are adjourned at 11:09 A.M..
Mahalo.
>>
>> council member ashley
kierkiewicz: welcome to the
27th session to the
land use, and economic
development
11:32 A.M. Present for today's
committee hearing are
>> council member jenn kagiwada:
>> council member james hustace:
>>vice-chair dennis "fresh"
onishi:
>> council member rebecca
villegas:
>> council member michelle m.
Galimba:
>>council member heather l.
Kimball:. Joining us shortly,
>>chair holeka goro inaba: and
>> council member matt
kanealii-kleinfelder:.
I apologize. Council member
inaba is in chambers. And matt
has just arrived. Thank you. My
name is ashley kierkiewicz.
Chair of this committee. Let's
hear from statements from the
public.
>>clerk: thank you. I believe we
have no testifiers. Let's check
again. Ot seeing any.
We can jump to bill 175.
>>yes.
>>
>>clerk: is there any testimony
for bill 175? Hearing none.
>>
bills for ordinances
25-50, as amended, an ordinance
amending chapter 6 of the hawaii
county code 1983 (2016 edition,
as amended), relating to
transient accommodations
changes certain responsibilities
for proposed vacation rental
laws under ordinance no. 25-50
from the finance director to the
planning director;
exempts prospective vacation
rentals that have submitted a
valid use permit or special
permit application from
ordinance no. 25-50; and
requires any funds collected
under ordinance no. 25-50 to be
deposited into the short-term
vacation rental enforcement
fund.
Reference: comm. 964
intr. By: council member kimball
motion to forward bill 175 to
council with a favorable
recommendations.
>> this is the registration
process for tvrs. Starting with
section 6, what this
non-codified section would do is
to ensure that folks who have
submitted an application for a
special permit under the current
bed-and-breakfast laws would be
considered deemed registered.
The reason for this is that
there are probably going to be
differences in the application
process before and after the
passage of bill 147. So we
wanted to make sure that folks
that had already had their
application received and
approved or accepted by the
department even though it had
not yet been processed would
considered deemed registered and
wouldn't have to submit a new
one. The second section here is
to make clear under section 7,
that the funds from the
enforcement of the registration
ordinance and the fees
themselves would go nto the
short-term vacation rentals
enforcement fund. I would like
to name that fund the tvr fund
but there is a reason it is
under that name.
The other, under section 8, as
we were discussing 173, this is
where there is a grace period of
four months created between
SEPTEMBER 1st and DECEMBER 31st,
for anybody to register.
Basically we are doing this
again as an uncodified section
that gist
ves the director the
ability to waive the period. If
there is a reason for it to be
longer than necessary. And the
editorial process was being
developed by the planning
department with the consultant.
It was clear that most of this
process would actually fall
within the planning department
rather than the finance
department. You can see that
shift where the finance director
was made to the planning
director. Other than that, it's
pretty much just editorial to
make sure that cross-references
are correct. There is one error
that unfortunately I did not
have the time to create the
amendment for it and I would do
that in first reading under
section 4. There should be
language in there that this is
this section applies only to
special permits that have
already been issued or use
permits that have been already
issued or accepted by the
department. I will fix that at
the ext stage. Happy to ake
any questions.
>>thank you for the overview. To
note for the record that
leadership from the planning
department, director darrow and
deputy are here in council
chambers. Members, any questions
or comments?
>> 2345b
>>chair holeka goro inaba:
thank you. I'm wondering,
director, regarding the
effective date of the ordinance.
Would it be for you folks to
need through DECEMBER 31st to
get rolling. I don't know if
that would fit the rehab
discretion in our ordinance
effective dates.
>>chair, MAY I respond?
>> sure, go ahead.
>>the effective date of the
ordinance will still be
SEPTEMBER 1st. That's when the
registration portal will be
opened. The next section
codified would allow for people
to register between
SEPTEMBER 1st and the 31.
So we do want to leave the
effective date the same. That's
just allowing a g
>>director, anything to add?
>> planning director jeff
darrow: aloha. Good afternoon.
Good morning. Chair, vice-chair,
members of the hawai'I county
council. So, yes, this
particular date is like a grace
period for, it's my
understanding, it's a grace
period for people that have been
operating to come in to
register. After that date, we
would enforce, and do our
enforcement. There will also be
a grace period which will be
introduced in bill 147, which is
making its way back up to the
council at this time. It's
passed through both planning
commissions with favorable
recommendation and this is
related to tvrs and everything
to do in the zoning code. That
grace period will be a period of
time that we can work with the
applicants to resolve any issues
they have, but to allow them to
continue operating as we work
with them whether it's
permitting or land use permits,
those kind of things.
>>okay, thank you, director.
>>thank you.
>>vice-chair dennis "fresh"
onishi: thank you. For
registration, it seems to me you
would need the finance
department also helping with
this registration because of the
list of what's needed. If not,
your department is going to need
more manpower to do all of this
other research or contacting
real property tax. Any comments?
>> sure. When this program was
first created back in 2018,
there were a number of
positioning that were allocated
for the s tvr program and that
was funded by the enforcement
fund and that fund had quite a
bit of money from registration
and annual fees. Overtime, it's
depleted to the point that it
very well could run out within
the next year. It was also the
intention for the planning
department to come back and not
only work with the unhosted
short-term vacation rentals, but
also, regulate the hosted
vacation rentals. That's what
this is doing. When we did the
original unhosted, we took care
of registration, we took care of
all the finances. The one thing
that's being introduced into
this new bill is he oversight
of the taxes. It's really
focusing as well on making sure
they have their g. E. T. Tax
and tat tax. Finance will be
part of it. We have a platform
on board called decker and we'll
be doing a webinar to be able to
present what they are doing. But
they have an enforcement
platform that monitors what's
going on around the island as
far as licenses, stvr's and so
forth as well as the
registration platform and we'll
do the webinar showing how that
works. We have a payment system
set up ready to go so everything
can be done online. I think we
are okay. At first, we are just
trying to identify the roles
between the finance director and
the planning director. This
seems to fit.
>>so this eliminates the finance
director completely?
>> she is involved. As you look
through this, there are certain
aspects that the finance
director remains a part of this.
>>are you talking about section
6-45?
>> in the registration section,
she is take own, the
ut, the finance
director.
>>yes.
>>but through his process,
there will be an avenue set up
for payments for taxes are made,
they work with finance
department, the platform that we
have been working on has been
working with both planning
department and finance.
>>so my thing is, sometimes with
government, it's better to list
it or to at least mention about
it instead of just going with no
knowledge. Say, the
administration changes, you are
no longer there. New people come
in. You read this. They MAY not
have an idea of what the intent
was.
>>yeah, again, up to this point,
it seemed more appropriate,
planning department has been
taking he lead n establishing
this process. And we have
experience in doing it based on
our previous launch of our
registration. Again, if you
look at the bill even in 645,
you will see a reference here
and there for the finance
director to be. It mainly is
making sure that we are all
updating our information to have
current and updated information.
But they basically take care of
the tat and g. E. T.. We take
care of the land use.
>>but this, we are talking about
the registration part. The tat
is separate, it's afterwards,
after the fact.
>>it's part of the registration
process.
>>that they havehat?
>> yes, they identify. They
cannot move through it unless
they identify that they have
those. But overall, all of the
questions that are being asked
and the information has to do
with the land use.
>>my last question is,
anticipation of when do you
expect your staff to be
functioning 100 percent because
right now as you said, funding
got reduced. So there is really
not many staff members there,
right?
>> we have five unfunded
positions, I believe.
>>right. So this happening, how
long will it take?
>> asap.
>>I understand it.
>>let's see, yesterday.
>>it's going to take time.
>>I don't want to go into great
detail, but we have been working
with finance on making sure that
once this plan begins, because
we have another number of
employees that are going to be,
that are currently during
particular jobs in hat we have
now. When this launches n
SEPTEMBER 1st, everything is
going to shift. So their roles
are going to shift. So we feel
very confident on being able to
make sure this thing runs
smoothly. We will immediately
once things start running begin
to advertise for those needed
positions.
>>so then, listening to what you
are just saying, those positions
might not be important to be
hired because if you have staff
that could be starting
SEPTEMBER 1st and running this
program, then you might not need
the extra staff?
>> those staff that are the ones
that aren't there, the reason
why they aren't there is because
we didn't want to continue. We
needed them, believe me. Several
of them are inspectors. So we
needed them.
>>you needed a long time ago.
>>yes, but the problem is the
more we deplete that fund, the
faster we would run out of
moneys to pay for people that
are currently in those
positions.
>>my last thing to add to that,
why weren't these positions paid
by general fund?
>> it was just set up that way.
We've requested that and that is
the goal. I think what needs to
happen n my understanding is
finance wants to make sure that
once the program launches, that
it is clear that there is going
to be income to be able to
sustain the program, hift the
positions into the general fund
and the moneys will also go into
the general fund instead of this
separate fund. There is a plan.
>>okay, thank you.
>>thank you.
>>
>> council member ashley
kierkiewicz: thank you. Any
other questions or comments?
Council member
kanealii-kleinfelder?
>> MR. Onishi, thinking about
the correlation between the
department of finances, our tat
reporting, is it important to
have finance built into some of
this process that's being
created?
>>
>> planning director jeff
darrow: they are very involved.
We have meetings weekly with the
platform that has been hired.
They are in all the meetings.
They are an essential part of
this because the information
that will be coming in will be
going to both planning and to
finance. But their information
is going to be different than
our information that's coming to
us. Theirs will be related more
to taxes and ours will be
related more to the registration
and land use.
>>looking at the first section
6-45 registration. Just
throwing it out there. Not that
there is a problem. A person MAY
not operate a stvr property and
what used to be finance is now
planning director in a format
prescribed by the now planning
director. Is it important that
the finance and planning work
together within this document?
To create the perfect
application or you like it the
way that it is with all planning
driven?
>> this registration process was
created with collaboration with
the planning and finance
department as well as tenant
entity.
They have a lot of experience
with the registration process.
the information they needed in
the registration is part of it.
But I
to the maker, did finance have
planning work together with this
bill?
>>
>>council member heather l.
Kimball: f I MAY, chair. It's
important to note that this
amendment doesn't actually
include all references to the
finance director that was in
25-50. The difference here
particularly with section 6-45,
is that we initially thought we
would house the registration
process in finance and connect
the plan. What happened is we
have housed registration in
planning, but it will actually
connect to finance. There are
other references in ordinance
25-50 particularly around the g.
E. T. Tat and property taxes
with the finance director. Those
are not being amended here with
this particular ordinance.
That's why you are not seeing
them. But the finance director
is included in section 6-45, sub
section c, the finance director
is also included in terms of the
reporting from the hosting
platform. So that compliance in
having to do with tat is still
there, and then there is also
the ability for the finance
director and planning director
to make rules to join separately
for this process. What you are
seeing is the egistration
process now housed nder the
planning side rather than the
finance side which is what we
originally planned for but it
works out better this way.
>>thank you.
>>
>> council member ashley
kierkiewicz: anyone else?
Thank you, director, for being
here. So, you are confident with
the go live date with the
registration process for
SEPTEMBER 1st?
>> planning director jeff
darrow: at this point, things
are looking a lot better than
when it launched JULY 1st. We
are working through the all the
bugs. We are very impressed with
the decker platform that has
been hired. They are very
flexible. Hey are very
responsive. They are able to
answer all of our questions,
just very impressed.
>>fantastic. You mentioned there
being a community. Was it
webinar, some kind of workshop
to let folks know, this is a
process, this is the portal and
the documents you need in order
to submit the application. Has
the date been identified for
when that webinar or workshop
will take place?
>> we urrently have a date. We
don't want to advertise that yet
because there are some tweaks we
need to do to the registration.
The webinar, decker has already
said they would be able to
present the presentation on how
to go through the process, but
right now, it's your standard
stvr registration so it's more
in line with what's going to
happen with tvrs and s tvrs. We
are hoping to have that done
quickly and spread that news out
when that webinar will be held.
We are also going to very
shortly put something both on
hawai'I county tar.Com and
frequently asked questions on an
information sheet to bring
everyone up to speed as to
what's going on.
>>would it be possible to
announce the date and time and
venue for this webinar at first
reading? If this goes to first
reading which is AUGUST 5th? If
go live is eptember 1st, we
want to be sure we are giving
folks ample time for the webinar
event. More time, the better.
This is an excellent venue, on
the public record and these
meetings are available for
livestream anywhere. We want to
give folks ample time to know
when the webinar will be
available?
>> absolutely. Do you want to
join?
>> sure, as an observer. I'm
curious bout the workflow when
the registration comes through.
What is the turn around time.
Walk me through what the
planning department needs to do
and if there is a requirement to
pull from the finance
department. I'm so sorry to
emphasize the need to understand
the workflow and how long it's
going to take for reviewing and
issuing registration number. So
I want to be sure that this
launch is successful and easy
for folks to navigate, but also,
on the internal side for the
planning department and finance,
there is clear lines of
responsibility, and we are
getting this turned around
quickly.
>>thank you for that question,
chair. That has been like focus
no. 1 in the planning
department. We have been
actively working on this
particular process. How is this
-
going to work? How can we make
this process as simple as we
can. Not complicated. The
process is these days that are
complicated just complicate
everything else. So what we are
trying, our focus recycle now,
ight now, our
direction that we have given
decker is that everybody that
comes in, we are trying to link
this program with an api that
shares information as well as
our gis system. It will be able
to identify permitted zoning
districts, things like that.
When someone comes in to
registers, as long as they have
the information, they will be
conditionally approved with a
registration number. That number
will be able to utilize for
advertising on the hosting 3
platforms. That is where the
grace period comes in. On that
registration form, are
conditions. It says that you
agree that these conditions need
to be met to continue, but it's
not at that time you are given a
conditionally approved
registration number. So during
that period of grace time, the
staff will be reviewing these
registrations to make sure they
are in a permitted zoning
district, that they have been
able to work out their building
permit issues for the structures
that they are utilizing for the
tvrs. If they need a land use
permit, a special permit that
they have gone through that
process and received approval.
This conditionally approved
number could be for a period of
time. It could be a year. It
MAY even extend after that.
Additionally, if we have certain
conditions in chapter 25 that
you will see. One of them is
that you cannot do a tvr in an
additional farm dwelling. Things
like that. Staff will review
these simple conditions, make
sure that they have met them,
and then they will be given n
approved number. From there,
they won't really need to deal
with planning anymore. They will
just continually deal with the
website where every year, decker
will send them a notice, your
annual fee is coming up and they
will go on to the website and
pay the fee. Our hope is that
this is going to be smooth. Is
going to get grace to be able to
allow them to continue this
transition and operate while
they work through any bugs that
there MAY be.
>>okay, that's helpful. That
was a lot of information and I
want to chunk it out. Under
registration there is ten areas
of information that someone must
meet in order for registration,
names, tax certificates, all
that stuff. They advance through
the applications once those
documents are uploaded, correct?
>> correct.
>>at the point of submission
they will be given a number and
that information is provided to
the hosting platform?
>> it's our understanding that
decker will be maintaining that
list and that list will be the
list that they monitor the
websites as far as ctive
advertising. That's question
I haven't asked decker, but I
will. If they provide the
hosting platforms, that
information. But that's the
information that they do what
they call scraping the websites
to find out if they are
advertising with these approved
registration numbers.
>>yeah, that's the piece that
i'm curious about because the
registration system goes live
SEPTEMBER 1st and given a number
upon submission of an
application. I would assume that
platforms like airbnb and vrbo
will be giving that information
so they can be live. Is that
how it works?
>> again, one of the things
brought up is the grace period
introduced for the actual
process. We are not looking at
-
enforcement.
>>I'm not even talking about
that, just making sure the
numbers are online for folks
getting registered in order to
operate this activity. The other
question is the turn around
time. I'm assuming lots of
innings
applications are coming through
SEPTEMBER 1st. How much timing
will you have around that
initial operation?
>> we have staff that will go
through that information
providing that information. To
me, it looks like it will be a
much quicker process than our
previous process. I can't tell
you exactly. It's going to be
different for every registration
depending on the issues but my
thought is it's going to be
quicker than the previous one
which took hours to go through a
registration and make sure all
the information was correct and
all the information that was
supposed to be provided was
provided. Keep in mind you did
touch upon a point which I
brought up to decker. Typically
when you go to a website and
filling out something, you have
the ability to save and come
back to I. Unfortunately that's
not something that is available
at this time with decker. So we
are asking them to make it clear
from the beginning that you need
the information from the
registration to be able to go
all the way through the process.
>>you will be timed out and
start again.
>>yes, if you don't have it all,
it won't be able to completely
and will not save.
>>with this process, you will be
able to track complaints that
come in?
>> yes.
>>how those are resolved,
enforcement from the planning
process ill be in a particular
profile for the vacation
rentals.
>>there is an additional program
called rental scape that is part
of this and they are actively
monitoring all the active
registrations, advertisements
going on related to stvr's,
airbnb and we will send out a
courtesy letter saying we have
been doing this search and see
that you are advertising for
this particular overnight
accommodation without a
rentaling
registration number. You have a
period of time to come in to
register, if not, we will inform
the planning department. When
we get that and they haven't
taken the next step, we will
take the next step after that.
>>that's for someone that is not
registered. I'm talking about
registered tvrs, and if they
come in is the decker system
going to have all the
information and lability
will you be able
to track that information.
>>they did say there is contact.
they can be contacted via the
website and information can be
provided to them whether it's a
complaint or whether it's
questions or whatever it is.
Planning department would
typically if there is a
complaint, we'll follow-up on
that.
>>where is that information
being housed? Is it in your
spreadsheet? What I'm trying to
get at, will that information no
matter who is handling, that
information is in a repository.
>>it's related to our epic
system.
>>I want an answer next time.
Can we house that information in
decker or is that going to
require another widget to check.
>>you are asking, so I'm clear,
council chair, is that you want,
if somebody wants to know how
many complaints there were, they
can go somewhere andee?
>> I will get to that in a
second. I just want to know,
once a registration happens, a
conditional number and eventual
number s issued. If someone in
the community were to call your
office and issue a complaint
about a registered tr, where
does that complaint information
go? In a spreadsheet or on the
profile that was created within
decker? I'm just looking to
-
understand where all the
information is being housed so
that we can track, you can track
how those complaints are being
addressed and resolved if there
was any enforcement that needed
to happen. That's all.
>>sure. Ream quick
l quick, I can answer
that. Whether we ove forward or
go back, complaints are always
confidential. They go in our
files and remain confidential.
We follow-up on those. They are
assigned to an inspector and
followed up to that complaint
and all the information is held
within that file.
>>okay, the decker system, my
next question. Is any of this
information publicly searchable?
So any member of the public
could go online and search for a
vacation rentals that has been
registered with the county?
>> the people should be allowed
to get that information. It
needs to be available from
planning and from finance as
well. Dementia initiate
well.
>>vice-chair dennis "fresh"
onishi: with certain systems,
because I was working with
public works. In the system,
you can have these questions,
evaluate the application when
they submit? Right? So you
wouldn't need staff? Then it
could red flag certain areas to
the applicant, this is the
problem, right? Have you guys
looked into that?
>> I know building has. I don't
think we have at this point.
There is talk about it, but it
hasn't gotten to the point that
I think they are looking at cost
and what it's going to take to
implement that type of ai
program. I'm not sure if it can
be done with planning. That is
regarding the needinging the
the ai
functions that are happening
now.
>>okay. I forgot my second
question.
>>I guess I can send you an
email later because there is a
professor at uh hilo that does
some work with ai, and we are
also looking at trying to get
involved with doing certain
things for the county with
public works.
>>I think I get like ten e-mails
a day from ai companies asking
to have us hire them.
>>yeah, but something that could
help the process.
>>sure, of course.
>>making it easier and also
making it easier for the
applicant. That's what we are
here for is to service the
applicant. Right now they can't
even save their application. So
making sure they have all the
information. How many of them
do have all that prepared? So
you could have a lot of
frustrated people out there.
>>
>> council member matt
kanealii-kleinfelder: maybe I'm
asking the same question a
different way. We didn't want
to use epic for this?
>> I don't think epic has the
capability of doing this. It's
a web based program that needs
to be online.
>>okay.
>>our epic system is like we
house our information. You can
submit into it and then it's
assigned to somebody. This
actually does the work for us.
You end up going. You fill out a
registration form, you create an
account. You are able to go back
to that account later to do 3
additional upgrades or edits or
change of information or pay
your annual fees, all through
this program. All of that
information will be input into
our epic system for us for
information.
>>so eckard is going to
interact?
>> yes.
>>maybe we should cancel our
epic contract and move it over.
>>I'm not going to comment on
that, but there has been a lot
of comments.
>>thank you. I yield.
>> council member ashley
kierkiewicz: one more question
to ask the director.
Registration 645-c, the duty of
the owner to maintain the
occurrence nd accuracy of the
information provided. Any
changes to the status, will that
need to be shared via a form
prescribed by the director or
can that happen within he
deckard system?
>> 645-c?
In the system, they have a
change of information form that
you can fill out and do that.
Whatever it is. If it's change
of ownership, that's a little
different. There is another
form for that, but any
information you need to change
on your registration, you can do
that to that process and update
it.
>>sorry, the question that I had
was also about the status. If
they elect to terminate the
registration, can that be done
through deckard or another form?
>> it will be done through
deckard, cancellation, those
things. As well as to update
the particular status for the
stvr's, whatever it is and they
monitor that. We have a lot of
questions and still have a lot
to go. And one question was
around people using the same
number several times and they
say all the time. They are
constantly able to catch all of
this activity online.
>>thank you, director.
>>council member heather l.
Kimball: thank you. I want to
encourage everybody between now
and the first reading if we get
there, to ook at the
they have a lot of case studies
here that show you the type of
tools they have available. I
think, director, perhaps if
before the next reading, I think
it might be useful to share the
rfp that went out, just from the
standpoint that you can see the
features that were requested
when we put out the request for
proposals. This is what we do
and it's not just the
registration that they are
providing but providing the
search function that go through
all the listings through vrbo
and airbnb and will show online
what is registered and what is
out there for transient rental.
There is a lot of value out
there. There is a lot with ai
in the process accepting the
special application and tie into
the existing platform. It would
be great to see that rfp and the
features. Tracking the
violations and notices as well.
>>thank you very much. Any other
questions or comments? If not,
we'll move to a vote on the
measure. Seeing none. All in
favor say, "aye"
>> aye.
>> any opposed? Motion carried
with 9 aye votes.
>>bill 175 will be heard at
first reading.
>>thank you.
>>is there
>>clerk: is there any testimony
for bill 176? Seeing none.
>>
article 1, of the hawaii county
code 1983 (2016 edition, as
amended), relating to the
general plan
establishes amendment procedures
for the general plan, including
a comprehensive review every ten
years and interim amendments;
describes powers and duties of
the planning director and
planning commissions.
Reference: comm. 968
intr. By: council members inaba
and kierkiewicz
>>chair holeka goro inaba:
motion to forward bill 176 to 3
council with a favorable
recommendation.
>>thank you. We have a motion
and second y council member
inaba and onishi to forward bill
176 to council with a favorable
recommendation. At this time,
please let the record reflect
that I'm passing the gavel to
committee vice chair galimba.
I'm the coauthor of the
legislation. Thank you.
>> council member michelle m.
Galimba:
>>chair holeka goro inaba:
thank you. Bill 176, is our bill
to codify in the hawai'I county
code, our general plan amendment
procedures both conferring the
vering the
comprehensive review as well as
amendments to the general plan
to the county director and the
planning crore.
Director. This bill, as
we know, we were making
amendments as we were locked out
of the last comprehensive review
part of because of the rules
lived in the general plan but
now we'll codify it. As an
overview, this process still
requires a ten year cycle for
comprehensive reviews. It
requires public notice and
opportunity for public
participation including at least
one workshop in each council
district. It gets us, the
council, the opportunity to
identify proposed amendments for
the planning director to
consider. Aain, the
requirement for review by both
the planning commissions which
is required by our charter and I
believe state law as well.
Establish is a general timeline
so we still have a three year
window from initiation to when
the planning department should
be transmitting it to council
for our action. If you
reference communication 968.3.
We have a graphic that shows the
process. So we can just talk
through it. The bill states hat
prior to the initiation the
planning department would work
on creating a draft and at the
beginning, the director would
share this draft with us, and as
part of the public notice inform
us of whether the plan is being
replaced at it was in this last
round or if there is slight
adjustments being made from that
point. The council has 120 days
to propose amendments via
resolution for the director's
consideration, and then the
planning department has some
time to work through those
public workshops. The planning
commission has to do with any
other bill for ordinance that
they recommend to the council,
again, make recommendation onto
the planning director's set of
recommendations. I think the
biggest change here for us to
recognize is that when it's
transmitted to the council, the
council has full authority to do
its legislative work. As we saw
in the previous amendment
procedures for the comprehensive
review, we were barred from the
removal or addition or taking
any ubstantive amendments. So
that language is gone. Being
that it is a planning department
initiated process, they are the
ones who create the
recommendations and send it
through the commission even
though we have an opportunity to
chime in at the beginning via
resolution, we found it
necessary to be very clear that
you have full authority to amend
prior to the passing of this
legislation. In addition, we do
have a timeline as well. If the
director does not provide the
draft to the council within five
years, that process is deemed
closed. That's to allow us to
have an opportunity to make
interim amendments. Nothing
prevents the planning department
from republican
initiating using the same
draft they were working on, but
there needs to be some kind of
deadline which is what is being
presented here. I'm going to
hand it over to council member
kierkiewicz to speak about the
interim amendments.
>> council member ashley
kierkiewicz: this will be my
public therapy session because
with the last go around there is
so much trauma and tension
because of what was in the
general plan itself and the
future and the inherit authority
granted through the charter.
There was a lot of conflict
there. This code amendment would
provide clarity whether there is
ambiguity and transparency and
predictability within the
process. I also really
appreciate the fact that the
process cannot go on
indefinitely. This last general
plan stands four mayoral
administrations which is kind of
insane. So this ensures that
everyone involved in the
department, the council t
community, they know their
responsibilities and know when
to act and within what
timeframe. There are separate
procedures for the initial
comprehensive review as well as
interim amendment and you can
see the process for interim
amendment in section 16b, I'm
sorry. I apologize. 16 f for
council initiated. The council
members can proposed amendments
at any time. Those amendments
would be transmitted to the
director and both planning
commissions prior to their first
meeting for review. The director
has 30 days to review and
provide recommendations to the
commissions. 60 days after
revving the director's comments,
the commissioners are to act
upon what has been send to them
t o them
and respond to council and after
that period with no response, it
will be sent without the
recommendation. The council MAY
act upon revving those
recommendations or 90 days after
revving from the director for
review whichever occurs first.
There is a time frame here where
the director can provide
comments, if not the council
will move forward. The director
is also empowered through
section g to initiate interim
amendments. Again, very similar
process. The director would
propose an amendment, ransmit
it to planning commissions with
-
a written justification for why
he or she is making that
recommendation for an amendment.
Commission's review and send a
recommendation to the council,
and the council moves forward
with its legislative process
with either adopting amendments
or rejecting amendments proposed
interim amendment. I hope that
provides clarity for how this
process will play out in the
future. It's best home is in
the code, not the document
itself. We are open to questions
and feedback members MAY have.
Thank you for the opportunity.
>>thank you.
>> council member michelle m.
Galimba: council member inaba?
>>chair holeka goro inaba: just
as a follow-up, we do have
communication 916.2. Which is
written comments from the
planning department on this
bill. I do want to note that my
intention is to hear everyone's
feedback today and to postpone
to the next committee meeting so
we can work on this and come up
with the right language moving
forward. Director, do you want
to walk through some ofours?
>> sure.
>> planning director jeff
darrow: thank you, chair,
vice-chair. Really appreciate
the opportunity to work in
collaboration with chair inaba
on this. Oerall, we are very
thankful for the time and effort
that was put into this to spell
this out much clearer than our
last go around. Hopefully, I
don't think any of us will be
here then in the future. I hope
not. But, but just in case. So
on 16.1, we are just asking that
they consider keeping the date
of DECEMBER 5, 1971, as that was
an important date in regards to
the first adopted general plan.
16a, initiation, this is unique.
Usually we initiate and then we
prepare. This is prepare and
then initiate. We are just
concerned about that because
typically what we do is take in
input and then prepare.
I can see this process working
if you are looking at an overall
comprehensive amendment of the
current plan, and doing an
amendment you go through it,
make amendments, package it and
then provide it.
In what we just saw in the last 3
go around, it was a completely
new plan. Both 2040 and 2045,
did not amend the previous
plans. They basically created
new plans. We incorporate a lot
of direction from the council
through the resolutions through
the different agencies, and
through public comments to
incorporate and prepare that
plan. But again, that's one of
the things that we can work
through as we postpone and meet
together and come up with some
language. Public comments
workshops on 16b. Again, the
concern was right now whenever
there is a change to someone's
property that would redesignate
it to either open or
conservation, that there be a
notice provided. I think that --
let's see, the planning director
shall. We know the proposed
process does not include the
requirement to notify property
owners. We recommend k
16d, we are just unclear about,
we just are requesting some
clarity on this particular
process spelled out in 16d.
Lastly, the legislative report.
I'm sorry, one more before that
again, we are asking to clarify
the intent of the legislative
history report and where it is 3
filed especially in the case
that the planning director's
recommendations are rejected.
Lastly, 16f, we are requesting
that it remain 60 days rather
than 30 days. 30 days is a 3
pretty tight timeline especially
given everything that goes on.
Anyway, thank you.
>>
>>chair holeka goro inaba:
thank you, director. I will
briefly summarize that we for
sure are willing to address. I
will walk us through from the
top of the director's comments.
I don't think we'll be keeping
the original 1971. We MAY have
further discussion on that, but
as of now, probably not. The
initiation note, having the
draft created prior to the
initiation, it's something we
felt would be helpful to
everyone because when the
initiation notice goes out, it
informs us of how it's going to
be. So, happy to, that's
something I would like to hear
from the body on, but again,
they have three years from
initiation to get something to
council. So if planning
department knows that the
comprehensive review is coming
up, they have potentially ten
years to prepare some kind of
draft to share as part of the
initiation notice. When it comes
to the closure, there was
comments from the department
regarding, being very clear that
the council has the authority o
make amendments because it says
either pass or rject. So we'll
be clarifying that language as
well as the legislative history
report to be specific about
workshops not having minutes
since they aren't recorded.
We'll make sure we tighten up
that language. E will make that
change from 30-60 days.
Generally not too much change
from what happened. The most
significant change is being able
to make the required amendments
when it comes to council.
We won't be including the public
notice. It doesn't change.
Sorry, the notice to property
owners either bus
ecause this is
the county's general plan. It
doesn't change the actual
intention and it takes resources
to get the letters out. It is
the county's mana'o on what
could be and should be in the
future and something we checked
in with corporation counsel
months back prior to working on
this bill. I will stop talking
now. We are going to postpone.
Hear from you folks and then
make the amendments for next
committee meeting. Thank you,
chair.
>> council member ashley
kierkiewicz: one thing to add.
I feel strongly about a draft
being circulated to the public
and not going out and doing
workshops where folks are just
adding to the board. You are the
planning department, you are the
planning expert. You are
supposed to know how to plan
communities. I worry about
giving so much free range to
community where they start to
misunderstand the point and
function of a general plan.
Starting the area where folks
can comment on is one point.
And one other thing is it would
be great to also get a look back
as part of the public initiation
meetings about hat has been
I know that there are maybe some
procedures in the country 2045
plan about reporting, but I
think it's also fortunate report
on where the county was
successful or fell short on some
of the goals that are in the
current plan, and that MAY have
informed the draft that folks
arguing that you were
recommending the council move
forward on. So I'm not apt to
agree with you that we just go
out to community to say "what
are you looking for?" I think
the general theme to look for
the working draft and look at
comments from that. Thank you.
>>thank you.
>>
>> council member james hustace:
thank you, chair.
. Hank you, council members,
inaba, kierkiewicz for
presenting this. I appreciate
the work you put into this. I
definitely felt that tension in
the general plan process about
our inability to make changes,
small, large, whatnot. I
appreciate you putting a new
position here on our legislative
authority. Thank you. My only
question and I appreciate your
sentiment, council member inaba,
on trying to identify and really
be clear about the closure
process and what that looks like
in terms of making sure it's
clear with planning that these
are the steps we are going to
take and this
condemn
>>council member heather l.
Kimball: first of all, to the
makers, about the timeline, I
just want to be sure I'm
especially clear on this. Every
ten years it will initiate and
-
they will have three years or
they are supposed to have three
years so that it's every ten
years we get a new plan. I'm
just not super clear.
>>yes, we need to initiate
within ten years of the initial
approval and once initiation
begins. Nothing has changed on
that front. They have three
years from nitiation to get it
to council. And if they don't,
they need to provide quarterly
reports to us. If they fail to
get us something within the five
years, then it's deemed closed
because we still are barred from
interim amendments during the
comprehensive review based on
the rules we are proposing and
that's to ensure there isn't
confusion at the commission
between an ongoing comprehensive
review and something trying to
throw in additional amendments.
>>if everything went well, we
could anticipate a 13 year
cadence for a new bill? Okay.
That's what I thought. I wanted
to be sure.
>>to the makers, was there any
conversation about adopting the
general plan as something other
than an ordinance itself? That
is one of the challenges that I
have had with this process in
terms of how it was brought to
us is that the general plan
itself is considered and
ordinance and, while, I know
that prescribes certain
procedures tied to it, it also
handcuffs it's in some ways too.
I just wonder if you had any
dialogue about that?
>> we id not discuss changing
it to a resolution based on the
standing philosophy is that it
is law and having it as an
ordinance really provides that
kind of force of law that we
would want something that is
supposed to guide development
and incorporates input from
state and county a
>>okay, I will bring some
comments more thoroughly next
time on maybe some other options
to discuss other than having it
be an ordinance. I think it
makes sense to -- corporation
counsel, yes, the charter is
part of that. Ys, go ahead.
>>corporation counsel: rene
schoen. T
>>council member heather l.
Kimball: well, however, now
it's included, in this last go
around, it was included as an
attachment. I think even within
the constraint of the charter
language, I think there is
-
the last thing to the makers
just trying to make sure I clear
with respect to making it
clearer what our authority is
once it's delivered to us from
the planning department, it
seems from the standpoint of the
absence within the creation that
we have an authority that it
becomes by default, the
prescription, the authority that
we have under the fact that it
is an ordinance and we are the
legislative body. Am I reading
that correctly?
>> yes, and that's something we
are going to clarify with
section 16b sub section b, says
the director shall present the
director's recommendation
together with each commission to
the council for its
consideration
consideration, period. That
lends to our doing our
legislative function, that we
are going to clarify as well as
in 16b-1 that the council's
adoption or rejection of the
recommendations that they could
be amended as well. So, just
more authority there and we'll
have that language for next
time.
>>yes, I think -- I actually
like that it's just our
consideration and that's by
default gives us all of our
legislative authority. I think
generally speaking, I like to
preserve as much authority in
the legislative branch as
possible. However,, I am of the
two minds of the fact that this
is the general plan is something
different than a typical
ordinance, and if anything were,
one would hope the legislative
body would be helpful and what
the planning department would be
giving around an amendment, but
I do have some concerns that
anything too substantive should
actually would potentially
measure it further review by the
planning commission, but I'm not
sure where that line is for me
or whether or not selling out. I
guess we would have the
authority if it came to us as an
-
amendment to send it to the
planning commissions for review
if anybody thought it was
substantive or not. Anyway,
that's some where I'm not quite
settled on that position on.
Thank you.
>> council member ashley
kierkiewicz: can I just say a
point when council member
kimball had mentioned how the
general plan is presented as an
exhibit to an ordinance. It
wasn't always that way. The
actually language of a general
plan if you look at the drafts
from 71 and 89, they were in the
format of how we typically
receive bills. So what you see
here, bill 176, that's exactly
what the general plans look like
before it was adopted and put
aside and made into a booklet
with pictures. There was a lot
more flexibility and room to
make amendments because it was
provided in a format that we are
used to. We might consider going
forward going back to what we
know which is these bills for
ordinances, not an exhibit. I
don't think folks care about the
pictures right now, director. I
think they really care about the
substance, the policy that we
are going to guide our county.
To your comment about sending to
the commission. I think that was
another tension point that we
were trying to navigate as a
body was how to define
substantive. I think we all had
a different range for what that
looked like. I feel comfortable
with the language as is. Where
the council has the final say on
what this looks like because
that is what we do for every
other bill for ordinance that
comes through. We get the
recommendation from various
commissions and at the end of
the day, we take that into
consideration and move forward
with either adopting or
amending. O I would like for us
to continue to exercise our full
legislative authority a
>>council member heather l.
Kimball: one comment to your
point, council member
kierkiewicz. I think about a
zoning ordinance and how that
doesn't go live in the code but
in a format of an ordinance that
we can amend as we make
receive it.
>>
>> council member jenn kagiwada:
thank you. Just real quick. I
just want to support what
council member kierkiewicz said
about I think it is really
important that the planning
department take the lead in
setting the direction and giving
the public something to kind of
wrap their heads errands.
Around. It's
such a large document and you
are the one with experience and
education on this. I think
people don't often know even
where to start. So, it makes it
really hard to get that civic
engagement from a lot of people
when it's just too overwhelming
for them. I just want to second
that I know it's a big shift and
a different way of looking at
it, but we are granting you
first stab. So, yeah, I rea
>> planning director jeff
darrow: chair, thank you for
those comments. The way the bill
is written, it does give
flexibility for the planning
director, which is good. The way
it's laid ut in 16a is that
it's not like you are creating a
new plan. You are creating
recommendations for a general
plan which MAY be recommended
amendments or could be a
recommendation for a new plan.
So you are kind of giving a head
start there. You are saying,
this is the direction we want to
go. And then you initiate and
have to chime in. So that works.
It looks like it will be good.
The ne thing I did want to
touch upon is what council
member kimball touched upon.
typically, we have been meeting
with the most of the council
members at this point regarding
the amendments they would like
to see now that the general plan
has passed. If it as done
previously, those would have
been amendments that would have
been considered during the
comprehensive general plan. In
meeting with everyone, I haven't
seen anything other than some
land use map changes and some
minor adjustments in the
language. There hasn't been
anything that has really even
though the way the previous
general plan said is hese are
considered substantive, right?
A land use map change or a
policy change. Those are
considered substantive. But
typically, a minor map
amendment, really isn't that
substantive. It's just really
fixing something, things like
that. What I think is
substantive that we have seen
and it's happened twice now. In
2005, it happened and it
happened again recently where we
-
see a new plan that comes out.
And again, I'm just using
thanksgiving
this
as an example that we can
consider as a substantive
change. You are looking at one
plan and another plan is
presented. Again, this has
happened twice now. This
happened back fell
in 2005 and
happened again here. It would be
good to have an opportunity when
something like that comes
forward to be able to llow the
commissions an opportunity if
that's the direction the council
wants to go as far as adopting
>>chair holeka goro inaba:
thank you. E'll work further in
two weeks with the planning
department. Thank you everyone
for your feedback. I want o
clarify a point that director
brought up regarding section
16a. The initiation notice is
not, well, what is presented is
not sharing what it's going to
be recommended amendments or new
draft. It is the recommended
new draft. I want to clarify
that because ten years from now
when people look at that in
minutes, I want that to be the
record. It's not saying that you
are going to do, you are
providing amendments for the
draft.
>>thank you.
>>thank you. With that, I move
to postpone bill --
>>sorry.
>> council member michelle m.
Galimba: I wanted to make a few
comments and that would be I
think also at that point of
amendments at the very end by
the council, I do feel like
although we MAY feel we are
wise, we MAY need some feedback,
and I think although we felt
like we were shut out, we were
more just daunted by the process
that substantive amendments
would have to go through and a
timeline that we were under. So,
finding the way for it to not be
such a daunting process, but
still I think giving a little
more weight to the planning
department than the
recommendations is something I
would like to see. I don't know
what that looks like but perhaps
thinking bit
about it in the next
few weeks.
>>sorry about that, council
member galimba baptism
. We will postpone