Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN AWEEMC 2019/09/17 2018-2020Committee on Agriculture, Water, Energy, and Environmental Management 9th Session Hawaii County Building 74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Highway, Building A Kailua-Kona, Hawaii September 17, 2019 CALL TO The regular meeting of the Committee on Agriculture, Water, Energy, ORDER: and Environmental Management was called to order at 3:10 p.m., in the Council Chambers, Kailua-Kona, by Mr. Herbert M. "Tim" Richards, III, Chair. ROLL CALL: Present: Mr. Herbert M. "Tim" Richards, III, Chair Mr. Matt Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Vice Chair Ms. Maile Medeiros David, Member Ms. Karen Eoff, Member Ms. Ashley L. Kierkiewicz, Member Ms. Susan L. K. Lee Loy, Member Ms. Valerie T. Poindexter, Member Ms. Rebecca Villegas, Member Absent & Excused: Mr. Aaron S. Y. Chung, Member STATEMENTS FRC)N4 TNF PUBLIC ON AGENDA ITEMS: The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, Statements from the Public on Agenda Items. The following individuals registered to speak and came forward when called by the Chair: Jon Olson: James Weatherford: Cory Harden: Bill Bugbee: Georjean Adams: Res. 301-19 (Comm. 462), in support. Res. 301-19 (Comm. 462), comment. Res. 301-19 (Comm. 462), comment. Res. 301-19 (Comm. 462), comment. Res. 301-19 (Comm. 462), comment. COMMUNI- The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, CATIONS: Communications. (There were none.) AWEEMC-9 September 17, 2019 CHR. RICHARDS: At this point, let the records reflect that I'm going to be turning the chairing of the meeting over to my Vice Chair, Councilman Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. Relinquish Chair: At this time, The Chair relinquished the chair to Vice Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. ORDER OF The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, RESOLUTIONS: Order of Resolutions. ACTING CHR KANEALII-KLEINFELDER: Clerk, can you please read in Resolution 301-19? Res. 301-19: URGES THE DIRECTORS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT AND THE DEPARTMENT OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT TO COLLABORATE AND DEVELOP A PLAN FOR A WASTE STREAM REDUCTION TECHNOLOGY FOR RENEWABLE AND ALTERNATIVE ENERGY GENERATION FOR THE COUNTY OF HAWAII Seeks to address an increasing supply of solid waste through a waste stream reduction technology mechanism that would conserve County funds, reduce the use of fossil fuels, and improve environmental conditions on Hawaii Island. Reference: Comm. 462 Intr. by: Mr. Richards Motion to Approve: Mr. Richards moved to recommend adoption of Res. 301-19. Second by Ms. Eof£ ACTING CHR KANEALII-KLEINFELDER: Mr. Richards, maybe you can guide us into discussion for that? MR. RICHARDS: Thank you so much, Chair. First of all, I want to thank the committee and I do want to thank the public because we had quite a bit of stir and conversation and input. And with that, let me start by saying this, this concept has come out of the idea of environmental management has to deal with our waste product, and we've already heard some testifiers on that. The primary goal of this is to try and figure out what we're going to do with our County a hundred years from now, as far as our waste management stream. One comment we heard today, it's a waste reduction, absolutely. We have to work on figuring out how to cut down on the amount of rubbish we're producing. Then, we also have to figure out what we're going to do with the rubbish that we are going to produce. Georjean, I appreciate your comments because, yes, we're going to always produce rubbish and we're always going to need energy. The question is, how can we minimize that going forward? And so, I got to thinking about this and what we're going to do about this. Our current plan for waste management is something that we've kind of evolved into. And when we had a small population Page 2 AWEEMC-9 September 17, 2019 we just threw everything away, because we didn't have that much of an impact on us, as we have doubled and then tripled our population. And our schedule to go to Planning says 250,000 to 300,000 in the next probably 50 to 75 years. This is going to be a growing problem for us. This resolution is about helping empower Departments of Environmental Management and Research and Development to start with a clean slate, a clean paper to come up with a way and a plan and recommendations on what we can do as a County to reduce our waste stream. That is the primary goal. Now, if we talk about that and the energy component of that comment that was made today by Mr. Bugbee concerning the methane coming out. I was going to bring up Mr. Saito, can you come up and just comment a little bit about our waste stream? Identify yourself for the record, and talk about the methane coming out of our solid waste right now, please? (Note: At this time, Deputy Research and Development Director Riley Saito came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. SAITO: Riley Saito, Deputy Director of Research and Development. Regarding the methane—well, let's go back to the landfill itself. It was designed and engineered as an EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) compliant landfill. So, the cells are lined as the rubbish goes in the landfill. There are systems of pipes that are installed to capture the methane as the biomass breaks down underground. And so, when this was fully implemented about 2015, about twenty years after the landfill was initiated, so back in 2015, there was some gas coming out but not consistent. So there was thought on how to use that energy, but because of the inconsistency, it wasn't viable, it wasn't firm, wasn't reliable. But at this point in time, the biomass is returning to its natural state by breaking down and it's producing 270 standard cubic feet of gas per minute. And to be compliant and get rid of the methane and reduce the greenhouse gas contribution by 28 times, the gas is flared. So, we've done several checks and there's reporting, it's all public record on the output of that gas and it's been consistent. A year ago, it was a 163 standard cubic feet, now it's up to 270 cubic feet and it will more than likely will increase as the breakdown accelerates. So, that energy, that burning occurs 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. That equivalent amount of MBTU's (one thousand British thermal units) and you take that in the different conversion tables, it's equivalent to about a thousand kilograms of hydrogen a day. Now, based on the bus scenario, that could operate about 30 buses, 360 miles per day, so as a transportation fuel this is one thing to be considered. The other things, and this is really something that with Environmental Management and myself and other experts are looking at, is what's unique about this island and how we can take advantage of this opportunity is through the systems that have been set up over the past decades. Page 3 AWEEMC-9 September 17, 2019 The West Hawaii landfill is the single location for the waste to go now. Hilo is pretty much shutting down. So, you have 22 transfer stations for people to drop off their rubbish and then we have this network of trucks that transport it to one location. So, what that resolves is that you have a steady feed -stock of rubbish that can help produce energy. So, there's also thoughts of possibly putting a sorting facility so we sort all the biowaste separate from the non-biowaste. That would reduce the input into the landfill approximately 45 percent. And that biowaste, you would then take it and combine it with the compost and combine it with wastewater sewer sludge and look at either anaerobic digestion, and possible gasification. Gasification is the last choice, but definitely with the greenwaste and the biowaste, we can use an anaerobic digestive process to produce methane and have that as a fuel to produce electricity to produce hydrogen. MR. RICHARDS: Ok, thank you, Mr. Saito. My point I'm bringing up, Mr. Saito, he's Deputy Director of Research and Development, but he's also the Energy Coordinator for the County. It's part of the conversation, as I said, this concept, this conversation came out of the need to reduce our waste stream. Reduction first, then, the next step is how we're going to manage it as was pointed out by Mr. Saito. About half of the solid waste we have going into our waste stream is biological and we can do something with that. Right now, somewhere between, I'm told, 300 to 400 tons of solid waste per day is going into our landfills. So, if we could take 50 percent out of that, we're going to cut that in half obviously. So, instead of 400 tons, say we're down to 200 tons, at the 400 tons per day I am told we have about 100 years on this landfill before it's full. If we cut it in half that will double the life but that's not the idea. The idea is to cut down the waste stream as a whole because our population is going to increase, and thereby the solid waste problem is going to be increasing as well. So, my intention, as I said before, it's to put Environmental Management and have them come up with brainstorming ideas what might be done. Mr. Olson from Pahoa pointed out that Environmental Management Commission and I think also in this chambers talked about that as well. This is what we have these commissions for, for input, for using their expertise to put in on this. We are not validating; we are not starting any project here other than the fact of starting the conversation to make a plan going forward. And my expectations, probably going to be six months to a year before we have a final outcome of this resolution and then report back to Council so we can start making decisions about how we're going to go forward. A comment about the recycling, and we have Mr. George I'm going to say this wrong—Hayducsko in the Hilo Chambers. Hayducsko, can you come up to the table please and just make a few comments about our recycling at this point? (Note: At this time, Recycling Coordinator George Hayducsko came forward to address the members of the Committee.) Page 4 AWEEMC-9 September 17, 2019 MR. HAYDUCSKO: We have our Solid Waste Chief here too, Greg Goodale. Aloha. MR. RICHARDS: Ok, thanks gentlemen, aloha. Actually, you heard what I just said. Mr. Goodale, if you could just make a few comments about solid waste and then, you George, if you could make a few comments on our recycling right now. (Note: At this time, Solid Waste Division Chief Gregory Goodale came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. GOODALL Yeah, Greg Goodale, Solid Waste Division Chief. So, yeah, when the conversation about this resolution came in front of us we looked at this kind of in the same regard with what's been ongoing within our division, as far as our Solid Waste Management Plan. So, the County has actually been currently working on an update to its Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan, which actually George has been the chairperson for. So I think one of the things we wanted to bring up is that, you know, the group that was put together, the Solid Waste Advisory Committee, that was tasked with reviewing our previous Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan to look at what the county is currently doing in terms of solid waste management, and looking at, you know, various strategies for what we want to be able to do into the future. You know, this plan is something that we're actually obligated to do by the State of Hawaii every ten years. So, this update kind of is timely in terms of the resolution being put forward because what it does is basically tasks the county with going through and look at the strategies that are being put forward in terms of solid waste management. Even though it's only being done on a ten-year basis, again, it's something that from time to time we do within our division to evaluate the effectiveness of the programs that we're putting in together. And, as it also pertains to, you know, the economics of what the selected technology represents, obviously, we only have a limited amount of money to do the work that we need to do, so we want to make sure that for the money we had spent, that it's being spent effective. So, like I said, we were just finishing up. As a matter of fact, we just submitted the draft of the Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan to the State of Hawaii for their review. Our plan is to take that plan out to the public, you know, once we get some feedback from the State. But actually, I'd like George to maybe touch on that since he was the one who facilitated that working group, the Solid Waste Advisory Committee. CHR. RICHARDS: Thank you. George, go ahead. MR. HAYDUCSKO: Yeah, thank you, Chair and Committee. You've heard a number of people speak about the Solid Waste Advisory Committee and this was seven dedicated members from the community, which the Mayor appointed to this Page 5 AWEEMC-9 September 17, 2019 Committee to work on our challenges within the solid waste field. They spent many hours working on this, working together, and they came up with over 80 recommendations and one of them are relevant to discussion today. And you heard this term discussed a number of times with other individuals and that is the life cycle analysis. So, when we came up with the ideas, when we look at our recommendations, our goals, that we just don't look at landfill diversion, how much can we keep out of the landfill? But, also, what kind of an impact does that have on life cycle? So, looking at the environmental impact, the fuel used, the toxins being generated. So, to me, this works really well with what's being discussed today. If we were to look at anything what the Council—what the Solid Waste Advisory Committee is recommending that we look at, the total picture, the life cycle analysis. And we welcome working with other departments such as Research and Development and looking at our challenges and trying to solve our long-term solid waste issues. So, again, I think it's as good as, you know, on the committee that recycling has been, again, we found a lot of problems with the Asian markets, where we used to be taking our materials that has had a great impact on us here in the County of Hawaii. So, again, working together on any other alternatives, we look forward to that. MR. RICHARDS: Ok, thank you on that. So, to kind of bring that around in where we're going with this. The intention of this is waste management. The energy component was something that was been articulated already by Mr. Saito, it's a byproduct of the waste management and how we're going to do that. It's not a conversation about an incinerator, but it's actually dealing with something that is coming from our landfill anyway. And maybe a better way to capture some of that energy and use it towards electrification of our buses, maybe a way of using a product that otherwise would have an environmental impact of what's been described 28 to 30 times worse than the carbon dioxide. So, again, this is a more global thought process as far as what are we going to do for today, yeah, but really for ten years, 20 years, 50 years from now, and it's about crafting that going forward. So, with that, I'm going to open it up or actually I'm going to turn it back to the Chair, and say I'm going to yield at this point and I'm going to ask for the support of my fellow Council Members. ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Richards. Thank you, gentlemen. Council Person Lee Loy? MS. LEE LOY: Yeah. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Mr. Richards, for introducing this. Like the rest of you, I did get those emails about the incinerator and I never read the resolution that this was what it was about. It really was about charging the Department of Environmental Management and R&D (Research and Development) to work together. I'm going to be supporting this just for the plain and simple fact what I heard—why is his name slipping—Greg. What Greg said Page 6 AWEEMC-9 September 17, 2019 just a few minutes ago was this was timely, this resolution actually was timely for some of the work that they are doing with their Solid Waste Integrated Management Plan and some of the other things that Riley folks are doing. And if this helps spark the work, that needs to happen to tell the departments keep pushing, keep doing the work, that Council supports you. That's what I stand ready to do. Because this by far, and I've said it many times, this work managing our waste is not sexy work. It's not, and nobody wants to tackle it because it's not. But we need to take care of it somehow. So with that, Mr. Richards, I'll be supporting this resolution with a favorable recommendation to Council. Like I said, Mr. Goodale said its time may dovetail nicely into all of the work that R&D and Environmental Management is doing at this time. Thank you, Chair. I yield. ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you. Any other discussion? Ms. Villegas. MS. VILLEGAS: Aloha Riley, thank you for being here. I do have a couple of questions. My email and phone have been blowing up with very concerned constituents. Unfortunately many of them are very confused by the resolution. And there is some PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder) issues about belief systems that this would open a window and create a pathway to a bill accepting an incinerator or transitioning to incineration for dealing with our waste. So needless to say, incineration is not a welcomed option. I'm grateful that I haven't heard anything from you in that capacity. Very creative with other options for utilizing byproducts of our current waste stream. I guess my question, I guess number one is I'm wondering if Bill Kucharski is here? He's on vacation, okay. Then I have a couple other questions, because if you guys are already working on this and Environmental Management is working on this, and these guys are working on this, and it's going to the state level, I'm asking is there a need for a resolution in general? Is it necessary to help support you, or inspire or start the departments to do that? In my experience this far, just this year, that seems to be the direction that you guys are going in. And to quote Bill Kucharski, he'll do anything. And he would love to do the more environmentally friendly options if we can provide him with the budget to pay for it. So I guess, you know Riley, I'll ask you. Is it necessary to support you in that capacity? MR. SAITO: Well it doesn't in writing. You know, the Council is supporting the work of Administration, and that we are on the same page and headed in the same direction. MS. VILLEGAS: Okay, thank you, that's helpful. But I guess for me after looking at the resolution and the input that I've gotten from so many constituents is I just see an opportunity for potentially some tweaking or changing of terminology so there's a little more clarification and less confusion and concerns from constituents that this is an opening of Pandora's box towards a direction that they're not open to. And I see where you're coming from, Mr. Richards, and I Page 7 AWEEMC-9 September 17, 2019 appreciate that direction, that opportunity, and for the communication to express that this body is working in collaboration with Administration and all the different efforts being made. I just have concerns about the timing. Is the resolution actually necessary? If it is, then working on some of the terminology and making sure that it is a little more clear so constituents aren't losing their minds. With that, I yield. MR. RICHARDS: Chair, can I answer that? ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: We'll go to Ms. Poindexter, and then we'll come back to you. Thank you, Council Person Villegas. Council Member Poindexter. MS. POINDEXTER: Thank you, Chair. And I agree on the same lines as what Council Member Villegas is saying, because I too in fact I spent a couple of hours this morning talking to one constituent about it. And trying to say, hey it's not about this but then they say it's not clear, so I agree. It's not written clearly. I would support withdrawing this and come back with something that's more clear if we could work withI mean, we had a testifier who sits on the committee and I think testified to good points. Things that you have already discussed and recommendations, and things like that should be part of that resolution, I feel. With the amount of emails and phone calls that I got, the resolution going through this way is not a good thing. If everyone was confused about it, why would we put something forward that is still confusing instead of having—you know, we had to come here and explain it first. We should have a little bit more detail in there that brings them some calm. You know, they're feeling, you know, I heard is this a backdoor deal, or what are we trying to do. You know, things like that come up, and I know, I see your faces, definitely not. But the perception of it being unclear is where I see the problem. So I cannot support it as it is written, but I'd support something if you would consider redoing it. I would consider supporting it at that point when it's clear. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Council Person Poindexter. Anyone else? MR. RICHARDS: Can I address Ms. Villegas question? ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Sorry, Ashley. No that's okay, he had his five minutes, I've learned that lesson already. And now, Ms. Kierkiewicz. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you, Chair. You know, first I just want to commend Councilman Richards for being so proactive. Last night I went through a couple of year's worth of Environmental Commission meeting minutes, and I noticed that at the start of the term you went and met with Commission, made Page 8 AWEEMC-9 September 17, 2019 introductions, and there's been a line item on the agenda this entire year about your continued dialog and worked with them. And so I appreciate how close touch you've been with the Commission. And I want to mahalo Jon Olson who is from District 4 and also serves on that commission and his perspectives and wanting to support in this. So thank you for being proactive. I'm wondering if George or Greg could share, you've mentioned 80 recommendations coming from the Solid Waste Advisory Committee. And this resolution being very timely, and so I'm wondering if you can share if it's proprietary information. If one of the recommendations is along the lines of what this resolution is stating. Because I have a copy of the current integrated Solid Waste Management Plan before me, and it does talk about wanting to prioritize these types of programs and technologies. MR. HAYDUCSKO: I just stated, you know, there's over 80 recommendations. Out of those 80 recommendations, there were six of the recommendations that was considered high priority. And this does sort of fit under that one, where it indicates that if we are going to set those goals that we look at the life cycle analysis of those technologies, those options. And it does list those landfill diversions, waste recovery goals; again, looks at the life cycle analysis. So it does fit into the Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan. Now the plan right now is that the Department of Health for review. Our strategy was once it comes back from that review then we would be making changes to the plan, and then putting it out for public review and for preparing for the public hearings. And that same timeframe the document would be out for everybody to take a look at. That document will come to the Council with a presentation after the public hearing, so you would get the whole package at that time with all the comments. So that's where we're headed at this point. MR. GOODALL Greg Goodale, Solid Waste Division Chief. I just wanted to point out, as George said, that traditional path that follows is that the plan will come before Council for their review which is typically, you know, depending upon any, you know, necessary changes, etcetera, would be accepted through resolutions. So as I said earlier, you know, this is timely and that we are a long way down the path toward that goal of getting acceptance of the plan. But, you know, the plan only gets acceptance through your folk's review. So, you know, we do believe that with all these things that are being discussed, these types of things will come into that discussion in terms of, you know, what are the appropriate technologies? Have we evaluated, you know, if the county—and I can tell you from our own perspective, the county is not in that process right now. But if the county was to want to take on that conversation, did we go through all that evaluation of the life cycle cost, environmental cost, all those things need to part of that discussion? Because we want to make sure that we are taking all those things into consideration before we go into any type of technology, I mean it doesn't matter which direction you might turn. There's a lot of them out there, Page 9 AWEEMC-9 September 17, 2019 but we want to make sure that we are all informed of what the ramifications of going in whatever direction. So I guess like just reiterate, you know, we believe that these things are going to be coming before the Council in the form of this Integrated Solid Waste Management Plan here, you know, during the course of this coming winter. And you folks all get a chance to review that plan, and comment and have input into it. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: So Greg, just to clarify; and Riley, I want to get your thoughts on this as well, but Greg just to clarify, this winter, so like November, December and prior to it going before Council, it's going to be vetted by the Commission and then the public. And does the plan change at all based on public comment? MR. GOODALL So we plan to have our public meetings in December, and so just sometime right after that we'd expect it to be coming in front of Council, so probably right around the New Year timeframe. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: And then where does the Commission factor in, because it's different from the SWAC (Solid Waste Advisory Committee), the body that was appointed to contribute to the document. MR. GOODALL The SWAC would be involved in those meetings. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Right. Environmental Management Commission, though. MR. GOODALL Oh, Environmental Management Commission would also get to review the plan. So typically the process, when a resolution is submitted it would go before the Environmental Management Committee and then it would go to the Commission after that for their review. That's the process. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Yes, I totally get the process. Just trying to figure out where the public fits in, and if they want to make adjustments to the plan if there is the potential for that by any of the parties. MR. GOODALL Yeah, so that would happen, like I said, during those public meetings, that folks can give their input and review. That would be the process that would happen, prior to it coming to County Council. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Okay. Riley, your thoughts on my original question about the 80 recommendations that was put forward by the SWAC, and if one of them beyond one of the six high priorities that George is referring to discusses waste reduction technology. MR. SAITO: I'm not familiar. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: You're not familiar, okay. Page 10 AWEEMC-9 September 17, 2019 MR. SAITO: No, sorry. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Okay. I mean I fully support what you're trying to do Council Member Richards. I think that you're leaping on a conversation that we had here in Kona earlier, about capturing the potential for nothing. And recognizing that we as Council have the authority to really urge, and put pressure on the Administration to break down those government silos, and work together and get the ball rolling on these very pressing issues. So I don't know if you'd be open to some minor tweaks to the resolution, based on the conversation that we've had here today. But I think, you know, because Riley is at R&D (Research and Development) and he also has an energy hat on, and we have support from DEM (Department of Environmental Management), you know, like I'm even comfortable with what they stated on the record before us as to what they see as the intent going forward. But I want to mahalo you for your efforts in being proactive. And right, for the record we're not talking about an incinerator here, we're talking about capturing methane that's being produced in our landfills right now, and leveraging that for power. MR. SAITO: We are currently flaring the methane and complying with EPA. So we are incinerating compliant to EPA right now. What we want to do is capture that energy, and become a source of energy production. That can be used in an diversified manner either in electricity generations to replace diesel generators that we roll around or you could take that methane and you could just keep it as methane purified and replace all the propane that we import, which is fossil fuel based; or operate long haul vehicles with zero emissions. So, you know, immediately the tradition is waste to energy. You think you're firing the rubbish and to be honest I really oppose the previous waste to energy programs too. That's why I'm kind of laughing about it, because it's something I was totally against back then. But this seems like a good way to move forward, in a different way. Because it's not depended on firm and safe generation of electricity that the utility is required to perform. And so it can produce end result like the methane hydrogen on as needed bases and take the biomass and that anaerobically ferments on an as needed bases. And over time it just keeps producing a new source of energy. And so we don't have to import as much. MR. GOODALE: So just to kind of dovetail on what was just saidagain, Greg Goodale. The county, as was said earlier, does flare the methane coming out of the Pu`uanahulu landfill, the West Hawaii Sanitary Landfill. Right now there isn't a volume of landfill gas that would allow for any sort of energy recovery type system. We are in the process of putting out a request to have a consultant assist the county with evaluating where and when we would arrive at that point in terms of how many cubic feet per minute of landfill gas we would need to achieve various outcomes. You know, there's a lot of different methods for generating energy from landfill gas. And so we want to make sure we're Page 11 AWEEMC-9 September 17, 2019 looking at a number of different ways of utilizing that gas, but we have to be at these various points before that becomes viable. And right now, you know, the system is only there to accomplish compliance with federal and state regulations. So what we want to make sure is that as we arrive at a point where it becomes fuel that can be utilized for energy production, we want to be able to know, you know, what are those parameters that make this a viable source of fuel. So we are in the process right now of looking at those things, so you know, we expect to have a consultant on board to basically give the County those parameters. You know, where we would have a commercially viable source of fuel. But first and foremost, we look at the system that we have out there as a form of environmental compliance. Anything we would to get out of it in addition to that would be a benefit when we arrive at that point. MS. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you for all that information, Greg. Please keep us posted on developments. Chair, I'm going to yield at this time. Thank you. ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Council Person, Kierkiewicz. Okay, Councilman Richards. MR. RICHARDS: Thank you, Chair. Appreciate some of the comments that have been made. This resolution came out of a conversation I had with Director Kucharski. And we talked about, I think, Ms. Kierkiewicz just articulated the breaking down the siloes that we get into. And to answer the question, "Is this needed?" Yes. And the reason it's needed is, as I was talking to Bill Kucharski, and he's not here, so I'm not going to put words in his mouth. But I will reiterate what he did say to me. We asked about a plan going forward, and he said, "I'd love to do that. Help me and direct me and we'll get it done." And so that's essentially where it came from. The energy side, that kind of sprung out of a conversation, I think Matt, you're a part of that conversation coming forward, because we have the waste stream. Oh, yeah and by the way, it's generating methane anyway. And so that's where the energy side came from. And so rather than just focusing on the waste stream and the solid waste, bring in R&D to look at the other technologies and what we can do about this. There's other things, and I wasn't going to mention them, but I'll just touch on them briefly. Plastics, we don't recycle plastics, but there's some good work being done that we can use plastics in our roads that we may actually able to use the plastics in that for constructing our roads. Those are the kinds of things that I'm looking between R&D and Solid Waste and see where there's the synergy that I think we can go forward. Now Val, I do appreciate your comments about a little bit of confusion. I think that's been cleared up through these conversations. I have no idea where this Page 12 AWEEMC-9 September 17, 2019 incinerator idea came from because I never said it, and it's not in the resolution. And I think we've addressed that. I can tweak it a little bit. I'd like to continue to put it forward because I don't want things to keep getting delayed. I can put it forward and I can tweak it a little bit. And as far as if you have some suggestions or tweaks, I'd like to hear them, Chair. If people have some suggestions right now? And I don't want to spend tens of minutes, just a few minutes if there's concern, but I'd like to keep putting this forward. And I can introduce it with an amendment at Council. So if anybody has any tweaks, I'm kind of curious. ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Mr. Richards. Council Person, Poindexter. MS. POINDEXTER: Yeah, and I have some written suggestions from a lot of people. And I think we heard some during testimony, and instead of spending all the time here. I think you know what it is already, because you have answered some of the questions. A lot of my constituents you wrote to and you were very clear. And they were just hoping that some of that would have been in the resolution so that they could have understood that. You know, with the methane, just different things in there to make it clear. Because what you had to do, is you had to write them and explain. And so all they're saying is, you know, this is about exploring how we can capture the methane that comes out of the landfill. And now they understand and make energy from it. This is not about incineration because you said that, and they would hope that that would have been in there, and that goal is to either eliminate or reduce greenhouse gas emissions. You know, those kind of things in the resolution to make it clear. All a lot of them said, "Well we got an email from Council Member Richards that explained it." Oh I just know, I'm just saying I don't know if they have something to say. I can yield at this time because I thought I saw you motion, I thought— So anyway, the resolution is not clear. If it was clear, we wouldn't have gotten all of those—everybody wouldn't have been bombarded. All I'm asking is that we make it a little more clear where people reading it would understand and that you're working with, you know, Environmental Management. Or whatever it is. Environmental Management, the committee that was working on it, some of their, you know, or even referencing that. I could go on and on. I can go start but if we're going to do this right now? So Tim, you know how to put it together, because you gave a good email to all the constituents that calmed them down, and they didn't fill this place today. Thank you. MR. RICHARDS: I've got to respond to that one, Chair. ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Yes. Page 13 AWEEMC-9 September 17, 2019 MR. RICHARDS: There's danger in that. Let me explain that. The reason I kept it a little bit vague is because I have no preconceived idea of what Environmental Management and Research and Development are going to come up with. And I don't want to channel that. And I hear what you're saying. I can say what I don't want, but I don't want to tell them what I do want, because I don't know if there's technologies—well, let me rephrase that. I know there's technologies out there that I don't know. And I don't want to channel towards something. I want to be sure, like I said, clean slate. So what I will do is, is I will work on that and keep it wide open so they're not channeled, but I'll be a little bit clearer while leaving it vague. MS. POINDEXTER: That is perfect, and you know, if you could say something about no incineration. That would be a big thing. That would take away the PTSD. Okay, thank you. MR. RICHARDS: Okay, I think we're both yielding. ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Council Person Villegas. MS. VILLEGAS: Thank you, Mr. Richards. I appreciate your flexibility with all of this and your understanding. You like to make clear as mud. I know that my constituents would feel, I think, much less anxious if it could be included in the terminology not to include an incinerator. And perhaps there's technical terms that Riley could help us with, that maybe someday there will be a form of incineration that doesn't create the challenges and the byproducts now. I can imagine that for a long time in the future, and not being as well versed at writing documents and legal resolutions as you are. But perhaps if there's an opportunity to include for example kind of things that include the methane conversion. Because my brain immediately went to waste stream reduction technology alternative energy. And immediately went to incineration. So I thank you for this. Thanks for the opportunity to provide a little bit of input. Is mercury a retrograde? No, I don't think so. I'm in retrograde. So with that I yield. MS. POINDEXTER: Chair, I just forgot to thank—can I just say something? You know, I just want to thank you because it kind of sparked the conversation, and that was waking people up. And you know, how much emails and telephone calls, and all. Everybody's ready to work on this. So thank you for making it uncomfortable because then it woke everybody up willing to work on it. So thank you for that. Sometimes we need to be uncomfortable to have change, yeah? So thank you. Aloha. MR. RICHARDS: So you're asking me to be vague going forward? ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Council Member Eof£ Page 14 AWEEMC-9 September 17, 2019 MS. EOFF: Thank you. And before I really read the reso, I started getting the emails. So I was concerned. So I read the resolution, and then I was looking at it like where did this come from. I didn't understand the reaction, but then the newspaper article helped clear it up a lot. And I appreciated what you said in there, because you are wanting to keep it open. Because we don't know all what might be discovered and I really trust Riley and the team that's now heard what we've said. And what I did, and I think some of the other ones of us did too. Is I replied to as many of the emails as I could. I attached the resolution. I said, please read it, and I also attached the newspaper article. And I said, "I think this will help clarify, this is just a means of opening up a good discussion, and we don't know what will transpire from it, but hopefully good things." So yeah, this is the process that we signed up for, and this is how we work it out. So I believe this conversation today also helps put statements on the record from everybody. So, yeah, thank you, Mr. Chair. ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you, Council Person, Eof£ Ms. David. MS. DAVID: Thank you, Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder. I too, did do exactly that, responded to a lot. And sending the newspaper article. And basically the responses that I got was, "Thank you very much." And so, that showed me that sometimes, given social media, that word incineration just went out like wildfire and so I remember going, "What's on our agenda?" Are we having now a proposal for an incinerator or something? And so, and that was, you know, basically was transpired between then and now. And Solid Waste Chief Goodale, thank you very much, and I think in this process—thank you for explaining that process on the reviews and the public input, because I think that's the important step that the community needs to be informed about. And they will know more from this process on what's being proposed and what's being considered. And so I think we were just getting like Council Member Poindexter referred to as some PTSD. I think it even affected some of us too. So, because we were around when that whole exercise on the incineration came about. I was not in this role, but I do remember the whole discussion and the uproar of that. So, I don't believe we will even consider going there again, but we certainly are open to any new technology and stuff And I really thank the departments and especially Mr. Kucharski who's not here, because he has a very good sense in all of this, and I think he will take us down a great path on resolving this huge issue that we face. So, thank you very much everybody. And Mr. Richards, thank you. So make it clear next time. Page 15 AWEEMC-9 September 17, 2019 MR. RICHARDS: Okay, but then we wouldn't have this much fun. So, Chair I'm going to ask the question here. MS. DAVID: And by the way, I yield. ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Oh, thank you. Thank you, Council Member David. Mr. Richards. MR. RICHARDS: So I am willing the tweak this a little bit. I still want to put this forward so it keeps rolling, but I will tweak it. And how do we delay it forward? Not to the next meeting, but I want to say the first week in November. How do I do that? Or do I ask him or do I ask you? ACTING CHR KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: I'd prefer if you asked the question. Mr. Clerk. MR. RICHARDS: I want to move it out of Committee, but I will tweak it. MR. HENRICKS: You want to move it out of Committee, but for a Council Meeting that's not the next Council Meeting? MR. RICHARDS: Correct. MR. HENRICKS: That's the first? MS. POINDEXTER: Can someone postpone it at the Council Meeting? MR. HENRICKS: I think the expectation would be that it would be taken up, though. So, Mr. Richards if the intent is move it forward but not hear it until a later time, it's probably better to do that than to put it on the Council Agenda with the previous position that it would not be heard. I suppose you could withdraw your motion. I'm hesitant here to set precedence by making motions about moving it forward to a certain Council Meeting. That's my hesitancy. I see what you're saying makes sense I understand. And I think it could be done in a motion to make it clear, that you know, moving this forward to a specific Council Meeting. But it's not vague, it's specific. MS. POINDEXTER: Chair, is it asking maybe for it to be waived through Committee and go to Council for that? MR. HENRICKS: We're in Committee now. MS. POINDEXTER: Yeah, but what I'm saying is that if he withdraws this and puts something new, could he bring it forward and then ask for it to be waived to Council? We asked a lot of stuff to be waived to Council. Page 16 AWEEMC-9 September 17, 2019 MR. HENRICKS: I understand, Ms. Poindexter. Basically, you're going to write a new resolution? MR. RICHARDS: Not really. MR. HENRICKS: No that's her suggestion, is to withdraw this one essentially from consideration with a new resolution. He doesn't seem favorable to that. MR. RICHARDS: No, we don't need to create more paperwork. MS. POINDEXTER: No, the reason why I'm saying that, Mr. Richards, is because if you're looking at it for a Council Meeting, then I see that being the only vehicle to do it, is withdrawing this; doing a brand new resolution. Because if you don't withdraw this, you may have to keep it in Committee. Or withdraw it; put a new resolution forward and ask the Committee. You would have to ask Council Chair if he could waive it to Council based on our discussion here. I don't know. MR. HENRICKS: No, that makes sense too, but perhaps the simplest route is, if you are looking at a meeting in November? MR. RICHARDS: I tell you what we're going to do, we're just going to keep processing it through and just stick to the schedule right now. Alright? MR. HENRICKS: Or you could have it postponed and keep it in Committee and work on it, which is what Committee's for. And then have it in the Council Meeting that you're anticipating anyway. I mean, you kind of have the same timeframe. You'd have the opportunity for people to look at your amendments and maybe if there's further adjustments that can be made during the meeting, or you could rework them again and move it forward at that time. MR. RICHARDS: Okay, Clerk. So what is the least amount of paperwork? Postpone it in Committee? MR. HENRICKS: Just, I think, everything I'm hearing right now is, a little more work to be done and that's what Committee is for, so perhaps a motion to postpone seems in order to me. MR. RICHARDS: Okay, that's what we'll do, because in the efforts of reducing paperwork and the government, we'll postpone it. So, move to postpone. Motion to Postpone: Mr. Richards moved to postpone Res. 301-19 to October 15, 2019. Seconded by Kierkiewicz. Page 17 AWEEMC-9 September 17,2019 ACTING CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: Thank you very much. Wonderful discussion. Is there any discussion on the postponement? Okay. Vote on Motion to: The motion to postpone Res. 301-19 to October 15, 2019 Postpone: was carried by the following voice vote: (Approved) Ayes: Committee Members David, Eoff, Kierkiewicz, Lee Loy, Richards, Poindexter, Villegas, and Acting Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder— 8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Chung— 1. Excused: None. ACTING CHR. KANEALI`I-KLEINFELDER: May I please have a motion to adjourn? ADJOURN- There being no further business, at 4:22 p.m., Ms. Poindexter moved to MENT: adjourn the meeting. Seconded by Mr. Richards and carried by the following voice vote: Ayes: Committee Members David, Eoff, Kierkiewicz, Lee Loy, Richards, Poindexter, Villegas, and Acting Chair Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder— 8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Chung— 1. Excused: None. Approved: November 7 2019 Mr. Herbert M. "Tim" ''chards, III, Chair (Date) Agriculture, Water, E ergy and Environmental Management Committee HR/rk/dt Page 18