MR. CHUNG: And what happens if we don't use it, we have to return it?
MS. SAKO: So again, the food, water, temporary shelter that's part of the
$12 million. That's, you know, related to health and safety. And so that was the
$7.2, and so we still have $4.8. And as long we spend it on, you know, health and
safety type of things we're okay. And then the $10 million is related to the
recovery.
MR. CHUNG: And how much did we spend on that?
MS. SAKO: That just got appropriated, so we haven't actually spent any. But
we're in the process of encumbering for the grant matches, and those were the
things for recovery but we haven't spent any to date.
MR. CHUNG: Okay. Alright, well I'm sure my colleagues have more questions,
but you know, again, just know we want to work with you guys on this thing. But
at the same time I think you guys have to meet us halfway in terms of being able
to sell this product to the legislature, and they really want specific items. That's
all I can say.
Page 18
GREDC-1
January 8, 2019
MS. LEY: We can give you more detail on the $10 and the $12 million, so you
see what we're targeting for.
MR. CHUNG: Yeah, because they're going to ask you guys that same thing, too.
MS. LEY: And we do have projects identified for that.
MR. CHUNG: Like what?
MS. LEY: You have the slide on that one? Yeah, he's going to pull up the slide.
We've got additional slides beyond the ones that you provided. Oh, okay.
MR. CHUNG: You know why? Because we're going to need this information if
we're going to go and try to pitch this—
MR. WHITMORE: So, I think that two for health was pretty straight forward that
the detail was clear.
MR. CHUNG: Which one?
MR. WHITMORE: Health, is that level detail sufficient? We talked about the
Ag already, so this one obviously doesn't have tremendous detail, right. So where
the $61 million comes from is, you saw it in an earlier slide, $180, $190 for
FEMA public assistance. So the estimates that have gone into FEMA on the lost
infrastructure: the highways, the roads, the water systems, parks; totals in the
range of $240, $250 million. We know we need to contribute 25 percent of that
and match, that's where the $61 comes from.
We don't yet have a list of projects, because that is exactly what you need to
engage the community in to determine where you want infrastructure rebuilt.
And that will start first with understanding what really is the risk, where do we
want to put public resources at risk in the future, do we want to invest further
infrastructure in that area, or do we want to reinvest somewhere else where there's
less hazard risk. These big sorts of questions can't be made overnight, and can't
be made before the leg sessions starts. So that's the infrastructure.
MR. CHUNG: I mean, but is it something then that we have to ask them for
now?
MR. WHITMORE: Well, so what we'd like to do as Diane said, is expedite a
community planning process, so that we have answer to these questions by the
later part of this calendar year. This is a two-year appropriation by any old
budget, and so we'd like to have the appropriations in place. So that we don't
then have to --once we are clear about what our priorities are then have to go back
for a special session or what have you to get funding for what we then know our
Page 19
GREDC-1
January 8, 2019
specific list of projects, right. So again, we're trying to think ahead, and be
prepared so we have the resources we need when we're clear about what the
priorities are.
MR. CHUNG: So the game plan is to get the appropriation, but not necessarily to
get the monies released.
MR. WHITMORE: That's an excellent point. So you mentioned accountability,
we have it in the slide here, this whole package is designed around accountability.
We all know you hold the purse strings, you make the appropriation, right. It gets
released then by the Mayor. Same thing with the State funds, right. These funds,
the $61 million—the $55 would not be released until we've demonstrated that
we've done our due diligence to prioritize wise invents, and infrastructure on
housing that we know will meet the long term needs of the community.
MR. CHUNG: Maybe you could probably answer this, my last question. I'm so
sorry, I promise. How does the GET flexibility play into all of this, it's probably
vital as well, right, Deanna? Right, okay, it is going to be vital, okay. Thank you.
CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Council Member Chung. Council
Member Poindexter.
MS. POINDEXTER: Yeah, you know, I'm listening to all of this and then you're
explaining the detail on how you guys are going to play this out. Which is what I
think Aaron is saying, we don't see, I mean we see all the bullet point stuff and all
of that. And anytime I know that when I would write grants we'd ask for matrix,
right? Because the matrix could say like you said, we need to engage in the
community, so here's this millions of dollars by July 1, you know, meetings with
community, then community selects priority roads. You know what I mean about
the matrix? You're familiar with matrices right? So I would love to look at a
matrix, then it details it out on what you plan and how you plan to do it.
Because you're telling us how you're doing it, but we're not seeing it, you know.
I think that's what the legislators are saying also, correct me if I'm wrong
Chair Chung. God if I say Chair Chung, Chair Chung, Chair Chung, three times
really fast that's really hard. But I think that's what we're kind of looking for,
because sometimes you see just buckets of money but you don't see how it's
going to be implemented with a strategic plan, and you don't need a full strategic
plan all you need is the matrix chart.
MR. WHITMORE: So I'm learning a great dance while we go through this
conversation. Because some people we talk to say, "Hey TMI (Too Much
Information) don't give me all the details" you know, when we give them
60 pages explaining in detail all the stuff And then others, you know, you give
them the high level summary they're like give me more detail, right?
Page 20
GREDC-1
January 8, 2019
So we have the information, it's just a matter of tailoring it to the audience, right.
So we met with Mark Nakashima from the delegation last week, and he gave us a
great example of the specific worksheets that Finance Committee members are
going to be looking at when they're considering appropriations. Great, perfect,
now we know what level detail the decision makers need to understand the
package that we're representing. That was extremely helpful, right?
Same time we were preparing, you know, presentations like this one to dive into
the details, show people big picture, zoom in where they need it so that we can be
responsive to the range of questions that might come up. So you know, I feel like
I have a split personality sometimes. Having to talk big picture, but at the same
time get into every little nitty-gritty details. Again, we want to be partners with
you on this, so happy to answer any questions you have.
MS. POINDEXTER: That's great. Because the matrix is just a short quick
version or summary of all of that, and I think that's what the Finance, what
Mark—so I'm glad you guys are engaging it at that level as well. Thank you, I
yield.
CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Council Member Poindexter. Council
Member, Lee Loy.
MS. LEE LOY: Thank you, Chair. I'm going to start with somewhere Aaron
started, which is, you know, creating this united front. Which is why I really
appreciated those hashtags at the very end of our slide presentation, because it's
absolutely true. We will be better together to revitalize Puna. It's that simple. So
when it comes to messaging from us to the legislature, those types of talking
points are incredibly valuable. Even if we have the elevator speech, right,
because sometimes that's all the time we have with these legislators.
And I'm going to flip the script a little bit, because we can crunch numbers a little
later. But my thought process this year is, everybody's asking for money. And so
I'm taking up little bit of a different approach, because words on paper don't cost
anything. So when I walk it back to the $14.8 million dollars that the Governor
has already given under restrictive guidelines, why don't we go champion having
them create more flexibility in that language. Can we do something like that?
Okay, I'll take that one. I will take that one to both Houses and the Governor's
office.
MS. LEY: If I may, those resources were pulled from within the Administration,
and so I guess my suggestion might be a conversation with the Mayor and the
Governor first.
MS. LEE LOY: Okay, you guys can take that back. But do you understand my
strategies here?
Page 21
GREDC-1
January 8, 2019
MS. LEY: Yes, we understand.
MS. LEE LOY: Because everybody is going to be asking for monies, so I'd
rather try and wiggle loose what we already have appropriated and encumbered
onto us, and then say, "Hey with $14 million, I know I can pay a least five miles
of roadway," right? And I had a little birdie tell me how much it would cost to
pave a road, a one mile of road which is $5 million, right. So I mean, and even if
we just cut up, doesn't have to be a paved road, right? Five million is a topnotch
road. You know, a million dollars to just cut a road out of $14.8.
I just see so much other strategic moves we could make right now with some of
this information. So if we can continue to collaborate like that and maybe look at
it from different angles for stuff that we already have, that way the legislature
feels like they're getting something without giving up too much. And then they
too are being accountable to the public's money, just like we will be held
accountable to the public's money. Just putting that on the table for everybody.
The other one I wanted to talk about was the housing, the $55 million for housing.
So Ron if you could help me with that, because I am all for housing. I think
housing creates jobs, it creates homes, it just really creates a huge amount of
stability in people. And so for the $55 million that we're doing in the ask for the
housing, what are we getting? Is this infrastructure, how many lots, you know,
what's the capacity, how did we come up with $55 million, and what does that
translate? And back to what Mr. Chung was saying about some tangible asset that
we as policy makers and the legislature can say, "You see those 200 new houses?
That was $55 million worth of infrastructure." We all want to grab onto
something that goes vertical with this money, so help me with that. Thank you.
MR. WHITMORE: And Roy, I may ask you to speak to this a little bit. So the
$55 million—so remember when you helped convene that housing solution
taskforce right after the lava started flowing? So one of the subgroups was
long-term housing solutions, and it looked at various scenarios. We were a little
ahead of the game quite frankly at that point, but it was really useful work
because out of that came several scenarios for where we might relocate
communities that were devastated. And we even began to run numbers on some
of that.
So the $55 million is two of those scenarios, both based on priorities within the
Puna Community Development Plan. So one is Kea`au infill, and the other is
HPP (Hawaiian Paradise Park) infill. That's not to say that's the decision made
about the best way to provide housing to meet permanent needs, but it was
numbers that we had run based on GIS -based (Geographical Information System)
scenario planning, and so fairly concrete. You know, but a ballpark figure.
Remember the number of total housing units between those two?
Page 22
GREDC-1
January 8, 2019
(Note: At this time, Executive Assistant to the Mayor Roy Takemoto
came forward to address the members of the Committee.)
MR. TAKEMOTO: This is the dilemma between trying to drill down to detail
before you can get the big picture. So we try to go both ways, we try to figure out
the scenario to get some numbers and then just try to generalize it into principles
like infill, constancy with the Puna Community Development Plan. Those are the
big picture principles. So these two options that we kind of use as a basis to try
and come up with numbers represent one—another basic principle was to provide
a diversity of housing choices.
So one scenario is an urban choice option. Another scenario, the HPP, is a type of
rural choice option. So for Kea`au the concept was that government would invest
in infrastructure that would normally be funded by a master developer.
Particularly like wastewater, water wells. And with that investment we would
capture that value back from the master developer, in terms of land. So land cost
for the urban option would be zero. Approximate soft cost to design and do
appraisals, surveys, those kind of things is about $3.5 million. The infrastructure
that would be used to the value capture, about $31.5 million; site development,
about $1 million; housing units, about $5 million. And that represents only about
50 units, just to get started, just as a catalyst because this is part of a bigger master
plan development in Kea`au.
So these funds, say the $55 million, you know, how does it—normally people
have to pay that in terms of sales purchase, so the $55 million could be set up as a
revolving fund. Where a discounted sales proceeds at least could flow back and
we could build more units. So about $41 million for the Kea`au urban option, and
for the rural option, HPP, the idea there is to use what's already there like the two
20 -acre back to back parcels, that could be the basis for a town center
redevelopment. So we need to purchase one of the 20 -acre parcels, we estimate
about $700,000 soft cost to do basic infrastructure like running the waterline to
that town center from the main highway.
The cost for the infrastructure about $12.7 million. So we set up the land that
would be offered to a master developer and they take it from there. So the
number of units that could be developed on 20-40 acres, would be up to the
developer to figure out the rest of the cost from there. So total for the rural option
on that premises would be about $40 million, so that's where the $55 million
comes. Is that the kind of level detail you think the legislature want to hear?
MS. LEE LOY: Yes.
MR. TAKEMOTO: All of these would be confirmed through the planning
consultant that we're going to hire, who would do the feasibility analysis to verify
these concepts.
Page 23
GREDC-1
January 8, 2019
MS. LEE LOY: Thank you Roy, for that. Because I think every single one of us
can really champion from their comfortable spot, and I know myself I would be
incredible comfortable just drilling that in. And I can speak confidently to that.
But it's back to the same message. We're better together to help revitalize Puna.
And so I'm going to yield at this time. I just want to really lay on the table that
we're going to have to be very creative with our approach, which is why I think
we also need to strongly look at it's a budget cycle for them.
And there are other ways, other tools, just by policy writing that not going to cost
money. And to me that's the path of least resistance, especially for the rest of our
legislative delegation going to the legislature, right? It's politics, you know, and
they're going to have to champion something and if they could get a small wind
with just tweaking language that brings money or keeps that money here which
creates more flexibility, you know, I like that idea. But when it comes too really,
we need $55 million or $150 million what is it for, what does it translate into?
You know, they're going to have to start picking and choosing what's important.
So I'm going to yield right now, and Ron I'm feeling a little schizophrenic too,
myself right now, just because you know, we're going macro -micro in a split
second. So if you and I could sit down a little bit and go through this at that really
fine detail, I'd love to that because we've got a week. Thank you. I yield, Chair.
CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Council Member Richards.
MR. RICHARDS: Thank you, Chair. I don't want to belabor the point that the
other Council Members already put forth, Councilman Chung, Council
Woman Poindexter, and Council Woman Lee Loy. Roy to your question,
absolutely that's the kind of detail we need. And Ron, I appreciate what you're
saying, that you're working on a narrative. That's fine, but the narrative isn't
going to do the talk story. And so what we're asking as a Council is to give us
the, I think you were sayingVal's terminology, the matrix.
You have a spreadsheet you came up with. The $250 million infrastructure need
that we have to pay 25 percent. So we need those lists. We need to understand
what's going forward so we educate ourselves on what the plan is. And with that
plan we're going to have special areas of interest. You've heard housing, there's
going to someone zeroing in on that infrastructure. Someone else is going to be
zeroing in on that. And not because we have to detail, it's just because our
inherent interests are a little bit different. But if we have enough information so
we talk story and can present our needs, and it's a sell job. We have to let people
understand that we understand what their needs are.
And I got the big picture, I know what you're saying. But we need to understand
the details, because in that $250 million need of infrastructure how are we going
to prioritize that? And it's all important, the question is what's most important,
how are we going to start stacking that up? So as we go forward we need that list
Page 24
GREDC-1
January 8, 2019
of details for us, so we can better promote the county's needs so we end up
getting that. And I agree with Sue, it's kind of in, out, in, out; we're looking at
the bigger picture and we've got to get the details on there. Without
understanding both, I don't think we're going to go anywhere. So again, not to
belabor the point, but that is the kind of details we need as fast as possible even if
it's not 100 percent accurate. So we get that general consensus, and are able to
better speak to the needs with authority not with generalities, okay. I yield.
CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Council Member Richards. You know, I just
want to say that Sue and I have met with Director Ley, and Ron and others over
the last few weeks to kind of prepare for this presentation. And I'm glad that
Council Member Poindexter and my colleagues have brought up the need for a
list of priorities. One hundred fifty five million is a lot of money to be asking of
the legislature, so I'm just wondering, if we don't get the $100 million, is there
some scenario planning happening in the background that says these are the
utmost priorities?
And the other thing, you know, I can't recall if it's Ron or Roy that mentioned
this, but somebody mentioned big picture. Are we in unison in terms of what the
big picture vision is to revitalize, recover, and rebuild Puna? What exactly does
that look like? I can't say for certain, I mean I think we all come from different
viewpoints of what we want the Puna community to look like. And so I put that
out to you, you've been doing a lot of outreach into the community. You know,
Bob Agres was here, is here, maybe he can speak on that, but I think we need to
understand what the big picture is. Because I feel that would help to drive what
the priorities are ultimately.
MS. LEY: So Bob has been reaching out to the community, met with over
200 students in the last few weeks and over 300 residents. We've been engaging
with the Puna Community Development Plan Action Committee, they are active
and meeting on a regular basis. Ron's pulled up couple of slides here, so we'll
just kind of maybe run through these really quickly, some of things we're hearing.
Would you like to come share quickly? And then we'll talk about the broader
strategies.
MR. WHITMORE: Quickly while Bob's coming up, in terms of big picture like
vision at this point, it's generalities. But it's a slide I had on a bit earlier. It's,
you know, families are stable again, everybody has permanent housing. The
communities of Puna have the—to support that housing, you know, the
infrastructure where they needed roads, wastewater systems, parks and
recreational facilities. The economy has not just rebounded but is revitalized and
stronger than it was before, and that's certainly holds true for the entire island,
right.
Page 25
GREDC- I
January 8, 2019
So the vision for the island restoring Puna in general terms is pretty clear, but to
get to the more detailed version, details on that vision is exactly, why one of the
first things we did when resources did become available is to engage Bob to begin
talking with people in the community, in their homes, about their experience on
the way to getting to what they see for the future. And so Bob is going to share a
bit about some of what they've been doing, and the types of things they've been
hearing.
(Note: At this time, Manager for Disaster Recovery Community
Engagement Robert Agres came forward to address the members of the
Committee.)
MR. AGRES: Aloha. Maybe if I could speak to the process and where we're at.
So you heard Diane share what we've been doing in the last month. Where we
are now is we're compiling and analyzing all that information, like literally
there's like the students gave us this much of their input of what they're
experiencing right now, what they're hoping for the future. And we're hearing
that from a range of people and businesses, and farmers and the like.
So what we're going to do is compile, analyze, look at the information, look at the
kinds of details that you've already heard that the county's been talking about and
see how that comes together. And then in early February we'll be going back out
again into the community to share back what people have said, but also to inform
those perspectives with information, with data and some of the kinds of strategies
that all of you have been sharing. And then get more of their input and ask more
detailed information.
This is all part of that four -step process that you saw for the recovery planning
with hope that we actually have details of an action framework by this fall. So
this is being done with community, in partnership with community. So it's both
listening and getting input, but it also is raising awareness and education also, so
that the County can better understand what the people are experiencing. But that
the community also understands the kinds of resources and opportunities, that's
always challenges that the County has in addressing some of those issues. So
that's what the process looks like, and you saw that more detailed thing that you
need a magnifying lens to read, which is what the process is about.
One of the things that I do want to share, and why stories are so important. So as
an example at the individual level there's already been a lot of effort in terms of
meeting the unmet needs of families and individuals. And so FEMA and all the
other kinds of benefits and assistance has been hugely helpful to many families.
But what we're all also hearing is that many families try to resolve things for
themselves, so they try self -resolve.
Page 26
GREDC-1
January 8, 2019
Some are only now finally getting back to their homes and seeing what actually
happened to their homes and farms. Some are only now understanding what the
eruption and the gasses did to their homes and the like. So what's happening is
these kinds of needs are actually surfacing now that we are not aware of.
So how we actually go about supporting families and how we orchestrate the
resources to meet their needs, is very different from what we thought eight
months ago. And it's very different from what FEMA would normally experience
in disasters that are unlike what Hawaii Island is experiencing. So those kinds of
stories is really important.
Another example would be with the farms. What we recently were hearing, so as
Diane has indicated surveys have already been done. But what's surfacing is this
idea that many farms and the industry maybe to some degree was beginning to hit
its stride in many respects. So we're trying to like understand that more deeply
like is there data that actually substantiates that, because if that is the case then the
baseline from which we work is a little bit different than what we had originally
assumed.
The other which keeps coming up, and you have all mentioned that, is the lava
viewing, the visitors, and the like. So without question across the board,
including the young people, are saying we need our visitors back. We need to
bring them back, because our businesses are hurting, and that's how we get to
revitalize the economy. At the very same time what people are saying is we need
visitors back, but in a way that's pono to this place. So as part of the recovery
process we're asking people what does that actually mean, what does it mean for
visitors to be pono in this place, Puna? What does it mean for residents to be
pono themselves, and how can residents help visitors be pono as they come and
see what has happened in this region? And then how does that become a win,
win, win?
So Frecia Cevallos is an example, who's a tourism specialist in R&D. She has
been looking at this kind of information, hearing the kind of feedback that's been
going on, and has been in conversation with HTA (Hawai`i Tourism Authority),
which is interested in socially responsible tourism. And is excited about Hawaii
County Pono Pledge Campaign. But this provides an opportunity—is the
County's with the support from HTA and other resources to actually work with
the community, and try to understand—and deep in that idea of the Pono Pledge.
It's not just a pledge that you go online, it's how do we actually live and share
pono? And then bring that to life, and then actually have a really strong, healthy
community-based tourism kind of industry. So all of these kinds of things are
being informed by what people are sharing, and that's the process we hope to
playout in the next several months.
MR. WHITMORE: Thank you, Bob. Just one quick thing to emphasize, and I
think you heard it in much of what Bob shared, is that the information is not being
Page 27
GREDC-1
January 8, 2019
just to inform the long-term planning. And the most important arrows on this
slide are the ones that go up. As we're hearing the stories, as we're hearing
priorities, we're doing everything we can to take immediate action to address, you
know, the recovery issues. So it's not only zoom in, zoom out, it's also now and
later at the same time, right. So we're trying to be as responsible as possible.
CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Ron, I want to go back to that slide where there were
three boxes, and one of the boxes talked about access. You know, that was
something that we've gotten a lot email testimony about it, something that I hear
nearly every day, nearly every single person that testified here today talked about
wanting to get back to their homes and farms. Yes, I just saw the first part,
limited access to homes.
But I wonder, you know, there were discussion earlier about pots of money
outside of $500,000 that's been awarded from the Federal Government. Mix of
like EDA (Emergency Disaster Assistance) grants and money to support the risk
assessment, but my question is, Diane you mentioned additional money. There's
that $150,000 from PGV, what other money is out there, and you know, Ron
maybe you can speak to this, how are we going to pay for the temporary access
over 132? Because I know we're going through some scenario planning right
now, but I'm just trying to understand what pot of money we would be pulling
from in order to get access back for residents and farmers? Temporary access.
MR. WHITMORE: I don't have an immediate answer to that question, not sure if
Deanna would or not. But she's more familiar with the constraints on each of the
pots, and I'm not familiar where the funds for like 137 came from. But part of
what we're trying to do is identify what the options are so we know—and then get
to that cost figure. But we'll pursue that question at the same time as where the
funds would come from.
CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Diane, the PGV money?
MS. LEY: I've not been in discussion about those funds. But I think that when
we discussed earlier conversations we were having with communities, and their
various pockets of communities. I think some of the testifiers you've heard, some
are residents in the Noni Farms (Road), there is some further down closer to four
corners half way down, all the way down. And there's different needs and
different interests, some people just want to get back to their place, some people
want to have easier access instead of going through another subdivision in a
roundabout way. Some people don't want people on their road, because it used to
be a quiet road and now it's no longer. There's more people on it.
So I think what we've done is the County stepped forward and we created a
process for if individuals want to come in for an individual driveway application
to cut across a new driveway, or cross the lava to get to their driveway. They can
Page 28
GREDC-1
January 8, 2019
come in with that process and it goes through Civil Defense, to Public Works and
Planning for appropriate processing. If there's multiple property owners that want
to share a temporary access, that's again, they all combined together and agree
that they would work together, they would share cost or somebody would cover
the cost. And they would all agree to liability. And again, that's an application
process through the County, so we established that and we put that out there to the
community.
We do have a new list server that we're emailing out to groups of people. Ron
has met several times, Public Works has been having multiple meetings and
addressing access issues. So that's how we're approaching it, it's not so much
putting County or State dollars into these accesses. These are self -resolving
efforts. They're going currently, because again, as the Mayor indicated from past
history of Pu`u `O`o and Kupaianaha, we have learned that we've gone back out
and restored roadway or even a temporary roadway and it's been covered before.
So in working with HVO the Mayor determined the policy would be to wait till
six months, so that's the beginning of April. So we're very cognizant of that date.
But you know, then from there for the reassessments would be done, and I believe
Public Works has been doing some initial assessments again, in conjunction with
HVO on Highway 132. But no decisions have been made.
CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, one more question then I'm going to open it
up for more discussion from other Council Members. You mentioned
accountability being something that's very important to this team, and I just
wonder the kind of standard we're holding ourselves to. I think about a
grant-in-aid application that nonprofits have to go to get grant money from the
County and State and how that is a very rigorous application process where they
have to identify where each dollar is going to be spent and what the measurable
impact would be to community. And I wonder, are we holding ourselves to a
similar standard of accountability for the legislature? I mean they want details of
how the money is going to be spent. So I just want assurance from you, and I
really would like a further breakdown similar to what Roy presented for all of
these different pots of money. That would be helpful in our championing these
priorities to the legislature.
MR. TAKEMOTO: I'm not sure about the standards, but as far as the procedure
that is why we were advocating that it go through the Governor's office. But not
the Governor's office as it is now, but the Governor's office as set up as a State
Disaster Recovery Coordinator Organization System. That is kind of like based
on a FEMA model and that it wouldn't specific to this disaster, it would be
something that could be stood up for any future disaster at the State level for any
County. And at the County level we would set up something comparable,
whether it be a redevelopment agency or working within our existing
departmental organizations.
Page 29
GREDC-1
January 8, 2019
But one part of the accountability is that type of organization that checks how the
money is going to be used, and it's a check and balance system. So the State
would check how the County is spending the money. So that would be the
general process that we would kind of propose to answer the accountability
question, which becomes important because we don't have the detail. So we're
asking for trust that we'll get to the detail, but this is the procedure that you can
control how we spend the money when we have the details ready.
CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Okay. Thank you for that clarification.
MR. WHITMORE: The other simple way to think about it is, this is a
$155 million appropriation and that none of it will be allocated immediately to the
County. You know, $11 million, whether you like it or not, actually would go to
the State, and then the other $144 million would be held by the Governor's office
via the SDRC (State Disaster Recovery Coordinator) and allocated or allotted a
need as clearly demonstrated at the County level.
CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Any other Council Members have questions
or comments? Council Member Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I'm still learning, I'm still getting used to
the process that we're talking about. I am a small business and a tradesmen, so
when I want to fix something I fix it. And I was told this will be frustrating for
me. And it is. I'm just going to think out loud, okay. We have close to I believe
was it about $14-$15 million right now, and it is now technically 2019. We are
waiting until April to start doing projects, because that is when our lava
emergency ends if I'm correct. And I could be wrong about things but I'm just
kind of summing up, as someone taught me.
I believe that we can tie many things back to continuing relief necessary to protect
the health, safety, and welfare of this place and area residents to basically any
project if you creatively word something the right way. And so I don't see why
we can't do things, and just start doing them. Whether it's a swimming pool,
whether it's a park, whether it's a road, just to have something moving, which I
think it's shared across the board. Or maybe I just speak for myself, I don't
know. But being that we're human and we're creative and if we word things
correctly we can spend that money now, which may not be the best move but I
feel that we need to start doing something. It is 2019, it is not flowing anymore, it
is still hot, and people are ready for some change. And I might just be a little bit
angry, but I'm there.
MS. LEY: You're comments are well taken. You know, I think we have made
some progress, I think we do have a slide on some of thoseI'm sorry what? Oh,
he crashed the PowerPoint.
Page 30
GREDC-1
January 8, 2019
So we can toot the County's horn a little bit, because again, this is not something
we do as our regular jobs. We were all in shock, you know, beginning of May
and we moved through this. But you know, we've been able to take the
barricades down like it or not, but we've taken the barricades down for the
communities at the Y, and we've taken down for Leilani. People who were able
to move back in have, into Leilani, and that's a substantial move forward.
We've been able to establish a temporary road at 137 to get people back into the
Pohoiki area, where the flows have not covered it. We've cleaned that road and
allowed them access. People are down and enjoying the beach park. And I
understand it's not a luxury beach park, it doesn't have, you know, water, it
doesn't have formal restrooms but we lost that water system. And we explored
options and there are no real strong options at this point. So temporarily it's
opened. We advise people to take plenty of water, and use the facility before they
go down preferably. Oh, you've got it back up, alright. I'm doing pretty good.
So we've got a process to allow people to get back to their farms and homes, you
know, going through the application process. And we're working on restoring the
Pahoa Park and the pool. So those are things they're not waiting for, but again,
the resources that the County had at the beginning of the fiscal year were not
sufficient.
MR. WHITMORE: Sorry, we have a number of slides to show the immediate
action we're taking, if you want us to go through them. Just to stress, we're doing
everything we can with the resources available to take immediate action.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I know, I'm sorry you are one of my first
few meetings that I had to discuss exactly what we're talking about right now.
And so I really appreciate what you guys have done, what you're doing and the
direction now we're moving.
MS. LEY: So could I just address also that the $10 million that was recently
appropriated by the Governor, you know, he went and scoured for that. And so
we've identified resources that would support housing, Section 8 vouchers.
We've identified other housing needs. The County needs to move forward with
the temporary housing site, planning for that process. We want to move forward.
Urgently needed. Everybody says you need a plan, we need a recovery plan. So
to bring all these components together we want to move forward with that.
MR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I as well as many other members, I think we
just want to sit down with you and kind of figure out what's going on and where
we're at. Instead of doing this like this. Thank you, I yield.
Page 31
GREDC-1
January 8, 2019
CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Any other discussion?
MR. CHUNG: Yeah, real briefly.
CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Promise?
MR. CHUNG: I promise.
CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Okay, Council Member Chung.
MR. CHUNG: First of all, you know, I'm glad that Diane you reminded all of us
the fact that both you, Ron and others are pulling double, maybe triple duty on
this thing that's not even your primary responsibilities. We really do appreciate
all of the work that you guys are putting in. I mean, make no mistake about it,
alright.
Briefly about the $4.8 million that's left, or maybe even $14 million depending
how you look at it, you know. Ms. Lee Loy brought up a real good point, maybe
some things are right before your eyes and you don't even think about it. But
we're asking for GET flexibility, well Administration is right now asking for GET
flexibility. And that goes through a process with the legislature, but this one came
from the Governor. Now I don't know you know, you're saying that there was
some conditions attached. And I don't know where this money ultimately came
from, so you know, maybe there are some constraints there. But couldn't the
Mayor just call up the Governor and say, "Hey remember I endorsed you in the
election, can't you just change those conditions a bit so we could use it now?"
Because we don't have a lava flow right now, then you'd have that pot of money
to do certain things immediately.
Because I kind of share, in fact I share exactly the sentiments of Matt. You guys
are presenting a long term plan, and that gives us time to think about things, right.
But you know, when you have emergencies or things that you want to do fast,
you've got to think fast too. And there are some matters that need to be addressed
as quickly as possible, and that's what I'm kind of looking at. Not so much the
long term thing, you know, like the $55 million for housing. You know, Roy
came up with some great details, but that really presupposes whether that's the
direction that we all want to take, you know, to begin with. And we don't know
that yet, but I do know there's some things that need to be addressed immediately,
and that's what I'm looking at.
So I'm going to close by saying this, when we go to the legislature, that's what
I'm going to be looking at. And it's not going to be anywhere close to
$155 million, okay. It's going to be how do we address or get monies from them
that can address the immediate needs of that community. And it's probably going
to be—if we are able to secure those funds it's probably going to be along those
Page 32
GREDC-1 January 8, 2019
lines. And I'm not saying that it excludes the longer term things. You guys do
your own thing on that. But I think what I'm going to try and do is, maybe get
anywhere from about $10, $15, even $20 million. If we get that amount for the
immediate needs, I think that's a win. Because the last thing I want to do is set
the legislature up for failure too, because those guys have expressed a real
willingness to help us. They've actually been chomping at the bit, correct? Yeah,
they want to help. So I would hate for us to ask for $155 million and then they
come up with $20 million then everybody looks at them and says, "See, they
didn't want to help the Big Island again." Because those guys really do want to
help, and we're going to take advantage of that attitude right now. That's all I
have to say, thank you.
CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Council Member Chung. Any closing
statements?
MS. LEY: No, we appreciate the input, and the suggestions. I've been making
notes, so I'll be doing some follow-up with the Mayor as well as our team. And
we can go back and reflect. We'll also be doing some follow-up with some of
you individually to drill down on what you see as immediate priorities. I will just
share that when we went to the legislature in the summer, we were told to identify
immediate needs and we did that. We were told to prioritize our needs, and we
did that. This is a big impact to this community, and we need to continue to move
forward. And we've been working on that again, trying to address both things
that we have the tools and the funds to take action on, and will continue to do that
both intermediate and long term.
CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you again for your hard work, we really appreciate
it.
MS. LEY: Thank you. We look forward to working with you.
CHR KIERKIEWICZ: Okay. Seeing no other discussion, there is a motion on
the floor to close file Communication 21, all in favor please say "aye."
Vote on Comm. 21: The motion to close file on Comm. 21 was carried by the
Filed following voice vote:
Ayes: Committee Members Chung, David, Eoff,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Lee Loy, Poindexter,
Richards, Villegas, and Chair Kierkiewicz — 9.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
Page 33
GREDC-1 January 8, 2019
ORDER OF The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business,
RESOLUTIONS: Order of Resolutions.
BILLS FOR
ORDINANCES:
ADJOURN-
'kA'PNTT-
Approved:
(There were none.)
The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of
business, Bills for Ordinances.
(There were none.)
There being no further business, at 5:50 p.m., Ms. Lee Loy moved to adjourn
the meeting. Seconded by Mr. Richards and carried by the following voice vote:
Ayes: Committee Members Chung, David, Eoff,
Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Lee Loy, Poindexter,
Richards, Villegas, and Chair Kierkiewicz — 9.
Noes: None.
Absent: None.
Excused: None.
CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Meeting is adjourned at 5:50.
Ms. Ashley Kierkiewicz, Chair
Governmental Relations and Economic
Development Committee
AK/rk
2-/q 2,0 [ 01
(Date)
Page 34