Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007-03-12 Public Access, Open Space and Natural Resources Preservation Commission MinutesHAWAII COUNTY PUBLIC ACCESS, OPEN SPACE AND NATURAL RESOURCES PRESERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES - REGULAR SESSION March 12, 2007 Department of Liquor Control Conference Room 75 -5722 Hanama Place, Suite 1107 Kailua -Kona, Hawaii 96740 Present: Chair Kenneth Kaneshiro Commissioner Paul Campbell Commissioner E. Kalani Flores Commissioner Bill Gilmartin Vice -Chair Hannah Springer Absent: Amy Self, Deputy Corporation Counsel Commissioner Laura Schuster Commissioner Benedict Yung Others Present: Stacie Waltjen, Secretary Sharese Macomber, Clerk III, Finance Department Harry Yada, Property Manager, Finance Department (arrived 10:10 a.m) CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chair Kenneth Kaneshiro at 10:08 a.m. STATEMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC AGENDA ITEMS None. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Commissioner Flores moved for approval of the minutes of February 12, 2007 regular session, seconded by Commissioner Springer and carried unanimously by voice vote. WRITTEN COMMUNICATION None. DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE REPORT Mr. Yada distributed maps of individual districts for upcoming island wide community meetings. Mr. Yada stated that Mr. Kaneshiro and Mr. Campbell were at the Council meeting and the Council accepted the Mayor's report with the Commission's report attached. The Mayor's recommendation was to focus on the top two properties that were already identified on the Commission's previous list. The recommendations were based on Kawa`a, and the number of parcels identified on that list; and on Waipi`o, which is currently being worked on. Mr. Yada stated with all the monies anticipated being deposited into the Public Access, Open Space and Natural Resources fund with property taxes, there probably will not have enough to cover both Kawa`a and Waipi`o. Mr. Yada stated that the Mayor thought there was no purpose to go beyond those two properties. Mr. Yada stated there has been no progress other than a call from the Kawa`a owner. They were evaluating the appraisal and having their own appraiser do a review of our appraisal. They asked for a couple of months to look into it, although there was no reason for them to ask because they rejected the first offer and there is nothing pending at this point. However, discussions are still on- going. As far as the additional parcels in Kawa`a, discussions are beginning with the owners. Mr. Yada stated at the request of the Waipi`o owners an extension of time was granted for them to consider the County's offer until the end of April. Mr. Kaneshiro asked what the current total in the fund was. Mr. Yada replied there was two million in the fund now. Assuming another 1.6 million gets added from the Mayor's fund balance appropriation proposal, it should be 3.6 million however the fund balance proposal needs to be approved by the Council. Mr. Campbell asked if there was any contact by anyone with other entities such as Trust for Public Lands, etc. Mr. Yada stated the owners of Waipio's representative was talking to the Trust of Public Lands and they were investigating the possibility of getting something beyond what the County's appraisal came out to be. Mr. Gilmartin stated the Trust of Public Lands cannot pay over the appraised value. He spoke with Lea Hong and she said that it's not likely that they can step in and assist us. Mr. Campbell stated that their focus should be getting State money or Federal funds to match. Mr. Yada stated regardless of the source of funds as long as its government related, he didn't think they would see any allowance for anything beyond the appraisal. Mr. Yada stated there may be a possibility of redoing the appraisal but he didn't think any government source of funds allows for something beyond the appraisal. Mr. Gilmartin asked Mr. Yada if he knew what happened at Honu`apo because they had to get additional public monies to make that deal. Mr. Yada replied that their situation was to do with the appraisal. So they went through a process of reviewing the appraisal and having another appraiser; but it still was based on the certified independent appraiser. Mr. Kaneshiro asked if the County does not pay more than the appraisal then can other funds be brought in to assist in acquiring the property. Mr. Yada stated he sees that being the only other alternative; some source of private funding willing to be added into the pot. Mr. Yada stated the unofficial reading from Corporation Counsel was that as long as the County doesn't pay anymore than what the appraisal says additional monies from private funds can then be used to supplement what the owner wants. Mr. Yada stated as long as other sources are willing to pay and as long as the County doesn't pay more than the appraisal, other sources are okay. Mr. Yada also stated that as far as the additional Kawa` a parcels, he thought it was a good candidate for pooling different sources of funds. Mr. Yada stated the owner could afford to wait therefore willing to work with the County. OFFICE OF THE CORPORATIN COUNSEL'S REPORT None. CHAIRPERSON'S REPORT Mr. Kaneshiro thanked Mr. Campbell for attending the County Council's Finance Committee meeting that was held on March 8, 2007. The Committee talked about the annual report that was submitted to the Mayor and then sent on to the County Council. Mr. Kaneshiro stated in the report, the Mayor's recommendation was to stick with the two projects, Kawa`a/ Kawa`a Bay Property and the Waipi`o Lookout Property, since there's not much funding. Mr. Kaneshiro stated that properties are very expensive in Hawaii. The Commission will not be able to show the real successes that the general public wants by buying all these properties but one thing that we may be able to show is properties that have access. Mr. Kaneshiro suggested the Commission draft up two different lists; one list to purchase and the other list would be for access. Mr. Kaneshiro stated the funding was not going to be that much money and most of it would be negotiations between the State, Federal or private entity. Ms. Springer asked about the Mayor's recommended top two... did the Mayor discuss access on the Commission's number two property which was Pohue Bay. Mr. Yada stated based on this report, the Commission's recommendation were Kawa`a and Pohue Bay as number 1 and 2. Based on the Mayor's transmittal to Council, he interpreted it to mean that the Mayor was maintaining the priority as Kawa`a and Waipi`o because on the earlier report the County was already pursuing those acquisitions and if implemented, those properties will eat up the resources they have. Ms. Springer clarified that she heard "top two" and wanted to make sure which list the "top two" came from. Ms. Springer stated she now realized that it's not on any list. Ms. Springer stated in response to Mr. Kaneshiro's comment on access, she wanted to point out that number 2 on the Commission's list dealt with access. Mr. Kaneshiro stated if the Commission had two tracks then hopefully the Mayor and the Council would pursue two tracks meaning they don't have to work only on purchasing of properties but also look at access as a different track and they could work on both. Mr. Kaneshiro stated the P61ue property would be number 1 on the access list. Mr. Campbell pointed out that the Commission had 1 report backing in to another because the Commission drafted two reports in 2006; so we have two separate reports and we have something going on that was generated by the first report. Mr. Campbell stated he thought it wouldn't happen again. Mr. Gilmartin stated they will never be able to keep up with the Commission's recommendations; properties are expensive and there isn't a whole a lot of monies to work with therefore there will always be a backlog. Mr. Yada stated they will always have to deal with what's on -going versus what the list recommended. Mr. Gilmartin stated he wanted to bring up a long term goal about maintaining a bigger list that could be referred to or added to because of the continuous backlog. Mr. Gilmartin stated there needs to be a way to keep a record of the top properties so those could be pulled out if they become available at a later date. They should still on the list somewhere. Ms. Springer stated when they go out to the public, the Commission should apprise the public of this aspect of the process; we need to track and stay with the properties that have been nominated in previous years. Ms. Springer stated the public would have realistic expectations when they come forward with their nominations. Mr. Yada commented on Mr. Kaneshiro's suggestion of public access. Mr. Yada stated although it's worthy of consideration, those acquisitions are more complicated. The acquisition cost may be less however the acquisition itself may be more complicated because the owner retains ownership of the property. Mr. Yada stated they would need to deal with the ramifications of public access through private property and the challenges that may come about based on the owners concern about having public access through his property. Even though those types of acquisitions are worthy to consider, it often was more complicated. Mr. Flores stated the Commission didn't drop properties from the list just because it was already in motion; it was kept on. Mr. Flores stated in the assessment process, they might get lowered in priority, but they wouldn't get dropped from the list. If there was a final acquisition for purchase, then we can remove it from our list. Mr. Yada stated during the Council meeting, Honoli`i came in through a different route and confused the whole issue because the Council's resolution in their ranking of the acquisitions also included Honoli`i, which wasn't even on the Commission's list. Mr. Gilmartin stated that this Commission was only advisory; Council makes the decisions and they can take anything they want into account. Mr. Kaneshiro stated he thought that the Council was also looking for guidance on how to do things; this Commission needs to provide guidance to the Council. Mr. Gilmartin stated based on what this Commission submitted in December and how we ranked those properties; the top group of 5 or 7 was essentially equal; they were all closely ranked by one or two points on a subjective scale. Mr. Gilmartin stated he would've put them all in one class and they could have picked any one of them. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Discuss with the Commission the need to adopt a rule regarding a procedure for taking properties off the priority list upon request by the property owner. Mr. Kaneshiro stated that the Commission will defer discussion with the Commission on the need to adopt a rule regarding procedure for take properties off the priority list upon request by the property owner until the next meeting. Mr. Gilmartin asked Mr. Kaneshiro if he was talking about the letters that Corporation Counsel was going to draft to property owners. Mr. Kaneshiro replied yes. • Discussion of assessment and criteria and revision of forms. Mr. Gilmartin questioned about asking the submitter who they would suggest on the long term maintenance of the property. Mr. Flores stated that it was on the Suggestion Form under Attachment C. Mr. Flores stated if the public asked what the difference was between this form and the one previously submitted, this form requested additional information so that the assessment of the property could be done more efficiently and the Commission would have a better understanding about the property. Mr. Flores stated the more information the person can provide, the better the Commission can rank the property. Mr. Flores stated that the Commission would be starting all over again with this new form because there will be more information. Mr. Flores stated the public could go to the public library or the Planning Department for an updated tax map key. Mr. Flores stated if the public asked if they had to resubmit a form again, the answer would be yes because the Commission would be looking at it all over again. Ms. Springer asked if the Commission were going to be asking the public to resubmit forms every year. Mr. Flores stated the only reason this Commission was asking the public to resubmit forms were because the Suggestion form and Assessment form had been revised. Mr. Kaneshiro asked if the Commission was going to be discussing the assessment form at the meeting. Mr. Gilmartin stated that it would be nice to have a copy so that the public can see how they should fill it out. Mr. Flores stated the Commission won't ask the people to resubmit if we don't change the Assessment form. If the Commission doesn't do major revisions then we won't have to ask the public to resubmit. Mr. Gilmartin stated if the Commission tells the public they don't have to resubmit then there needed to be some formal mechanism for maintaining the history of what had been submitted. The Commission will then have to revaluate everything that has been previously submitted with what comes in new. Mr. Flores stated that the Commission was not telling people to resubmit at this time, we should just say that they do have to submit anew form. The Commission could use the term "greatly revised ". Mr. Flores asked Stacie Waltjen to forward the updated assessment form to the Commissioners. • Discussion of format regarding the report for December 2007. Mr. Kaneshiro suggested the Commission change the report and add two lists. One list would be for purchase and the other list would be a "negotiation type" activity. Mr. Flores stated the Commission could identify what existing lands were available for public access. The Commission should be updating the existing public access inventory list that the County has published; we could include this as part of the report, and the other would be what could potentially be added to that, regarding public access. Mr. Gilmartin added one possibility would be to take our title and categorize things in those areas. For example, public access, open space, natural resource, preservation and list them in those categories because there is the additional sub - category of conservation easements too; it's not just access or purchase. Mr. Yada replied that he thought it was worth considering. It had a logical categorization in the acquisition part. Mr. Flores suggested maybe there should be a listing for acquisition, one for conservation easements and one for public access. They are distinct. Mr. Flores stated in times we don't have money; we could focus more on conservation easements. Mr. Gilmartin responded that the easement category would probably include access. It doesn't necessarily have to be a separate thing. Ms. Springer stated in the December 2006 report, the Commission recommended County actions as our third column and that was where we discussed whether we were going to have acquisition, easements, or access; so what we are suggesting was to do away with this column and organize our list in the category that was in this column. Mr. Flores recommended they call it "Recommended actions ". Ms. Springer stated she had some reservations about this because the Commission may be giving themselves more work to do if they were going to be grading in three separate categories. However, if the Commission included in the narrative, a greater emphasis of the third column, they might be able to accomplish the same thing, without having to add another analysis. Mr. Gilmartin added that the Commission could keep the single list but have something that symbolizes "E" for easement or "P" for purchase. Mr. Gilmartin stated realistically not many people read beyond page one of these reports, so they needed to put it somewhere up front. Or, highlight it with some code that was very clear for what the need was, for example, need for "purchase" or need for "easement ". Ms. Springer stated she didn't think that the Commission needed to draft three separate lists. She agreed with Mr. Gilmartin's idea. Mr. Gilmartin suggested that the Commission should code it right next to the title of the property name, instead of in the third column. Mr. Yada stated that he didn't think the Commission needed to separate it out. It should be prioritized if the owner wanted to sell. If there was a possibility of buying, then it would boost the priority because of having consensual agreements on how to structure an acquisition. However, if you are trying to acquire an easement from someone that doesn't want to give you one that would be a more difficult situation; those issues would handle themselves if the owner was willing to cooperate. Mr. Campbell agreed with Mr. Gilmartin's idea about putting a key symbol to categorize the properties. Ms. Springer stated the Commission should add a discussion of what that represents. Mr. Campbell stated that it wouldn't be a major change but it would draw attention to the list a little better. Ms. Springer stated the need to tighten up the language more to make sure we are clear. Ms. Springer stated the Commission should also include the most previous list with the report so the public can track movement of sites. Mr. Kaneshiro stated the Commission needed to educate the Council about this so that they know where the Commission was coming from and they can direct the administration to please work on this. Ms. Springer stated the Commission would need to get with Chris Yuen and see what the process looked like when the Commission was making a recommendation for access or easements. Ms. Springer stated the Commission already knows what the acquisition process looked like, but it's not clear on what these other recommendations would look like, if or when they are implemented. Mr. Gilmartin asked if Chris Yuen could come to our next meeting. Mr. Kaneshiro asked Mr. Yada if an updated list of existing public access could be done. Mr. Yada explained that it could be done however there are other agencies that are involved with access issues. Mr. Yada stated that he thought the County puts out a public access listing but he wasn't sure if it's only access that the County has done or if it also included DLNR accesses. Mr. Yada stated he was not sure if the Commission could have a comprehensive list because it may be in bits and pieces with different agencies. Mr. Yada stated he thought that Na Ala Hele also has a brochure that showed trails. Ms. Springer asked Mr. Kaneshiro if the Commission could have a focused topic at our next meeting such as "access" and invite Irving Kawashima from the Na Ala Hele program and see if they have a State inventory. The Commission could then find out from the County if the County has an inventory of public access; we then could make recommendations to the agencies to update the list. Mr. Gilmartin stated he got in touch with Lea Hong, the director of TPL in Hawaii. Ms. Hong stated she could not participate in our meetings at this time; she was the only one in the office and she needs to stay in the office. Ms. Hong stated they were in the process of hiring staff therefore once that happens, she would be able to come and find out more about what the Commission was doing. Mr. Gilmartin stated he also attempted to contact Hawaii Island Land Trust twice but received no response. Ms. Springer asked if the Commission would keep all the lists in the report or was is it going to be stored electronically in the report to the Mayor. Mr. Flores stated the previous comprehensive list the Commission did in the first report shouldn't be in the new report because the assessment form is different. However, the Commission could include the priority list. Mr. Flores suggested another subheading could be "community meetings" after "commission meetings" and a short summary of what occurred. ANNOUCEMENT: The next meeting is on Monday, April 9, 2007 in Hilo, at the Department of Liquor Control, Conference Room, 101 Aupuni Street, Ste. 230, Hilo 96720 It was decided to invite Irving Kawashima, Na Ala Hele Specialist with the Department of Land and Natural Resources, Division of Forestry and Wildlife to discuss the Na Ala Hele trails program and current inventory of trails within the Na Ala Hele program. It was also decided to invite Chris Yuen from the County to discuss Public Access Inventory Status. ADJOURNMENT: Commissioner Springer moved to adjourn the meeting; Commissioner Gilmartin seconded the motion and all members voted aye. The meeting adjourned at 12:06 p.m. s tfully s itted, Stacie T. altjen, S retary E