Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006-09-11 Public Access, Open Space and Natural Resources Preservation Commission Minutes (Kona Mtg)HAWAII COUNTY PUBLIC ACCESS, OPEN SPACE AND NATURAL RESOURCES PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES - REGULAR SESSION September 11, 2006 Department of Liquor Control Conference Room 75 -5722 Hanama Place, Suite 1107, Kailua -Kona, Hawaii Present: Chair John Replogle Vice -Chair Hannah Springer (arrived 10:05 a.m.) Commissioner Paul Campbell Commissioner E. Kalani Flores (arrived 10:05 a.m.) Commissioner Ruth Walker Commissioner Benedict Yung Commissioner Jocelyn Garovoy (arrived 10:10 a.m.) Commissioner Kenneth Kaneshiro Absent: Commissioner Laura Schuster Others Present: Amy Self, Deputy Corporation Counsel Stacie Waltjen, Secretary Dave Caylor Beryl Blaich, Vice -Chair for Kaua`i's Public Access, Open Space Commission CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chair John Replogle at 10:00 a.m. STATEMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC ON AGENDA ITEMS Debbie Hecht from Save our Lands Citizen Committee Ms. Hecht thanked the Commission for giving their support. Ms. Hecht came to bring to the Commission's attention the ballot question was very different from how their committee expected it to be; it deleted part of the Ordinance. (Ms. Hecht brought hand- outs to be passed out to Commissioners) Ms. Hecht stated on the initiative petition under Section 2 -214 Pubic access, open space, and natural resources preservation fund, it showed the changes that the committee asked for. Ms Hecht stated under (b)(5) added 2 percent of Hawaii Real Property Tax revenues collected annually and under (c) the stricken though and bracketed part were deleted. Ms. Hecht stated on the top of the Initiative Petition Amendments it said, "new materials underlined and material to be deleted is bracketed and stricken." According to County Clerk, Connie Kiriu because they left off (d) which really showed the entire purpose of the fund and in the actual open space ordinance, it had 2(d) and Ms. Kiriu stated that because they didn't include that in the petition form, that it was entirely deleted and that it was their intent. Ms. Hecht stated that it was clearly not their intent, in all of their educational materials it was reiterated again and again. It wasn't left off on purpose. Ms. Hecht stated if that was deleted, it would gut the ordinance and if they were to follow that logic, they also left off 2 -215 Public Access Open Space and Natural Resources Preservation Commission which would delete the Commission because anything below would be deleted out of the ordinance, since they didn't include it on the petition initiative. Ms. Hecht stated that it made no sense to her and in her mind it's another way to derail their process. Almost 10 thousand people signed their petition. Ms. Hecht stated they submitted to the County their preferred ballot language and their argument in support. The County then gave back to them the ballot question. Ms. Hecht stated in her asking the public what they thought of the County's ballot question, their response was that they thought the County was putting something over them therefore they came back with a little more information as their ballot language and their argument. Ms. Hecht stated they received from the County the ballot question that will be included in November regarding the 2% for open space issue and in essence what this does is adds 2 % of the property tax revenues and deletes the limits of the funds which is what they wanted however it also deletes 214 -D which is the entire purpose of the ordinance. Ms. Hecht stated as the question reads now, she wouldn't vote for it. Ms. Hecht stated the end result would be 2% of property taxes would be deposited in the fund, the limit would be removed and there would be no purpose of the fund since 214 -D would be omitted. Ms. Hecht read 214 -D for the record which says: The fund shall be used for acquiring lands or property entitlements in the County of Hawaii for the following purposes: 1) public outdoor recreation and education, including access to beaches and mountains, 2) preservation of historic or culturally important land areas and sites, 3) protection of natural resources, including buffer zones, 4) preservation of forests, beaches, coastal areas, natural beauty and agricultural lands; and 5) protection of watershed lands to preserve water quality and water supply. Ms. Hecht stated that was the heart and soul of the ordinance and for Ms. Kiriu to say that they wanted to delete that was absolutely wrong. Ms. Hecht then asked for a statement from the Commission would be wonderful as well as individually talking to the council people would be helpful. Mr. Campbell stated he had been working closely with Debbie especially through the Sierra Club and when they saw the language come back it was a flurry of emails and the red flag went up. This was what they all feared; it was similar to what happened with the geothermal. Mr. Campbell stated he emailed Connie and what he got back was a bunch of "gobbly- gook." It was a bunch of legalize language that he could not make any sense of. Mr. Campbell stated he was personally outraged and he asked Debbie to come today and present this to the Commission. Mr. Campbell reiterated that Ms. Hecht's suggestion was to write a group letter. He then asked if it would be okay to use some of their language that they have generated. Ms. Hecht stated absolutely. She stated that the ACLU was looking at it and they were talking to attorneys. Ms. Hecht stated they thought it was outrageous and totally against what all the volunteers worked so hard for and so many people signed the petition, almost 2 10 thousand people, it's against what the people were promised by signing the initiative petition. Ms. Hecht stated she wanted to tell the Commission since they voted unanimously to support this. Ms. Hecht stated if they follow the logic, because they inadvertently left of the language 214 -D, the open space commission language that forms this body is after that too, what does it do to this body? Ms. Self stated she needed to respond so the Commission could understand the legal part of this since it was a legal interpretation. Ms. Self stated the way it's written, it says, "Chapter 2, Article 42, Section 2 -214 is amended to read as follows." Ms. Self stated when you say that and you make changes to the code, you are putting in all your changes and when you see that Section D is left out, you are amending the entire section. It does not apply to 215 because they don't mention any amendments to 2 -215 so when they say anything below, they are talking about within Section 2 -214 because you are not making any amendments to 2 -215. Ms. Self stated it was not a deliberate attempt of the administration's part, Connie's part or Lincoln's part. It's merely interpreting what was in the bill. Ms. Hecht replied she respectfully disagreed and interpreting was exactly the right word. Where it stated, new materials underlined and material to be deleted is bracketed and stricken, so the intent was there. Ms. Hecht agreed that it was a legal interpretation. Ms. Self stated there was case law that supported this and nobody wanted it to fail. They were shocked that it was left out. Ms. Self asked if they had an attorney draft the bill. Ms. Hecht stated not really and that they couldn't afford an attorney all the time. Ms. Hecht stated they submitted this to the Corporation Counsel for their approval and they received it back with no mention that it needed to be the entire ordinance. Ms. Self stated that it didn't have to be the entire ordinance, it had to be the entire section because if she read it, she would think that they intended to leave out "d" because they are amending the entire 2 -214; that part of the code, not the 215. That was the legal interpretation and a legal document. Ms. Garovoy stated she was interested because they ran this by the Corporation Counsel and it was her understanding just from conversations in the community that this group had met with the County a couple of times before this petition was circulated, in order to ensure that it conformed to whatever the requirements were for an appropriate petition, so it struck her as being possible that there might be an argument about getting that kind of advice from an official who knows better; someone who represents the County in these kinds of things. Ms. Self stated they don't represent this group and when they gave them the ordinance that they wrote, her understanding was that Deputy Corporation Counsel Leithead -Todd gave them technical advice. She was not there to advise them on what to put in the bill or what to take out. 3 Ms. Garovoy stated she wondered about the fact that in (c) there's a strike through at (c) (1) however there was no section (d) with an entire strike through; things like that she felt could be interpreted in a number of ways. Ms. Garovoy stated what would be helpful for Debbie and her group was if the County could share the legal authority or the case law they used to give them a level playing field where they could share the case law with an attorney (if they get one.) Ms. Self stated that this was not a deliberate attempt to try and knock this down. Ms. Hecht stated she thought it was a little suspect that it was brought up a week before the ballot language was due, which was September 8, 2006. Ms. Hecht stated on Friday, at 4:30 p.m. which was the day that the ballot question was due from the County, this was the first they ever saw of the language deleting 214 -D. Ms. Hecht stated the other part that was deleted on the ballot question and submitted on the deadline day was the part where it stated, "If you agree, vote for. If you disagree, vote against." What also was deleted was, "(Notice: A ballot left "blank" on this question will not be counted as a "FOR" or "AGAINST" or a "ballot cast ".)" Ms. Hecht stated it was like a shifting landscape. She also stated she had a naive notion that elected officials represent their constituents and help enable the will of the people and somewhere along the line, almost ten thousand people signing a petition was a pretty good indicator that's what people want to happen. Ms. Hecht stated she figured it out it was 12.7% of all registered voters in the County signed their petitions. Ms. Self stated she makes no representation for the Council and she doesn't represent them in this situation but she could say that no one in the Corporation Counsel office did anything deliberately. She was not sure what Connie told Ms. Hecht but legal interpretation was made by Lincoln Ashida, who spent an entire weekend researching this, and she's not sure about the timing issues or even when the deadlines were, but she does know that Lincoln was quite shocked that the section had been left out and that was the way it was submitted. Ms. Self stated that Ms. Hecht's suggestion of talking to the council members was a great idea. She stated she's not sure which ones were in favor and which ones weren't but she thought a lot of them were probably in favor of purchasing lands that this Commission has chosen and selected. Ms. Hecht stated the Council voted unanimously to override Connie Kiriu to give them certificate of sufficiency after she invalidated so many signatures for ridiculous reasons. She thought there was a fair amount of support from the Council for it. Ms. Self stated she couldn't speak on their behalf but she thought they were going to feel the same way about how this turned out. Ms. Hecht asked if the Council could override a ballot question. Ms. Self stated she didn't think they could override it. in Ms. Hecht asked Ms. Self if she would vote for this with Ms. Self replied no. Ms. Hecht stated she would not vote for it either. Ms. Self stated if it does or doesn't pass, the Council could always amend the ordinance, they could always amend the code. Ms. Hecht stated that was why they went through this exercise of getting all of the signatures, because they hadn't done that. Ms. Self stated she understood the frustration, but as an attorney, if she read that, she would conclude the same thing. Ms. Hecht stated she thought several things were not being taken into account. One is it says, "New material is underlined and stricken. Underlined material is to be deleted is bracketed and stricken." And on the front it says, "To the Hawaii County Council, we request that you amend the County Code and incorporate changes outlined in this Initiative Petition to Amend Chapter 2 Article 42 Open Space Natural Resources Preservation Fund by adding a new clause and deleting an existing one; add and delete." It doesn't say anything about 214 -D. Ms. Self stated that was because it was left out. Ms. Garovoy asked if Lincoln could put the case law out there for the committee to work with. Ms. Garovoy then asked if it was Hawaii State case law or Federal. Ms. Self stated she thought it was Federal. Ms. Garovoy asked what the Commission could do; maybe Debbie could request that the Commission do something specific or ask someone to do something specific in this instance; knowing that the Commission advises the Mayor which is about the extent of the Commission's authority. Ms. Hecht stated a letter from the Commission supporting the 2 % and the intent of the almost 10 thousand people who signed it; not to gut the Ordinance would be helpful. Ms. Hecht stated if you took out 214(d), you take out what the fund was supposed to do; the properties that it was supposed to purchase or property entitlements. What the Commission would be left with would be no funding or criteria for properties to choose. Ms. Self asked Ms. Hecht who drafted it; who left section (d) out. Ms. Hecht stated she didn't want to disclose it because that one person would be blamed forever. Ms. Self wondered if it was a mistake. Ms. Hecht stated it was left off because there was no change and there was no room; they were reducing fonts to eligible size and then they had to put in the affidavit and other things. They also felt since Deputy Corporation Counsel Leithead -Todd looked it over, they would be okay. Ms. Hecht stated if the Commission could talk to their councilmen however they feel about it, it would be helpful. Ms. Hecht invited the Commissioner's to a party on September 15, 2006 from 6 p.m.- 9 p.m. at the Kona Outdoor Circle to kick off the campaign. Mark Varney Mr. Varney is a 35 year resident of the Big Island and has been up in Waimea for the last 10. Mr. Varney went to one of the first open space meeting in Waimea and was asked to fill out a hand out about six months ago. Mr. Varney came to speak about Spencer Beach Park/ Mau`umae acquisition; actually the expansion of Spencer Beach Park. On the hand -out he passed out with photos attached of Mau`umae Beach; on the second page there was a map showing a narrow strip of land. Mr. Varney stated it was in question for the expansion of the Spencer Beach Park. He believed it was part of a really big parcel owned by the Queen Emma foundation. Mr. Varney stated it's the narrow strip between the old Kawaihae to Puak6 road and shoreline. Mr. Varney stated it's one of the last undeveloped places on the coast there. Just to the south of that is Mau`umae Beach and that parcel he believed has a house on it. He left that out because he believed it would be too expensive to acquire the house and the beach parcel. Mr. Varney figured regarding the narrow strip up to the beach; they could probably get it at a bargain negotiating with the Queen Emma Foundation. It would help with public access down to Mau`umae. Mr. Varney stated one of reasons why he submitted the survey form was seeing the increase in the resort build out there and all the homes going in and the increased pressures on Mauna Kea/Kauna`oa Beach and Hapuna. There's a lot of pressure on the coastline; he goes down there a lot with this two sons and it's a really nice place and not crowded. Mr. Varney stated Mauna Kea currently hands out ten or eleven passes to get down there so the most people you would see would 15 people. Mr. Varney stated he believed it's a good thing that needed to be shared with the whole community. With the Kawaihae Harbor improvements coming up, there would be some changes to the recreational area down at the landing which a lot of people use; hard to get in. You have to have a pass and take a two hour course to get in. The recreational area down at Kawaihae has changed in the last couple years. It's hard to get down there therefore we need to provide for some more recreational areas. Mr. Varney stated there were more homes being built in the area along with Waimea; it's estimated that Waimea's growth was supposed to double in the next twenty years. This proposal made it on the Commission's list. Mr. Varney wanted to share his information along with pictures and maps. Mr. Flores asked Mr. Varney if the County were to purchase the land, what would be his vision. Mr. Varney stated right now it's overgrown with keawe trees and the original shoreline trail runs along the coast all the way to Mau`umae then goes up and behind where it was 31 relocated a long time ago. Mr. Varney stated his vision would be no real major infrastructure changes to the parcel. Possibly opening up the old Kawaihae to Puako road with some parking down by the coastline so people could walk down to Mau`umae. Mr. Varney stated he didn't think a parking lot down by Mau`umae would be a good idea. Mr. Varney stated having some day camping areas along the way for fishing and day use would be good. The coast line was pretty rough and low. Ocean access is good for fisherman but not for swimming; possibly campsites for overnight. Mr. Varney stated maybe twenty years from now there maybe a need to change it and cut down a lot of the keawe trees but right now they do provide a lot of shade and there were a bunch of coconut trees just south of Spencer; you could expand Spencer a little bit and stop and then make little pockets that go south to Mau`umae. Mr. Varney stated the area where the homes were has already been disturbed and it's been bulldozed and flattened. That area has already been impacted. From there you could walk to Mau`umae in less than five minutes. Mr. Varney stated some of the work could be done by volunteer groups similar to Wai`aha Beach in Kona. Mr. Varney stated he thought the Queen Emma Foundation might be willing to work with the County and they might be able to get the strip of land for a bargain. Ms. Garovoy asked Mr. Varney what the threat was to the area right now. Ms. Garovoy stated she has walked it and it seemed that the beach was accessible to pedestrians at this point. Ms. Garovoy stated it's pretty easy to park at Spencer; the Alakahakai Trail takes you there which was state owned. Given the limited resources that the County has, it seems a publicly accessible beach already. Mr. Varney stated he didn't believe that it currently was going to be developed nor did he think the Queen Emma Foundation had any development plans. They own a ton of land around Kawaihae and if they were going to build on it, they would've already. It definitely should not be put on the top of the list, he's just hoping it's added to the list and recognized. Mr. Varney stated you could park at Spencer Beach Park and walk there; it takes 20 minutes to walk to the beach but you have to be physically fit to get there. If you are older; it is a way to go. Further, the situation with the parking passes at Mauna Kea, they currently give out ten 10 passes per day, if you try and go there after 3:30 p.m. - 4:00 p.m, you won't get one. It's supposed to be open from sun up to sun down, but you won't get one after 4:00 p.m. Mr. Varney stated sometimes, if you are down at the beach, the property owner that manages the old home on the southern end of Mau`umae will come up to the beach and tell everyone the beach is closing. If you walk in from Spencer, you could stay there all night if you wanted. Mr. Varney stated the longer you wait the more expensive it will get. Initial discussion with the Queen Emma Foundation now so they are aware of it would be a good thing. They may be willing to come to County and say, we'll give it to you. Mr. Varney stated he would be willing to work with the commission on that; communicating with them because he has work with them before on a lease -fee exchange in the past and they were very pleasurable to work with. Chair stated on the LSD landing at Kawaihae, that's another place where people swim, it's being lost because of homeland security. Do you think that the federal government could mitigate the loss of that to the public in helping with the acquisition of Mau`umae. 7 Mr. Varney stated it would be great. There was also the national park system that housed the Pu`ukohola heiau, they maybe interested in acquiring the mauka portions as a buffer and get the whole thing and split it up. Mr. Varney stated they have to get creative on the financing for it. Mr. Varney stated the LSD landing at Kawaihae is best place to go swimming with your children. If you look at some of the plans, they maybe still able to keep the LSD part but the other part where a lot of people go; it's more like a man made coral rubble beach. That place is packed with people on the weekend. With this new security and restriction, he had to go through a two hour training seminar to get the pass to get in there. Mr. Varney stated he needed to come and share his information with the Commission. Mr. Varney stated he did not know what channels he needed to go thorough to talk about this mitigating funding and how that would work. The day they decided to build the whole Kawaihae harbor, they took away so much shoreline and sandy beach before the harbor was built. Prior to the harbor being built, it was a black and gray sand beach and one of the longest stretches of beach on the island. DISCUSSION WITH DAVE CAYLOR, PLANNER FROM THE KAUAI PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND BERYL BLAICH, VICE CHAIR FOR THE KAUAI COUNTY'S PUBLIC ACCESS, OPEN SPACE AND NATURAL RESOURCES PRESERVATION COMMISSION. Mr. Caylor introduced himself and Beryl Blaich, Vice -Chair for the Kauai County's Public Access, Open Space and Natural Resources Preservation Commission. Ms. Blaich stated it was wonderful to be invited to be with the Commission and have a discussion and thought conversation was good and she brings greetings from Kauai to Hawaii. Ms. Blaich stated one of our Commissioners, E. Kalani Flores was important on their island for the work he did in historic and cultural preservation. Ms. Blaich stated that they have personal ties to the Big Island especially their Chairman, Jean Nishida Souza, was a Hilo girl. Mr. Caylor thanked the Commission for inviting them and was very excited and quick to accept the invitation when Deputy Corporation Counsel Self offered it because it's so important that we communicate and learn from each other. We're all charting new ground and the Big Island was going through some of the same pains that Kauai was in, in terms of rapid development, loss of public access to beaches and the mauka areas; the lack of open space. Mr. Caylor stated we all have an awesome responsibility in determining what can and should be preserved for future generations. Mr. Caylor stated he would be happy to talk about anything the Commission had questions about. Mr. Caylor stated he's relatively new to the program; he just recently took the position as the County's Open Space Public Access Specialist back in April; it was vacant for an extended period of time. Mr. Kaneshiro stated someone came to talk to the Commission about the 2% property tax that will go towards the purchase of public access, open space. Mr. Kaneshiro stated he noticed that Kauai has half %, could you tell us about the reaction from the public and the reaction from the Commissioners. Ms. Blaich stated their Ordinances differ in that they were created by a Charter Ordinance which 74% of the public voted to set aside a minimum of half a percent of property tax, the other interesting difference was their fund couldn't be raided; it's a permanent fund. Ms. Blaich stated in contrast to the Hawaii County where the Council used tax monies to endow the Commission with 5 million dollars as their beginning operating fund. Ms. Blaich stated in their third year of operation, they only have approximately 1. 15 million in their fund which leaves their Commission with a constant feeling of what can they do; they see rising property values. Ms. Blaich stated even to look at a situation where they maybe an eminent domain action and they see the shear legal costs however it does say minimum and their Council was clear with them; should there be a very desirable opportunity they can add an unlimited amount of money into the fund. Ms. Blaich stated in response to the issue of public support, it was very strong. They had contemplated whether they would have the same degree of public support if they suggested raising the percentage of the property tax. Mr. Caylor stated he believed it was three years of appropriation from their property tax so it gives you some indication of how slowly their fund grows. This past year they received shy of four hundred thousand dollars in their fund and that rate they can't buy a whole lot but as Beryl indicated, they can appropriate more money should they choose to do so. Ms. Garovoy asked if there has been any acquisition as a result of the Commission's work. Mr. Caylor stated not yet however they were working on their first and it's proving to be a challenge; they are not a willing seller. It's a highly desired beach access and it would probably go through condemnation. Ms. Blaich stated if the Commission read their report, there were a lot of attention to what they called "opala" issues or issues where access, particularly beach access had been lost. These were thought to be legally in the domain of the County. Ms. Blaich stated the little easement they were looking at acquiring was to provide beach access to an area that will have a large population growth and doesn't have any access but unfortunately, it is right across someone's property in a residential neighborhood. One of the reasons why this particular one was chosen was that a development agreement with the large project going in the area allotted a certain amount of money to open space acquisition and access. Ms. Blaich stated the feeling was that they could leverage what little they had with this money that was being committed by the developer. Ms. Walker asked whether they were able to partner with different agencies to purchase properties and how successful they were. M Ms. Blaich stated they were currently verging on their first partnership. They had one nonprofit land trust and by way, congratulations to the Keopuka acquisition and the expansion of Ho`onaunau National Park. In their situation, this would be a combination of Noah Estuarine monies going to the Kauai Public Land Trust and buoyed by funding that the County Council has already indicated. They also wished the Black Pot Park in Hanalei expanded. There is a focus in that area that is a partnership. Mr. Campbell stated the Commission was currently looking at revising their public intake forms as a result of their first round public intake, was there any mana`o they could share regarding their experience with that. Ms. Blaich stated she was part of revising the form last year and they got as result of their public meetings, issues of protection of the resources versus public access. Ms. Blaich stated their Commission wanted to know more of what the public was feeling about the basic question of, should all people be allowed to use all accesses. And when they say public access they mean general public. Ms. Blaich stated they expanded their form and took the basics of their previous form and added an extensive questionnaire; it was too extensive however they were trying to get specific answers. Ms. Blaich stated it was a lot to ask from the public. They received approximately 130 questionnaires; less the half got thru everything. Mr. Caylor stated he had 20 plus years experience of doing survey research process. The thing that Ms. Blaich was describing, he called "as long as your out there" syndrome. Mr. Caylor stated he designed a lot of survey research process and there was a tendency on the part of funding organizations to fall into that syndrome. They also have a "respondent burden." Mr. Caylor stated in order to get good information, you needed to be brief in your questions. You had to get right to the point and go after exactly what it was you knew would help you make the decisions you needed to make. Mr. Caylor stated the idea was to narrow it down to questions you are the most concerned about and as a result, you receive more concise information and people who actually participate in the process of giving their opinions. Mr. Caylor stated you get more data that's more targeted. Ms. Blaich stated they were very map dependent for part of their input because in the public process, they took out a lot of maps of the quadrants of the island. Ms. Blaich stated it was very hard and it took a lot of Commissioner interest and extra staff to translate into a good database. Ms. Blaich stated they lost their open space planner shortly after that, she was intending to retire however since then, the County has hired her back on a contract to do some GIS work related to interpreting the survey's they did last year. Mr. Caylor stated most of the data that was collected last year with the longer survey form happened at public meetings and those surveys were administered by the commissioner's or by staff which resulted in "commissioner burden." He realized that the Commissioner's were burnt out from the process when he talked to them about the next upcoming public input process and how they might trim it down. Mr. Caylor stated 10 he didn't see it as building a new process every year but building upon the process, add to the database with new information that was collected each year and delete out of the database problems that were solved. Mr. Caylor stated it also caused him to think in a new direction regarding how to collect information which would be to collect information from a web based survey as well as some identical paper versions of the same questions. Mr. Caylor stated he was working on developing that right now and found some cheap alternatives. Mr. Caylor stated mapping was a big part; you need to zero in to specific sites. Mr. Caylor stated what they could integrate into the web survey was a link to the County's GIS site which allowed people to look up sites, zero in and pull up TMK numbers. Mr. Caylor stated one of the problems that he found in the first report was a lot of the properties were misidentified by the TMKS. Ms. Springer stated she had questions about what the realistic expectations of the public had of the Commission and its work. In continuing to intake recommendations of properties for acquisition with the acquisition being slow to occur, did you maintain the public support and how do you make sure their expectations are realistic. Ms. Blaich stated the public's expectation were very high. The Charter did not specify anything about implementation of the desire of the Charter to protect these resources and to acquire open space. By Ordinance the actual process had been set forth. Ms. Blaich stated she's read our enabling legislation and thought this Commission was better protected from the problems of raising too high expectations without performing and therefore disillusioning an already disillusioned public. Ms. Blaich stated they were nested in the planning department. Ms. Blaich stated she noticed this Commission reports to the Mayor and the Mayor is required to further the Commissions recommendations to the Council. Ms. Blaich stated they report to their Council with their experience being their Council was very supportive but there was no formal requirement for their Council to report to the Mayor. Ms. Springer stated given the limitations that they had with implementing acquisition, did they have advocacy function as well? Ms. Blaich stated legally they probably don't have an advocacy function however they felt since the fund was so limited, they should have greater advocacy. Ms. Blaich stated without making the process more tedious, they would like to be able to comment on pertinent permits. Ms. Blaich stated Kaua`i's comprehensive zoning ordinance was due for an update and there were many areas within the comprehensive zoning ordinance that some strengthening of language regarding applying some of the same standards they applied to the resendital areas to agricultural area may produce open space and access benefits without relying on paying for them. Ms. Blaich stated she had a planner background was well as several other Kauai Commissioners; particularly the Chair which tends to make them look at things in terms of planner solutions and she wasn't sure if that should be thought about. Ms. Blaich stated she would like to know the Commission's experience with being nested with the Finance Department. 11 Mr. Caylor stated they had different opinions; which he thought was fair. Mr. Caylor stated he thought their Commission was established as an advisory commission and currently that was their role. Mr. Caylor stated he was in support of their Commission being advocates for accomplishing some of these things. Their County attorney had spoken to their Commission and recommended they go back to amend their Ordinance if they were seeking more authority; which was always a possibility however they were a County of laws therefore they had to operate within the laws. Mr. Caylor stated he thought advisory roles of the Commission was an appropriate role given they were trying to accomplish by making recommendations each year of priority projects and acquisitions. Mr. Caylor stated their Commission was frustrated by what they perceived as lack of movement on a lot of their recommendations. Mr. Caylor stated from what he's read and the discussions he's had with the Commissioners, there were a lot more public attendance at the Commission meetings. Because things happen politically, movement tends to be based on public desires. Mr. Caylor stated they need to think about how they could increase public awareness and get more public input to the items on the agenda. When the Charter amendment was passed in November of 2002, there was a huge amount of public support and awareness. In Mr. Caylor's opinion, they've faded a bit in the public's eye. Mr. Flores stated their Commission ended up with Finance and they get staffed by legal. Mr. Flores stated it hasn't been detrimental however with the stuff they were dealing with; a closer relationship with the Planning Department might work out more. Mr. Flores stated their Commission followed Kaua`i's template so he was wondering if they had a staff planner who did the research to verify the information. Ms. Blaich stated they did have an open space specialist which was independent of their funding. She stated their Council saw that for this to work, there needed to be this position; which has been refunded. Ms. Blaich stated this open space specialist was able to help them create the assessment form, bring back a presentation with a map and the key aspects of each of the nominated properties and that helped them deliberate further and break it down into categories. Ms. Blaich stated she liked the way our Commission gave a percentage of the score and she liked the way this Commission was keenly aware of the threat which helps them move. Ms. Blaich asked if being nested in the Finance Department helped to make the Commission more efficient when it came time to act upon an acquisition. Mr. Flores stated being under the Mayor's umbrella helped a lot because he's supportive. The department heads and staff have helped to move it along. Mr. Flores asked Ms. Blaich once they did the assessment and did the first list and they went for their second or third list, did they reassess the new ones or the previous nominations as well? Ms. Blaich stated they were in that process now. They've been really set back by not having a planner. They were in the process of writing their second report and going over the recommendations. In the meantime, their planner had looked at the primary recommendations that needed to be cleaned up. Ms. Blaich stated their original idea of 12 hiring a consultant to do this work was not supported by their administration however they were lucky because they had a planner now. Ms. Blaich stated some of the issues involved the State and a relationship had to be developed. Ms. Walker talked about revising the survey. She asked Ms. Blaich how they phrased the questions in the intake forms so that the reader could say these are really their express needs and should be considered priority items. Mr. Caylor stated it depended on what they were looking for. If you were looking for a list of properties or access that might be acquired, you would just need to close in and focus. Mr. Caylor stated to look for all possible ways that the question could be misinterpreted; the questions needed to have one possible interpretation therefore you don't ask a question too vague. Ms. Walker stated they wanted to help the public describe their needs so the Commission could understand what it was. Ms. Walker stated when they went through the intake forms they found most of their needs were very similar. Mr. Caylor stated a good survey ought to include as few open -ended questions as possible. If were asking about opinions or anything else it needed to be categorized by ranges. Mr. Caylor stated if they could quantify or categorize the possible responses, you needed to distill the information to something very simple to understand. The answers the public gives you should be clear cut. Mr. Caylor stated nearly everything could be analyzed with numbers. The act of analyzing open -ended information was that the researcher categorized the responses into numerical grouping. Mr. Kaneshiro asked if they had a process regarding a bi- annual or bi- monthly newsletter or bulletin on how the Commission was proceeding with the recommendations that were made by the public and if that report was sent to the Council. Ms. Blaich stated they don't but they should. Their Commission had talked about having a monthly newspaper with a short statement about what they were interested in and how it was going. Ms. Blaich stated they had been through one round and they had to report to their Council and be on television. Ms. Blaich stated they made an extensive presentation with an effort for the public to learn about what their Commission was doing. Their Council meetings are frequently watched. Mr. Caylor stated one point of caution would be to pay attention to the program staffing level and the time involved. Mr. Caylor stated somebody had to be responsible for that which would be another task for the staff. In their case on Kauai, it would fall to him. It depended on how much time you wanted to dedicate for other things or possibly increasing staff level. Mr. Caylor stated he believed they should be reporting back to the public which maybe through their annual report or web updates. Mr. Kaneshiro stated when the Commission were out at public meetings, they heard there was a need for maintenance regarding the facilities that already exists and some of the 13 recommendations were to have a group maintain it... have you gone through the process of identifying groups that maybe interested in maintaining some of the properties. Ms. Blaich stated that was one of the reasons they asked this question regarding if they were involved in taking care of certain places. Ms. Blaich stated she would be happy to send to this Commission their too long questionnaire. Mr. Caylor stated in the issue of maintenance, it was tempting to partner with other organizations and /or groups however the concern was that if they relied to heavily with partnering to maintain an access, then if the ball drops, who takes care of it. Mr. Caylor stated they don't have a Department of Parks on Kauai, they have a division of Parks which falls under their Public Works Department. Mr. Caylor stated they talked about being better housed under a recreation organization but as long as Parks was under Public Works, it may not be the best place for them. Ms. Self stated the Mayor and a Council Member worked together to come up with the bill to form this Commission and the fund. She doesn't know who decided this Commission should be under Finance; it just happened. Ms. Self stated Finance didn't have people to staff. This bill was passed before Finance had staffing for this Commission. The Corporation Counsel stepped up to volunteer staff until they could get people hired. Deputy Corporation Counsel Self stated the Planning Director came and talked twice to the Commission, which was helpful. Ms. Self stated it would be good if the Commission had support from Planning. Mr. Caylor stated they have no attorney working with them until they go to the County attorney's office. They also have no full time finance person. They rely on a lot of different people and departments. Chair asked if their Commission had funding responsibility such as looking for sources of funds; ways to help fund the purchase. Ms. Blaich stated they were just responsible for producing the list however they feel it's inadequate. Ms. Blaich stated they see the need to identify the sources of money that were out there. Their Planning administrator reminded them that they maybe setting expectations for future Commissions that are unrealistic. Ms. Blaich stated the language in the Ordinance was very clear in that grants and other funding sources would be looked at and identified. Chair asked Ms. Blaich once their Commission identified a property that needed to be protected, does Dave get the word and begins to make the calls and find the possible funding partner or was there someone else who does that? Chair stated he was trying to convince his side that they should have someone who does the follow up Ms. Blaich stated it would be the expectation of the Commission that the open space planner position would step forward but she doesn't believe that was in the actual job 14 description. Ms. Blaich stated the way it worked now was that the Commission would make it a team effort. Ms. Springer asked if they had two staff persons; the specialist and the planner. Ms. Blaich stated no, they have the specialist planner (Dave Caylor) and a clerk. Chair stated their list went to the Mayor and he juggled it and sent it to the County Council. Chair sated what appears to be happening is the Council representatives have put forth resolutions for properties that the County should purchase. Chair stated the Council has taken a part in responding to land owners and trying on their part to find the funding. Their Council is responding to it because he thinks the public responded well to the Commission. Chair stated it might be good if the public encourages their councilman. When they have council meetings the public should go and make a statement. Mr. Flores stated to have a councilmember take the lead. Once the list was put out, the council members took the lead in their respective district. Mr. Caylor stated their Council Members are elected at large and not by district. Out of their open space fund, any expenditure must be approved by an Ordinance. Mr. Caylor stated it would be beneficial if someone from their Council to take the lead on a particular property they had an interest in. Mr. Caylor extended an invitation to Ms. Self and a Commissioner to come to Kauai and speak to their Commission. Ms. Garovoy stated in her opinion, being under Finance wasn't the reason why our balance was higher than Kaua`i's balance. Ms. Garovoy stated it was because of the Mayor. Ms. Garovoy commented on the online survey, in particular linking it to the online GIS system, this Commission was given CD's of the GIS system for this County however the County has been unable to figure out how to put that information online. The Planning Director was interested in putting it online for the public to have access to. Ms. Garovoy asked if someone from their side could talk to our Planning Department to help. Ms. Garovoy stated with respect to prioritizing, the issue of public access slipped down in score because the Commission was putting an emphasis on preserving natural resources and cultural resources. Ms. Blaich stated they were struggling with that as well. That is what they were trying to get at in the questionnaire to the public; are you willing to pay for access that they may not be able to use. Ms. Blaich stated she believed for each dollar spent there needed to be public benefits however there was a big value spectrum for how you benefit the public. Mr. Caylor stated cultural resource preservation and access are not necessarily compatible. When dealing with public access vs. cultural preservation, you don't necessarily provide public access to every site and you don't publicize every site but do you preserve, you bet. 15 Ms. Blaich asked how do you not publicize when you have hidden Kauai; hidden north Kona. There was that other dimension of public access which is tourism. That has become incredibly sensitive on her island. Are they creating more accesses to tourists or maybe they don't want to create anymore accesses at all. Ms. Blaich stated they talked about creating a County seal of accesses or a County guide that said these are approved for public use in the following circumstances; not that you wanted to exclude anybody but can you not be so welcoming. Mr. Campbell stated this came up with Waipi`o Valley and P6hue Bay. The Commission talked about limited access and tying it into the Mayor's ranger's program he's trying to get up and running. This ranger would act like an interpreter as well as an administrator to allow a certain amount of people down there. If that comes to be, that could be an intrical part of what this Commission was doing. Chair stated they wouldn't be able to enter without some kind of education such as watching a video. Mr. Caylor stated he thought the whole key was protection; once you identify sensitive resources, you want to protect them. Mr. Caylor stated if you lack the resources for protection and providing access then you err on the side of protection rather than provide access. However if you have the budget, then it's perfectly allowable. Mr. Caylor stated it's like a museum; you don't let people camp out unsupervised but you do put artifacts and try to create a living history of exhibits and allow people access with education while still protecting the resources and facilities. Chair thanked Mr. Caylor and Ms. Blaich. Lunch taken at 12: 00 p.m Reconvened at 1:1 7 p. m. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Kaneshiro moved for approval of the minutes of August 14, 2006 regular session, seconded by Commissioner Walker and carried unanimously by voice vote. WRITTEN COMMUNICATION Communication No. 06 -103: E -mail from Dave Caylor, Planner from the Kauai Planning Department re: comparison of Hawaii Open Space Funds and Funding Mechanisms. Communication No. 06 -104: Letter dated August 17, 2006 from Paul K. Takamatsu, President of Pacific Coast Properties, Inc., to Councilman Fred Holschuh and Council Members re: Waipio Lookout Point Property, also known as the "Rice Property." Chair stated they lowered the asking price of the property to make it more available to the County. 16 Communication No. 06 -105: Attachment dated August 17, 2006 by Stephen J. Small, Esq., re: President Signs Into Law New Conservation Tax Incentives Under the 2006 Tax Act. Chair stated that the new tax incentive law (Communication No. 06 -105) could be renewed but as it stood right now, it's only good for the 2006 -2007 tax year. It could be individuals or corporations. If you do a conservation easement, such as protecting a forest, you can take a 50 % reduction of your AGI (adjusted gross income). If you do it on agricultural land, you can take 100 % of the value of the easement. You can carry the balance over for 15 years the value of the property. Ms. Self stated this was also forwarded to the Mayor's office. Ms. Garovoy stated the County would be a qualifying entity to donate a conservation easement as well as other non - profit groups. DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE None CHAIRPERSON'S REPORT Chair stated several weeks ago he went to the County Council meeting and testified on behalf of the Waipi`o Valley lookout purchase. Chair stated they shouldn't buy the property to make a giant parking lot out of it, they should plan on a cultural center; possible ranger station. He mentioned considering partnerships such as Kamehameha Schools who have a vested interest in the valley. Chair stated he got a call from Councilman Bob Jacobson saying he was submitting a resolution to the Finance committee for the County to purchase Kawa`a and Punalu`u, so he would go and testify about that. Ms. Self asked Chair what if the County Council asked him how much of Kawa`a should they consider. Chair stated from the road over. He also stated next to Kawa` a, with the big house, they could possibly gain favor with the County. They have other acres down there that they could put into a conservation easement; it would join the Ed Olson property which would join the property that Marcia Johnson has on the market. It would protect the heiau on the top. Chair stated they didn't anticipate development down there; the road wouldn't be paved. There's a lot of archaeology down there which was protected right now. Mr. Campbell asked if anyone addressed the issue of Abel being down there. Chair stated he didn't think so. Personally, he would like to see Abel stay as the park caretaker however he may have to be made a County employee. 17 Ms. Self asked if Abel lived down there. Chair stated he built a hale and claimed he owned that property however to date there was no legitimate papers stating he owned that property. Chair stated he got a restraining order against Marcia Johnson the realtor because he felt his life was threatened by her husband, so she couldn't even go on her property. Abel has been there 15 -20 years. Chair stated he keeps the place clean, repairs the wall and puts on the surf meet down there. Ms. Springer asked if Bob Jacobson's measure came with specific bounds. Chair stated he thought it would. Chair stated he would be testifying to the Commission's recommendation of it being an archaeological and recreational site. Chair stated he was not sure what Punalu`u was about. On the message the he received, they stated that he was asking for 12 acres, which would include the old restaurant site. Chair stated he's not sure how far along the coast it would go. Ms. Springer asked when the different councilmen make recommendations for acquisition, was it handled by order of receipt or are they competitive. Ms. Self stated she was not sure how that worked. The Rice Property has already been passed and that's a go. And then Mr. Kaneshiro testified on Puapua`a for Ms. Isbell. Mr. Kaneshiro stated that it was still in the Planning Committee so it had to go thru several more hearings. Mr. Kaneshioro stated regarding Waipi`o Valley, they waived it through committee and went straight to the Council. Mr. Flores stated Council would discuss among themselves which properties to buy. Ms. Self stated she was not sure ... the only way they could do it was they bring it up as resolution and pass it. Once the Council passes it, it gives the okay to the Finance Director to purchase. Mr. Kaneshiro stated as far as he could remember, once the resolution gets back, the resolution goes back to the Mayor and directs the Mayor to have the Finance Department to start making negotiations on acquisition. Ms. Self stated for the Rice property, the okay was already given to purchase and that passed through Council. With all the other properties coming up, how was it determined which property will be bought. Chair stated right now that was the missing piece; the person to Shepard the whole thing through. Right now it's being thrown out to buy all these properties. The Rice property had a hint of urgency because they had a buyer and the owners backed out to give priority In to the County and they reduced their amount. There was an opportunity so they had to move quickly. Mr. Kaneshiro stated he didn't think the Finance department would go around to see if anybody would be willing to donate funds. It's the local people who were really interested. Mr. Kaneshiro stated that Chair was right; who will bring all of these things together. Mr. Yung stated that was what Dave Caylor does. Mr. Flores mentioned the Trust for Public Lands. Mr. lores stated a relationship had already been developed; maybe for Kawa' a that would be ideal. That could be something he could suggest at the Council meeting. Ms. Garovoy stated that the Hawaii Island Land Trust would eventually hire an executive director so when the Trust for Pubic Lands can't step because they are overburden with projects throughout the State, there will be another local funded organization that would have some staff that could work with the County and State. Mr. Flores stated the Trust for Public Lands had more flexibility and they can move on things faster. Ms. Garovoy stated if there was no urgency on seller's part, you could enter into a longer term option and take your time. Chair stated the only place that is "iffy" was the Marcia Johnson lot because she had it on the market. Chair stated regarding Ed Olson's portion, he would probably sell it for what he purchased it for. Ms. Self stated the Johnson parcel was "upping" the price. Mr. Campbell stated it was selling for 8 million. Chair Replogle called for a vote regarding his going to Hilo to testify at the Council Finance Committee on behalf of the Commission regarding Kawa `a and Punalu `u pursuant to the Commission's previous recommendation. Commissioner Flores pursuant to Chair Replogle's request moved for a motion. Commissioner Campbell seconded Chair Replogle called for a vote on the Motion, all members voted aye by voice vote, motion carried Chair stated on November 4, 2006 from 10:00 a.m. -4:00 p.m. there will be a blessing for Hono`apo with free lunch and music. 19 Chair stated Hawaii Island Land Trust secured its first conservation easement at Ke6puka. Ms. Garovoy stated she got a call from Sherry at the Department of Land and Natural Resources regarding the U -Hop Ranch. They were looking at doing some acquisitions and she stated that someone told her the Commission recommended it to be protected, so Ms. Garovoy directed her to the report. Chair stated those properties were the long stripes that went down between the South Kona forest reserve. OLD BUSINESS • Review the 2006 Suggestion /Survey form. Will be updating to 2007. Mr. Flores stated he tried to incorporate what they discussed at the last meeting, with the main change being asking for attachments. The other items were asking for following attachments for "b ", "c ", and "d." Mr. Flores stated it really was just taking the questions out of assessment form and putting it on survey form. It all correlated to the assessment form. Mr. Flores stated he put a contact number with contact person and the other addition was putting the web address on. The due date was changed too. Mr. Flores stated the bottom box also added in the date the Commission received the form and attachments for checking the box. Mr. Flores stated it was relatively short compared to other forms he's seen. He knew there were open ended questions but it was relative. Ms. Garovoy stated she had a question regarding the second page, second to the last question, should they state it more clearly by giving an example. Mr. Flores stated maybe some specific examples such as question number 3. Ms. Self stated the owners of the Rice property saw the property on the Commission's list and that's how they came about knowing the County would want to purchase. Ms. Springer asked if that was a problem regarding failure to notify the landowners that their property was on the list. Ms. Self stated the Rice property owner's wanted the property to go to the community but they couldn't donate it to the County because they had a family member that required long term care and they needed money to settle the estate. Ms. Springer asked if there was problem with failure to notify because the State generated a list of historic places back in the 70's and land owners were not notified, a landowner whose property was on the list and not notified, was able to have the list set aside. Ms. Springer stated she wondered if there were any issues of notification if they list a property. 20 Ms. Garovoy stated the landowners can be surprised and upset but she's not sure if they were violating any laws. It would be a good practice for the Commission to try and initiate some kind of notification before it even goes on the Commission's list. Mr. Flores stated maybe putting in the notification if they would be willing to sell it. Mr. Yung stated at one of the community meetings one of the concerns were if their property goes on the list, they were being condemned. Ms. Garovoy stated in some contested case hearings against land owners who wanted to develop are saying that it was listed; so this list is more powerful. People are using it to fit their needs. Ms. Self stated the list really had no effect until the Council moved on it. It's a wish list that is given to the Mayor, which he doesn't have to submit the entire report to the Council. If you read the Ordinance, the Mayor is supposed to make his recommendation and send that to the Council. It's really the Council's call. Ms. Self stated she doesn't think there was a need to send a letter to the public whose land had been selected. Mr. Campbell stated technically, if it's privately owned, it could possibly be available. Ms. Walker stated in giving the assessment, they were questions whether to develop for public access or leave it the way it was. Therefore, under attachment "b ", could they put ask that question. Ms. Garovoy asked if the County acquired a property or easement, could they even keep the public out. Ms. Self restated what Chris Yuen said, if the purpose was to preserve, you just buy it and leave it but if your intention was for public access, then you had to make improvements. Mr. Kaneshiro stated maybe if they went and visited the site, they may see something, so their input would be better when they made their recommendation. Mr. Kaneshiro stated in talking to his councilperson, he couldn't understand why Waipi`o was left out when it was high up on the Commission's list. Ms. Self stated Chris probably had a different understanding of what the land was going to be used for. Mr. Kaneshiro stated in looking at the legislation that created the Commission, the first priority would be access to beaches and /or shoreline. Chair asked when the Commission gave their list to the Mayor, the Mayor made his list, and Councilman Holschuh put forth the Waipi`o property, which is fine but shouldn't they go in order of urgency. 21 Ms. Self stated the problem was that the Council gets the last say. Mr. Kaneshiro stated it was on page 2; last sentence regarding priority given to shoreline access. Ms. Self stated it was in there under Section 2 -218: Where there are multiple lands under consideration under any one time, priority shall be given to coastal lands and lands where matching funding is available to leverage the County's contribution. Mr. Flores stated Chris Yuen was not sure what the purpose was however after his discussion with the Commission, he had a fuller understanding. Mr. Campbell stated he had a minor change, on the first page under landowners, he would like it to say, " Please check all that apply." Ms. Self stated that was what Chris was talking about regarding anticipated uses; there was one for preservation and another access and those two conflicted. Mr. Kaneshiro stated they had this discussion before, what was the primary reason why they are recommending this site; there maybe other reasons but it wouldn't be primary. Ms. Garovoy stated she didn't' necessarily agree with what the Planning Director said with regards to access and preservation being at odds. Mr. Caylor's example of a museum was a good point, if properly managed you can have a beautiful path that goes just this way. Ms. Self stated once you mark it, you have the chance of people going off the trail. She thinks that is what Chris was saying. People would be accessing it; it all depended on the level of preservation. Chair stated they should get as much information and point of views from the public about the property. Ms. Self stated the final decision would come from this Commission. You look at what the public puts on the form however the final decision would come from the Commission. Chair stated he would like to suggest the Commission try the proposed intake form and next year they could amend it. Mr. Flores stated there wasn't any conclusion regarding purpose of suggested site. It was agreed by the Commission to say those that applies versus all that applies. It was also agreed by adding the statement of asking the public to explain what the intention was whether it will be public access or limited public access was too limiting. 22 Chair stated the County wanted to know was how much the park or land would cost them after they bought it. Ms. Self stated according to Mr. Caylor, there were several departments that could be involved. When the Commission get's their draft, they could get input from the different departments prior to their final report. Commissioner Walker moved for a motion to use the proposed draft of the intake form. Seconded by Commissioner Springer. Chair Replogle called for a vote on the Motion, all members voted aye by voice vote, motion carrietL • Process and apply assessment criteria sheet to complete intake survey forms received by September 5, 2006. Mr. Flores suggested that the Commissioner's took home the survey forms to score individually and bring them back to the next meeting. Mr. Flores will email or fax the new criteria sheet to Stacie Waltj en and she would forward to the Commissioners. Mr. Flores wanted to discuss the new assessments and the previous top ranking ones. Because they changed the assessment forms, the Commission should reassess the previous top ones with the new assessment form. Mr. Kaneshiro stated what they needed to do in their report was to expand their explanation on who they felt the County should contact. Commissioner Walker moved for a motion to take into consideration the top five intake forms and reassess them using the new criteria form. Mr. Kaneshiro stated he would be careful about that because they already made their list and sent it to the Mayor, they should look at the ones that weren't sent to the Council. Mr. Kaneshiro stated they should contact the council person, the county council and Mayor thanking them on the properties they moved on and encourage the Mayor to get Finance Department to move on acquiring the properties. Ms. Walker stated one of the reasons why she proposed it was at their community meetings, they told the public that if their properties weren't considered, they would reconsider them under a new priority the following year. Mr. Flores stated the entire list should be revisited using the new criteria form. Commissioner Walker amended her motion to reevaluate with their new criteria along the new intake forms the top twelve submitted to the Mayor. Commissioner Campbell secondetL Chair Replogle called for a vote on the Motion, Commissioner Springer, Commissioner Garovoy, Commissioner Yung, Commissioner Campbell, Commissioner 23 Walker, Commissioner Flores and Chair Replogle voted aye by voice vote, Commissioner Kaneshiro opposed by voice vote, motion carried Mr. Flores stated they were revisiting the top twelve because the assessment form was different from when they did their first list but the intake form was the same. Next year everyone can resubmit new forms. NEW BUSINESS • Discuss funding sources Chair stated Ms. Hecht asked the Commission to submit a letter to the Council and the Corporation Counsel asking that they support the proposed language from the committee. Mr. Campbell stated they could use most of her language in generating a letter. Ms. Garovoy stated they should refer back to their report in which they state long term funding was necessary. Ms. Springer asked if it would it be possible to submit testimony recommending reinsertion of that language that was left out. Mr. Campbell stated what he understood was they couldn't print the ballot until the primary because they won't know who will be on it anyway. Mr. Kaneshiro stated in listening to Ms. Self as to why it wasn't included was because the people who submitted it didn't submit the document that included it therefore he couldn't see the Commission submitting a letter saying it should be this way. Mr. Campbell stated as Ms. Hecht stated, it essentially guts the purpose of the 2 %. It doesn't state what the monies are for; it's just a general statement. Mr. Campbell stated in his opinion they didn't need to evaluate what the Committee had done and have been trying to do; they made their case clear and it's persuaded him to take exception to the way they worded the ballot. Ms. Self stated the wording was left out by the Committee. It was never changed; it was never submitted, they left it out. Mr. Flores asked if there was anyway they could support it the way it was originally written. Ms. Self stated the best person to submit a letter to would be Connie Kiriu. Ms. Garovoy stated with a "cc" to the Mayor and Council. Mr. Yung stated since they didn't submit it properly, should they get an attorney to work with Lincoln guys. 24 Ms. Self stated if it passes as it is with 2- 214(d) not on there, they could always introduce a bill to amend it. Mr. Campbell stated the Commission should at least send a letter of support. Ms. Self stated they should send it to Connie Kiriu, Mayor, Lincoln Ashida and the Council Members. Commissioner Campbell made a Motion to draft a letter in support of reinstatement of 2- 214(d) to the ballot initiative in its original intent onto the ballot. Seconded by Commissioner Flores. Chair Replogle called for a vote on the Motion, Commissioner Springer, Commissioner Garovoy, Commissioner Campbell, Commissioner Flores and Chair Replogle voted aye by voice vote, with Commissioner Yung, Commissioner Walker and Commissioner Kaneshiro opposing by voice vote, motion carried. Mr. Campbell to draft the letter and Ms. Garovoy would proof the letter. It will be emailed to Stacie Waltjen. • Schedule time line for completing December 31, 2006 list to the Mayor. Chair stated we need to have list by October, compile a report by November and finalize the report by December. ANNOUCEMENTS Chair stated Ms. Self handed out a press release dated September 7, 2006 regarding the shoreline of proposed development at Ke6puka Protected Forever. The next meeting is scheduled for Monday, October 9, 2006 at 10:00 a.m. at the Department of Liquor Control, Conference Room, 101 Aupuni Street, Suite 230, Hilo, Hawaii 96720 ADJOURNMENT Commissioner Garovoy moved to adjourn the meeting; Commissioner Campbell seconded the motion and all members voted aye. The meeting adjourned at 3:43 p.m. RRspec, -fully su mitted, St cie Wajn, Secretary 25