HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-07-20 Cost of Government Commission MinutesCOST OF GOVERNMENT COMMISSION
County of Hawaii
MINUTES
July 20, 2006 — 10:00 a.m.
Department of Liquor Control — Conference Room
101 Aupuni Street, Suite 230
Hilo, Hawaii 96720
Commission members Myles Y. Miyasato, Chair
present: Wayne T. Joseph, Vice Chair
Marilyn L. Nicholson, Commissioner
Patricia Provalenko, Commissioner
Melvyn K. Sakaguchi, Commissioner
Barbara R. Stremski, Commissioner
Also present: Stanley Nakasone, Division Head (Highway Maintenance Division)
Brian Kajikawa, Division Head (Building Division)
Katherine A. Garson, Deputy Corporation Counsel
Mary E. Crosson, Secretary
1. CALL TO ORDER
The Chair called the meeting to order at 10:03 a.m.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM JULY 6, 2006 MEETING
Motion and Vote: Ms. Nicholson moved to approve the minutes of July 6, 2006. Ms.
Stremski seconded the motion, and all members except for Mr. Joseph voted aye. Mr. Joseph
abstained, as he was not present at the meeting on July 6, 2006.
3. STATEMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC
No members of the public were present.
4. APPROVAL OF ADDENDUM AND /OR SUPPLEMENTAL AGENDA
There was no addendum or supplemental agenda.
5. PRESENTATION AND QUESTION /ANSWER SESSION BY THE
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS, HIGHWAY MAINTENANCE DIVISION
Stanley Nakasone, Division Head for the Highway Maintenance Division of the
Department of Public Works introduced himself. He stated that his answers to the COGC's letter
were incorporated in Jiro Sumada's response on behalf of the Department of Public Works.
Mr. Nakasone said he has worked for the County of Hawaii for 35 years and that his title
is now Superintendent of Highways. He said the County has about 1,000 miles of roads to
maintain, with his Division having about 180 employees and 30 temporary positions. Their
budget is about $11 million per year, not including $2.5 million for resurfacing roads annually.
The Chair asked Mr. Nakasone how many men it takes, per mile, to maintain the roads.
Mr. Nakasone explained that when he became superintendent, around 1995, there was no
standard of performance, so he did not know what he could expect of employees. He visited the
different counties and learned that none of them did. As a result, he worked on developing his
Division's own standard of performance, and it amounts to five miles per employee, both sides
of the road, and includes the maintenance and grass cutting work.
The Highway Division has programs, including paving, resurfacing, and shoulder
maintenance programs. These programs do not necessarily start and end. The grass cutting has a
cycle and is done by the employees of that district. They start at one end and finish at the other.
They do the same with herbiciding, patching, and shouldering. There is only one County paver,
so the paving is scheduled.
The Chair said that the work priority then, to clarify, was on damaged areas or areas
needing improvement, rather than on a cyclical basis. Mr. Nakasone said that in addition to the
regular work, they also receive work orders and requests and have emergencies, which interrupt
the regular schedule. Sometimes a grass cutter may start his area but get called to work
elsewhere on an emergency. By the time he returns to his area, he may need to figure out
whether to start over or continue where he left off.
The Chair said that he went to yesterday's County Council meeting and noted that many
issues were hitting the media, particularly on the subject of splitting the island into east and west.
He asked Mr. Nakasone whether he felt it would be good to have one superintendent in charge of
East Hawaii and another in charge of West Hawaii, or whether they would have a harder time
functioning. Mr. Nakasone said that when there is top- heaviness, there is confusion. In his
opinion, the Department is not big enough to have two sections. Though they could use
assistance, the County is one entity and should not be separated into east and west. Doing so
would make people territorial. Employees could be working for different supervisors, and
production could be affected. He does not believe they are ready for this.
Mr. Joseph asked whether the Highway Division was fully staffed at 180 employees, and
Mr. Nakasone said they were fully staffed for what they are currently assigned to do, but if the
County has to take on the "roads in limbo," they will need to increase staff. He explained that
the roads in limbo are roads which neither the State nor County claim. These roads are in bad
shape, and taking them over will require more equipment, material, and employees. He said
more employees are always needed, but you need to be realistic and do the best you can with
what you have. If you always think you need more employees, then you stop thinking about how
to better yourself. So he does not worry about needing more employees. Rather, he looks at
what he has and thinks about how they could do better. If a grass cutter has a performance
standard of cutting so many miles of grass, he will see if that can be increased.
2
Mr. Joseph asked whether all 180 positions were filled or if there were vacancies. Mr.
Nakasone said that they do have vacancies, but by the end of the year they should be able to fill
them. They also anticipate about three retirements at the end of the year.
Mr. Sakaguchi asked whether the Highway Division contracts with private contractors or
vendors to do some of the work, or whether he has the authority to do so. He mentioned as an
example that in Honolulu, the government was contracting with private companies to take care
of the brush and grass cutting. Mr. Nakasone said he has the authority to request this, but has not
done so. He stated he believes his Division is doing a good job and that their laborers are not
paid very high, which saves on costs. The workers are required to cut at least five to six miles
per day, both sides. He said that to be honest, he had not thought about contracting out and
believes they are doing an okay job. He said he feels this because when he first became
superintendent, it would take them eight to ten weeks to complete a district. Their goal is now
four to five weeks, and they are about there.
Mr. Sakaguchi asked whether a grass cutter who lives in Hilo has to travel to Ka'u to cut
grass, and Mr. Nakasone explained that each district has its own crew. Certain specialized
employees may need to travel to complete a project, but each district has its own crew sufficient
to do the regular maintenance. There is a baseyard in each district.
Mr. Sakaguchi asked why both the State and County have highway maintenance sections
and whether just one organization could maintain the highways. Mr. Nakasone said that in his
opinion, he believes there is a lot of redundancy of work in having both. As an example, both
the State and County have baseyards in Waimea, which sit next to each other. The baseyards in
Hamakua and Ka`u also are close to each other. About four years ago, this issue came up in the
legislature. He went to the legislature and suggested that the Big Island be the first to try having
the State merge into the County. (He said he did not want the County to merge into the State
because of difficulties in getting approval from Oahu for things that need to be done on the Big
Island.) However, in his opinion this issue should be addressed in the future because of the
redundancy of work. He explained that if the County should take over, they would need to learn
about federal guidelines and standards so that they could request federal assistance if a road is in
the "T" program. He said that the federal standards are much higher than County and State
requirements for the maintenance of roads. If the County should take over the roads, they would
need to learn these federal procedures, and he would like to see that.
Mr. Sakaguchi said the public always wonders why both the State and County maintain
roads. Mr. Nakasone said that in his opinion, the counties should take over the maintenance of
roads, and the Big Island is a prime place to start. He believes it would save money.
Mr. Sakaguchi asked whether Mr. Nakasone had recently been to any conference or
workshop related to his work. Mr. Nakasone said that about six years ago, when he was new at
the job, he visited the other counties to compare things. The idea came to him that it would be
good to have a superintendents conference, where all the State and County superintendents could
meet. After discussing this with his various counterparts, they did have a superintendents -
overseers conference. The idea was to make it a working conference where they shared ideas
and thoughts on how to make things better. This conference is now held once a year.
3
Mr. Sakaguchi asked whether Mr. Nakasone had ever attended a conference out of the
State. Mr. Nakasone said he has gone to California, Arizona, Utah, and Las Vegas. He said that
when he goes on vacation, he visits highway maintenance agencies there.
Mr. Sakaguchi commented that the travel was at Mr. Nakasone's own expense, then, and
done on his vacation time. He explained that the COGC wondered why the County does not
invest more money in staff development and giving employees the chance to check out other
states and bring back ideas. Mr. Nakasone said that he did go to Arizona and Las Vegas on
business and that he went to FEMA training in Maryland. He agreed that training is needed, but
a problem is that there has to be a report system. If he sends employees to Oahu or Arizona, for
example, when they return they have to prepare a written report of what they learned. He then
makes sure that it is incorporated into their work. Otherwise, it was just a trip. They would need
to go with purpose and to see what could be gained.
Ms. Nicholson said that some of the responses the COGC received indicated that it might
be good to consider getting a contractor to do island -wide pothole patching. She asked Mr.
Nakasone whether he agreed with this, or felt his own people were the best to handle this. Mr.
Nakasone explained that they recently ordered equipment, called "co- planing." In the past when
they patched holes, they just plopped the asphalt in and the cars would run over it, and it was not
a good system. So equipment was purchased for each district, and it is hoped this procedure will
be an improvement. It is their responsibility to try different things. He said there is nothing
wrong with contracting out, but if it is the County's job to repair potholes, they should make the
effort to do so first.
Ms. Nicholson asked whether or not the COGC should put forth, then, the contracting out
as a recommendation on his behalf. Mr. Nakasone stated that he feels they can do better and
should first try to make it more efficient and effective.
Ms. Nicholson asked Mr. Nakasone how he felt about going to a ten -hour work day, four
days per week. He responded that he approached the union about doing this eight years ago. He
wanted to do it on a trial basis. The idea was acceptable to the unions, but there was a problem
involving holidays which fell on a Monday or a Friday. They could not come to an
understanding on this. He said some employees would have to work Monday through Thursday,
and the others Tuesday through Friday. If a holiday fell on a Friday, what would happen to the
employees who worked Monday through Thursday —how would they receive the holiday? They
never did resolve the issue. However, the idea was well accepted by the unions, and he feels
they should look into this again. He believes the positives would be more than the negatives.
Ms. Nicholson asked whether the crews would be adequate to cover the County's needs
in an emergency if they went to that schedule, since they are also divided into districts. Mr.
Nakasone said that whenever there is an emergency, they normally bring out everyone who will
be needed in order to cope. He still feels they would benefit by going to the four -day work
week. Saturdays and Sundays would still be free, and they would still have employees working
on Mondays and Fridays.
Ms. Nicholson asked whether the Highway Division encounters a lot of overtime. Mr.
Nakasone said their overtime is planned and in the budget. The resurfacing requires a lot of
overtime, but it is also planned out. They also try their best to anticipate emergencies and plan
rd
accordingly. Some years have many emergencies, and some years very few. This year, for
example, they did not anticipate having 21 straight days of rain.
Mr. Sakaguchi asked what would happen if there was a big emergency like a hurricane,
since they have limited resources. Mr. Nakasone said they have a plan.
Mr. Sakaguchi asked where the money was. Mr. Nakasone said his Division has about
$500,000 set aside for emergencies. They learned to do this as a result of the flooding in Ka`u in
2000. At that time they did not have a contingency fund but were fortunate that it happened in
September, as their new budget started in July. When there is a big emergency, you also need to
go to the federal government for disaster reimbursement. They established the fund to help pay
expenses in case of an emergency.
Mr. Sakaguchi asked how Mr. Nakasone's employees felt about the four -day work week.
Mr. Nakasone said they took a poll and it was liked. However, they have some new employees
now and would need to poll them again.
Mr. Joseph asked what the current work hours of employees are, and Mr. Nakasone said
from 6:30 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.
Mr. Joseph asked whether there were any provisions to do resurfacing at night, and Mr.
Nakasone said they did Palani Road in Kona at night. If they were to have a new crew, the work
hours and schedules would need to be changed, and the union consulted. They would need to be
very careful, because if it rained, the workers would not be able to do regular maintenance.
Safety is also a concern at night. If they were to go to night resurfacing, they would need to be
sure of the weather. They would not be able to come back during the day time, as maintenance
would be scheduled during the day. A lot of factors and variables would need to be considered
in the planning. However, he felt it was possible.
Mr. Joseph said he was thinking about traffic and congestion and doing the resurfacing
during the off -peak hours. He said if they went to the ten -hour workday, they would hit the peak
driving schedules, whereas with the current eight -hour day, they finish work before the rush
hour. Mr. Nakasone said there is both good and bad on the issue. It tends to be after 3:00 p.m.
when they are called out for an accident and need to clean up the oil, glass, or debris on the road.
When the ten -hour day was presented to the union, the plan was to do it on a six -month trial
basis. One can only guess at how it will actually work, but you will not know the impact unless
you try it.
Mr. Joseph asked who was responsible for the maintenance of the federal highways on
the island. Mr. Nakasone said the federal people come and evaluate the roads and determine
what roads could belong to their "T" program, which makes them eligible for federal assistance.
Of the 1,000 miles of road the County maintains, about 170 miles qualify for the "T" program.
Mr. Joseph asked whether the federal government pays for the maintenance of the roads
in the "T" program, and Mr. Nakasone said no. The federal government will identify the roads
they believe could be under their program. It is then up to the states and the counties to lobby if
they want money from the federal government. They need to sell themselves and show they
need the money. Every state lobbies for this money.
5
Mr. Joseph asked who writes the grants for Highway Maintenance, and Mr. Nakasone
said they have engineers in Public Works who do this.
Mr. Joseph asked whether Mr. Nakasone lobbies or puts in a request for the maintenance
of more roads, and Mr. Nakasone said he puts in a CIP request and it goes to Engineering. Each
division has projects.
Mr. Joseph asked whether it would be more efficient to consolidate the State highways
with the County than to lobby and try for grants. Mr. Nakasone said he believes in home rule
and that it should come under the County.
Mr. Sakaguchi asked how many miles of roadway the State has here, and Mr. Nakasone
answered 330.
The Chair asked whether it would be helpful to the Highway Division to have a grant
writer, someone specific to help the engineers, and mentioned that other departments brought up
the issue of having in -house grant writers, or hiring out someone designated to write grants. Mr.
Nakasone said that a grant can only be requested during a certain window of time. He said that
in his opinion, you cannot be just a grant writer, because what would you do the rest of the time?
Would you just sit and wait for the deadlines on the grants to see if you get them or not? He felt
they shouldn't specifically have a grant writer, but possibly a specialist. He would like to believe
that an engineer could do this. He used to work closely with some engineers, who are now
retired, who used to do grant writing and engineering.
The Chair said that the Solid Waste Division had a strong request for a grant writer and
said that not all grants have a timeline. He said they were looking at having a grant writer for the
County itself, for all the departments, and they just wondered whether Mr. Nakasone concurred
with the other departments about having an in -house grant writer.
Mr. Sakaguchi said there was a concern that the County may need someone to research
getting money from sources which the County would otherwise not know about. Mr. Nakasone
said that in his opinion, the County would be better off contracting out the grant writing, because
if the writer didn't do a good job, the County could use someone else rather than be stuck with an
inefficient employee.
The Chair commented that a lot of people blame the County for the potholes in the roads,
when some of the holes are in State roads. Mr. Nakasone said that the resurfacing program is
helping out his division greatly.
The Chair mentioned that there have been many meetings all around the island regarding
"roads in limbo" and that while he sympathizes with people living on those roads, they also
brought their property knowing the condition of the roads. He asked Mr. Nakasone how, if the
County has to take over those roads, it would be worked into their budget.
Mr. Nakasone said that they met with realtors several years ago about the problem with
people buying homes and then asking the County to fix the road. The Highway Division
31
developed a form that realtors need to submit to buyers, with information about whether the road
is maintained by the County, so the buyers will know about it in advance.
Mr. Nakasone also said he prepared an estimate on what maintaining the roads in limbo
will cost. He does not know if the Council has reviewed the information yet. However, his
Division is preparing themselves for the prospect of taking over the roads in limbo and buying
equipment. They will need to spend money to develop the roads in limbo.
The Chair asked whether it made sense to Mr. Nakasone to consolidate the Highway
Division into the Traffic Division. Mr. Nakasone said if you look at it on paper, it seems to
make sense. However, he does not feel they should pay someone more money to oversee them
in a system that is not broken. It might work to share clerical resources, but the functions of the
two divisions are very different.
Mr. Joseph asked whether anyone in the Highway Division is assigned the regular use of
a County vehicle, and he said that he and the five overseers are. The cars are needed to respond
in emergencies. They also have to carry cell phones and pagers. If they have to use the
equipment on their non -work time, they get stand -by pay.
The commissioners had no further questions, and Mr. Nakasone said he had one: Why
was he there? The Chair explained that it is the COGC's task to evaluate as many departments
as they can, the whole County if possible, so they can make suggestions to the Mayor or the
Council on what would make the various departments more efficient. The COGC is trying to
determine how to better the efficiency of the County, which is why they asked the departments
for suggestions.
Mr. Nakasone said he is the wrong guy to ask. If he is given a budget, he will work
within the budget. He sometimes will make sacrifices for the following year. He says he feels
responsible for his employees and wants the best for them. He wants them to feel they are doing
something good that will benefit their family and friends. He said that whenever a new mayor
takes office, they may go back a couple of rungs on the ladder, or they may go up a few rungs
with another mayor. He sometimes feels the managing director should not be an appointed
position. The job should be to make sure the County functions as it should. Performance needs
to be extended. He would like to see, in all divisions, a standard of performance. His division
has a standard of performance for everything they do. Some divisions only do six or seven
projects during the year, yet they ask for more employees. Because you ask for new employees,
you should have a standard. There needs to be a level you have to try to reach. If an employee is
not doing his job, why hire another one to help? The one who is not doing the job should be
checked out. There should be standards for all employees so that no matter who becomes mayor,
the standard won't go backwards. Mr. Nakasone said the managing director should have that
position. Each department has a director and a deputy director, and the deputy should be a civil
servant. This would keep the standard of performance there. It is not good when both have to
step down when a mayor leaves, as two more people have to come in and learn the job all over
again. By the time they learn it, it is their turn to step down. He believes deputy directors and
managing directors should be in the system. There should be standards of performance for
everyone, no matter who becomes mayor.
7
Mr. Nakasone said that when he first took over as superintendent, the resurfacing
program was new and faced a lot of much resistance. The first year they only resurfaced one or
two miles for the whole County. Today they do 35 to 40 miles a year. It took five years to train,
to change attitudes, and to set performance standards. They had to fight the unions and bring in
overseers from outside. He did not realize it would take five years for the County to learn about
and implement this program. There are some people who resist stepping out of the box or being
told to do better, and the first thing they will do is go to the union. If there were a managing
director who was not involved in politics, and that person had a desire from within, he /she could
get division chiefs to produce. The Highway Division is more than 50% of the Public Works
Department, so he knows it can work. He would like to see some divisions step up, but someone
needs to give them standards of performance.
Ms. Nicholson asked Mr. Nakasone whether it would be helpful in his Division if the
employees had incentives. She did not know what form an incentive could take, whether it
would be a cash bonus, or temporary raise, or perhaps an extra day off —but some way of
rewarding the employees who do an outstanding job. Mr. Nakasone said that the majority of
their employees work hard, although there is that percentage that does not. Sometimes
incentives might work, but he feels that telling an employee thanks for doing a good job, or
having it reflected on his 7PR, should be sufficient. He does not feel comfortable about giving
days off as an incentive, because there are some employees who are goof -offs but know how to
look busy whenever the boss is around. If that employee were given the incentive, it would ruin
it for the other employees. He is very careful, also, that if he calls an employee in to thank, it is
the right employee he is thanking.
The commissioners thanked Mr. Nakasone, and he left at 11:00 a.m.
(A recess was held from 11:00 a.m. to 11:07 a.m., at which time the Chair called the
meeting back to order. Mr. Brian Kajikawa entered and introduced himself.)
Mr. Kajikawa explained that he is the chief of the Building Division in the Public Works
Department. He j oined the County less than eight years ago as a proj ect coordinator, and over
the years and divisions has become the Building Chief.
Ms. Nicholson asked Mr. Kajikawa if he knew why he was there, and he said not really.
The Chair explained that the Commission's task is to evaluate departments and
commissions for the County. At the end of one year they will submit suggestions to the Mayor
on how they feel the divisions can better their efficiency.
Mr. Kajikawa said that the Building Division is responsible for the issuance of all
building permits. They are also in charge of all violations concerning illegal structures. They
also do the building maintenance for all County facilities other than those in Parks & Recreation,
which maintains its own. They also put projects out to bid in which only the DPW is allowed to
execute the contracts. They have several projects on board currently, including the West Hawaii
Civic Center and the renovation of the County Building. His staff at one point had only two
people, but additional staff was granted and they will have five project coordinators.
Their building maintenance work includes repairing roof leaks, fixing toilets, etc.
Mr. Kajikawa explained the various positions his Division has, which includes building
inspectors, electrical inspectors, and plumbing inspectors, divided up between the east and west
sides of the island. They recently received approval for a violations inspector to help them catch
up in that area. They are also gradually increasing the number of clerks they have to process
permits. Staff increases were not granted until last year, and the workload is there. Inspectors
used put in overtime but were not allowed to claim it. Under his supervision, they are now
allowed to claim the overtime. For inspections alone, he was allotted $18,000 in overtime, but
they actually worked about $180,000 in overtime. The answer was always no when they tried to
budget for overtime, but the workload finally got too high.
He looks at the Building Division as the "dumping grounds" of the County. Whenever
people don't know who to call, they call them. They are called for all kinds of problems and
questions.
The Chair explained that the Commission had six questions for Mr. Kajikawa to address
and that these questions are being asked of all the departments.
1. Do you have any ideas about what your department can do to save money
while not compromising essential services?
Mr. Kajikawa said he didn't know about saving money, because they never had
enough of it. The work was there, but the overtime pay was not. Previous chiefs would not
allow overtime, which caused the workload to pile up. The personnel are willing to get the work
out. The inspectors need to travel a lot by cars, and at one point they were running the mileage
from 150,000 to 160,000 per car, as they were not budgeted for new cars. Two years ago they
were given the go ahead, so they have been acquiring new cars. Nine new cars were acquired
this year and he expects to acquire about twelve next year. Previously the inspectors were in
harm's way because of the condition of the older cars. So he is pleased in this area.
2. Do you see any way to consolidate services, activities and functions of a
similar nature within the County?
Mr. Kajikawa said they are stretched out, and it would be hard to say yes.
3. Are there any services, activities and functions not necessary to efficient
conduct of government that could be eliminated?
Mr. Kajikawa said that because his Division takes care of the County facilities,
every year they have to budget for electricity, rent, and water services. He feels the departments
should pay for those things. Doing the budget is always a guessing game, and the electricity
goes up each year. They also have "x" amount assigned for travel expenses each year, but air
rates went up, as well as meals, and they do not have enough for traveling and conferences. The
budget needs to increase with the times. His Division also pays for building insurance, and he
feels that should be done by a different department, possibly Finance, where they have the
personnel.
Oj
4. Can privatization help the County? If so, in what ways?
Mr. Kajikawa said that currently, only the cleaning of facilities is hired out.
People come at night to do the cleaning, sweeping, vacuuming, and dumping of rubbish. There
are two persons in charge of this, but their primary duty is delivery of mail and other things. If
they had to do their own janitorial work, they would need a way bigger staff and it would be a
headache. His Division also does the shampooing and polishing of floors, as well as window
cleaning. These could be privatized. As far as inspections and permit processing, this should
remain with the County, as he needs control there.
S. Can you suggest any modernization projects that might streamline your
operations in lieu of privatizing functions?
Mr. Kajikawa said they had tried to streamline operations by going to a new
computer system. However, the system has so many problems and can't do certain things. They
are trying to iron out the bugs in the system.
6 Do you have any other ideas on how you can make your operations more
efficient?
Mr. Kajikawa responded, "Get rid of the union." He explained that a lot of
employees fall back on the union and take advantage of the County. They might have come to
the County with good intentions, but some go to the dark side. When that happens, there is a
hard task in front of County. The JPR's start going downhill. He does not know if it is a County
mentality that causes this, but it makes you shake your head.
Mr. Joseph asked how much income the permit process generates for the County, and Mr.
Kajikawa said about $2 million, and that it goes into the General Fund.
Mr. Joseph asked whether the cost of having inspectors balances out with the revenue
generated from the permits, and Mr. Kajikawa said they actually collect more.
Ms. Provalenko asked whether it would behoove them, since they have budgeted
$108,000 for overtime, to hire more people versus paying overtime. Mr. Kajikawa said it is good
to hire more people, but then what do you do with them during the slow periods? He feels it is
better to be able to pay overtime than to have too much staff to try to keep busy during slow
times. He said that right now it is pretty comfortable.
Ms. Provalenko asked if they would be all right even with added projects coming up, and
Mr. Kajikawa said that with the additional personnel they have received, they should do okay.
Ms. Provalenko asked whether the Building Division was always responsible for paying
other departments' electricity, and Mr. Kajikawa said yes, as well as the rents. This includes all
the County buildings, all the baseyards, all the facilities. Only Parks & Recreation takes care of
its own.
10
Mr. Sakaguchi asked what would happen if the County said it was not going to build any
more, that it was going to lease —would it work if whoever builds the buildings is to take care of
the maintenance? Mr. Kajikawa said he believed so and that this was a good idea, as they would
not have to worry about it. He said they had a schedule of all the buildings and when they were
due for certain repairs or maintenance, such as painting or roof changing. However, funds were
taken out of his Division and maintenance has fallen back. At one point they were behind 15
years. Now they are over 20 years behind. If they had someone who they could lease from and
who would take care of everything, that would be good.
Mr. Sakaguchi said that many departments do not know how much they are spending,
especially if they don't take care of their own expenses such as electricity. He said that many
universities are getting out of the dormitory business and instead contracting out. It costs more,
but it reduces liability and is included in the current service.
Mr. Kajikawa said that when the County owns or builds, the first five years are good
because there is no maintenance requirement. After five to six years, maintenance comes up.
The County Building was hardly maintained, which is why they are having problems now. They
encountered asbestos in the 1990's and if they had taken care of it then, it wouldn't be as big a
problem as it is now.
Mr. Sakaguchi said that the permitting function is important, as it sets certain living
standards and is a crucial responsibility. He said that at one point there was talk about allowing
licensed architects and engineers to do it.
Mr. Kajikawa said that is allowed in certain situations, but for the most part he does not
trust this would be good. Some architects rubber -stamp things to get income. Some do not even
visit the site but will stamp approval. He knows of a situation where an inspector found the
foundation floating, but the architect approved it. However, on some big projects he would
allow the architect or engineer to do the inspection. An example was the police radio tower, in
which the construction was fast - tracked. The contractor was allowed to get a structural engineer
to do the inspection and send the report to him. But it needs to be under his control so he knows
what is happening.
Mr. Sakaguchi asked why architects who rubber -stamp do not behave professionally, and
Mr. Kajikawa said it is because they have not been sued yet.
The Chair asked whether the Building Division has specific personnel looking for illegal
structures. Mr. Kajikawa said not at this point. The inspector of that district should be taking
care of that. Last month 330 building permit applications came in, and he feels that since people
are paying for permits, they should be serviced first. Going after illegal structures is secondary.
He is hopeful that with their new inspector coming in, they can do more. Some of the illegal
structures are nicely done by people who just don't want to go through the system and be
bothered with it. If later on they want to get a permit, the permit fee is doubled. They do not
realize that Hawaii County is one of the cheapest in the State as far as permits. There is also an
amnesty program to avoid the doubled permit fee.
11
The Chair asked whether the fast track was being pursued on permits for package homes,
and Mr. Kajikawa said that when the code is adopted, they will pursue it. The plans will still
need to be stamped by an architect.
The Chair asked whether there were plans to upgrade the computer software, and Mr.
Kajikawa said that every time they have enhanced the software they ended up with problems.
They have a good County employee who is working on it but can't seem to figure out how to fix
it.
Mr. Sakaguchi asked if that was the only software package available, and Mr. Kajikawa
said it was recommended they follow the system used by Real Property Tax.
Ms. Nicholson asked what happens to the fees they collect, and Mr. Kajikawa said they
all go into the General Fund, even penalties. He said there is nothing he can do about it. He
earlier wanted to implement a plan review fee, which would be a percentage of the building
permit fee, but the Mayor and his boss said no.
Ms. Nicholson said that some departments retain funds they collect, such as Solid
Waste's tipping fee, and asked why Mr. Kajikawa's division does not. He said that everything
goes into the General Fund. He can ask about it again, but will probably be told no. He is
required to stay within the previous year's budget. The only increase is in salary and wages, and
possibly in electricity. This last budget was the first time he was able to increase the overtime.
He said it is difficult to operate like this—he has to show the work is being done in order to get
the funds.
Ms. Nicholson asked whether he would like to send employees to conferences and
meetings and whether he felt it benefited the County. Mr. Kajikawa said yes. He said they are a
part of the Hawaii Association of County Building Divisions, which meets each year on a
different island. He sends his supervisory staff to those. He would like to have his building
inspectors receive certification to show they are qualified as inspectors. Electricians and
plumbers are licensed, but the building side has no requirements in terms of being a contractor
for certification.
Ms. Nicholson asked why an inspector would want to work for the County, given the
construction boom in the private sector. Mr. Kajikawa said once they are in the County system,
they tend to stay. The problem is when they retire. He has problems recruiting on the Kona side.
People do not apply because the market is so good out there. Sometimes he recruits from other
County departments.
Mr. Sakaguchi asked whether Mr. Kajikawa has the authority to offer bonuses, and Mr.
Kajikawa said that is not in his jurisdiction. He said a problem with incentives is bringing anew
person in to get more pay than someone doing the same work for a long time. It is hard to make
incentives equal across the board. He does not want to deal with conflicts there.
Ms. Nicholson asked how he felt about the County being split into two counties. Mr.
Kajikawa said he does not think there will be a split, but if there is, coverage of Waimea would
need to be determined. Kona and Hilo share Waimea. At the present time Kona cannot issue
12
building permits for the east side, but the east side can issue them for Kona. These issues will
slowly be corrected.
Ms. Nicholson asked whether it would make sense for the Building Division to have a
different work schedule, such as four ten -hour days, or having the permitting section open on
Saturdays. Mr. Kajikawa said he is short- staffed as far as the building permit employees.
Sometimes supervisors have to go up front to help the clerks, who take the brunt of the
complaining public. He said he does not want to be open on Saturdays, as they would need to
increase the staff. Some employees may not be willing to work on Saturdays, as well. The staff
would have to be bigger to handle working on Saturdays.
Ms. Nicholson asked whether any privatizing would help the Building Division. Mr.
Kajikawa said that as far as the building permit side, he did not want privatization. Too many
peoples' hands would be involved. Though the procedure is not that complicated, things can get
altered. As far as the repair and maintenance side and the design side, they could probably use
privatization. The design side does not have professionals, so they hire architects to do the
design work. They could probably hire construction managers, too.
Mr. Sakaguchi asked why Mr. Kajikawa had left private practice, and he said he got tired
of drawing after awhile.
The commissioners thanked Mr. Kajikawa for coming, and he left the meeting at 11:50
a.m.
The Chair asked if anyone had suggestions for the list of recommendations based on the
two presentations just held.
Ms. Nicholson commented that she finds it disturbing that some of the answers they get
do not support the written responses sent out by the departments. She feels they need to be wary
in looking at some of the responses prepared by the department heads. The responses they
received should not be taken as a given, because there are clearly some differences of opinion.
The Chair said they could decide on each one as they went down the list, take either side.
Mr. Sakaguchi wondered who makes the decisions, whether the Council on a political
basis does so, or the mayor. He felt it was sad for the departments and divisions to be so
constrained budget -wise, as they have the potential to move the County ahead.
Mr. Sakaguchi had to leave the meeting at 11:55 a.m.
Ms. Nicholson said it was difficult to come up with any specific recommendations from
either Mr. Nakasone or Mr. Kajikawa. She said it was clear, however, that Mr. Nakasone is
unhappy that deputy directors and the managing director are not within the civil service. He is
concerned about the lack of continuity. She was not sure they should recommend that a director
or deputy director be civil servants.
Mr. Joseph said he would not support that, either.
13
Motion and Vote: Ms. Nicholson moved to recommend that the Highway Maintenance
Division of the Department of Public Works pursue negotiations with the union to go to a 10-
hour, 4 -day work schedule for employees. Mr. Joseph seconded the motion. Ms. Stremski said
she agreed. After no further discussion, the Chair called for a vote and all members voted aye.
Motion and Vote: Mr. Joseph moved to recommend that the County try to incorporate
or consolidate all the State highways into the County highways system, as Mr. Nakasone felt it
would be more efficient and for home rule. Ms. Stremski seconded the motion. All members
voted aye.
The Chair said that a good point was made about hiring out grant writers instead of
employing them in- house, but he noted that hiring grant writers was on the list of
recommendations. So, this issue could be discussed when they get there on their list.
Motion: Ms. Nicholson moved that the Building Division's budget request for more
training, conference, and travel funds be increased, if possible, into the next budget cycle. Ms.
Stremski seconded the motion.
Discussion: Mr. Joseph said he was confused on this issue, as Mr. Kajikawa had said
that he cannot add to his budget and that it does not increase. However, when a budget is being
made, aren't recommendations to increase taken into consideration? The Chair said that Mr.
Kajikawa said his increases always got taken out. He did not know if that happened at the
division level, department level, mayor, or County Council level. However, he got the
impression the requests were made but denied.
Mr. Joseph said he would prefer in the motion wording that the travel budget be
"adequately funded" rather than "increased."
Motion withdrawn: Ms. Nicholson withdrew her motion, and Ms. Stremski withdrew
her second.
Ms. Nicholson said they could recommend increased opportunities for training,
conferences, and meetings for the Building Division staff to broaden their knowledge. Ms.
Provalenko said that there are opportunities, but if there is no funding, how could it be done?
Mr. Joseph noted that on their draft list of recommendations, item 12 is about providing
professional development opportunities for departmental staff and felt that covers the wording of
the motion they were trying to make.
Ms. Nicholson said it was interesting, though, that Mr. Nakasone seemed to feel they did
not need more in this area. However, the Building Division seemed to need it.
The commissioners discussed how to word a motion in this regard.
Motion and Vote: Mr. Joseph moved that they recommend the Building Division be
provided with an adequate travel budget in which certification and training opportunities would
be available to staff. Ms. Nicholson seconded the motion, and all members voted aye.
14
Ms. Nicholson said that Mr. Nakasone had recommended that there be performance
standards for each division and that he had already developed them for his Division. He clearly
felt other divisions would benefit from having standards. Should this issue be posed to Civil
Service?
The commissioners discussed performance standards and how certain divisions provide
multiple services, which would make it hard to measure their performance and function. They
felt Mr. Nakasone was trying to impress this issue upon them, however. Ms. Stremski suggested
this issue be added to their list for Civil Service. The Chair suggested they ask other divisions
about whether they have performance standards when they come in. He felt about half of the
divisions would have a way to measure, and the other half would not.
Ms. Nicholson suggested that as they were finished with having speakers from the Public
Works Department, they review its response letter (Communication No. 2006 -51) and decide
what to recommend.
A break was called from 12:15 p. m. to 12:20 p.m., at which time the Chair called the
meeting back to order.
Motion and Vote: Ms. Nicholson moved to recommend that creation of a traffic hotline
be investigated, pursuant to item 4a of the response from the DPW. Ms. Provalenko seconded
the motion. All members voted aye.
Motion: Ms. Nicholson moved to recommend that the DPW develop a prevention or
safety- driven focus within each division, pursuant to item 6b of the DPW's response. Ms.
Stremski seconded the motion.
Discussion: Mr. Joseph asked what the purpose would be, and the Chair and Ms.
Provalenko indicated they also did not understand this recommendation. Ms. Nicholson said that
right now the DPW is reactionary, as opposed to being pro- active. This is suggesting they add a
pro- active component to their department, focused on safety.
The Chair said he could not see employees searching neighborhoods for problems, if that
is what was meant. Mr. Joseph said it could prove more costly. Ms. Garson explained that it
was similar to risk management. If you see a pothole that needs fixing, you should get it fixed
before receiving a claim for damages from someone.
Vote: After no further discussion the Chair called for a vote. Ms. Nicholson and Ms.
Stremski voted aye. Ms. Provalenko, Mr. Joseph, and the Chair voted against the motion. The
motion was not passed. The Chair said he only voted against it because it was hard to define,
and he did not want to recommend something he could not defend or justify. He said they could
always come back to it at another meeting.
Motion and Vote: Ms. Stremski moved to file Comm. 2006 -51, Ms. Nicholson
seconded the motion, and all members voted aye.
15
7. DISCUSSION /ACTION ON OFFICE OF THE CORPORATION COUNSEL
RESPONSE TO THE COMMISSION'S LETTER DATED APRIL 10, 2006
Motion: Mr. Joseph moved to accept and file items 7 through 19 on the agenda, and to
leave discussion for a later time. Ms. Provalenko seconded the motion.
Discussion: Ms. Nicholson said that if these are taken off the agenda, they may forget
they had a response to something, or not everyone will bring the responses to the next meeting.
Mr. Joseph suggested that in lieu of having speakers at the next meeting, they address each of
these items instead.
Motion withdrawn: Mr. Joseph withdrew the motion, and Ms. Provalenko withdrew her
second.
Motion: Mr. Joseph moved to defer items 7 through 19 to the next agenda, and Ms.
Provalenko seconded the motion.
Discussion: Ms. Nicholson noted that item 18 was recently received and they could
move to file it away, rather than defer it. She felt those responses which did not say much could
be filed away rather than deferred, and be gotten off the agenda. The Chair suggested that they
be deferred to the next meeting, at which time they could have those with minimal responses
filed all at once, and then have one presentation instead of two. (Ms. Stremski mentioned that
she will not be able to attend the next meeting.)
Vote: After no further discussion, the Chair called for a vote. Ms. Stremski, Ms.
Provalenko, Mr. Joseph, and the Chair voted aye. Ms. Nicholson was opposed, as she felt they
should at least deal with item 18. The motion was passed.
(ITEMS 7 THROUGH 19 WERE DEFERRED TO THE NEXT AGENDA.)
20. DISCUSSION /ACTION REGARDING PRIORITIZING DEPARTMENTS/
BOARDS /COMMISSIONS OR ISSUES TO ACCOMPLISH THE MANDATE OF
THE COST OF GOVERNMENT COMMISSION
The Chair asked whether they wanted any more presentations from the Department of
Public Works. Ms. Nicholson and Ms. Stremski said no. The Chair noted that the
Planning Department is next on the list, and that it may take long. No one suggested
adding another department to the list.
21. DISCUSSION OF ITEMS TO BE PLACED ON THE NEXT AGENDA
Ms. Nicholson said that getting Christopher Yuen for the Planning Department is key.
The Chair asked whether, if Mr. Yuen was not available, they would prefer to jump to the
next department and wait for Mr. Yuen's availability, and Ms. Stremski and Ms.
Nicholson said yes.
16
Q �
Ms. Garson mentioned that the Police Department did not respond to the COGC's letter.
She said they could ask for the chief or a deputy or assistant chief, and that there were
different divisions, including an administrative division. Ms. Nicholson said they should
leave the decision on who to send with the chief, and that they wanted someone to give
them an overview. From the overview they could decide if they wanted to talk to another
representative in particular. Ms. Nicholson suggested the Police be sent the questions
again and asked to respond, or to bring a response with copies to the meeting. Ms.
Garson said she would e -mail the Police.
Ms. Garson said that at the next meeting, they need to sit down with a calendar and plan
out how the rest of the process is to take place, as they are running out of time. This can
happen when they are discussing prioritizing.
Mr. Joseph asked if there was a chance that the Mayor would fill the District 4 vacancy,
and Ms. Garson said probably not. The County has been trying through various means to
get more commissioners, but she is not aware of anyone under consideration and cannot
see it happening soon. Also, it may be rough for a new commissioner to come on at this
point.
22. STATEMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC
No members of the public were present.
23. ANNOUNCEMENTS
The Chair announced the next meeting as being scheduled for August 3, 2006, at 10:00
a.m. at the conference room at the Hilo Department of Liquor Control, 101 Aupuni Street, Suite
230, Hilo, Hawaii.
24. ADJOURNMENT
Motion and Vote: Ms. Nicholson moved to adjourn, Mr. Joseph seconded the motion,
and all members voted aye.
The meeting was adjourned at 12:45 p.m.
Respectfully submitted:
Mary E. 6osson, Secretary
17