the budget and finance committee will come to order and members today we are covering appendix b which outlines all of our rates and fees should should be some good discussions i by the number of people who've shown up to testify i don't think there's been much understanding of public of the increases that are included in the budget so hopefully folks will start return with that will begin part public testimony and it does not appear that we have anyone here to testify in the chambers about all the rates and fees that were it gets no real opening comments i will be making the you know my initial budget presentation and we missed last week i was making that on the thirteenth talk about in general all of the overview budget overview revenues and that kind of item so we'll get through today a based on the rates and fees that were presented any questions you might have of i can you know we can work on you know what those proposed increases or changes to the revenue would mean two increases to the rates would mean to revenue as well so if i and  just heard me miss that say a word so if you hear me that do that once in a while it apologize and the trying to catch up ok thank you very much members of you turn to page  one there's no changes in the rates but i think it's important to point out the changes in the valuations as you know there the new values for each of the classifications is in the blue and the old values in red as you know just to run down the percentage changes in each of the categories residential has increased by twelve percent apartment values have increased by thirteen point four percent commercial values are way ahead of all other classifications with an increase of fifty percent and again we need to take into consideration that this doesn't mean that all the values in that classification have all the individual values have increased we don't know to what degree some of the new commercial  parcels around the airport and cars have added value to that classification but as we go through the process of determining whether we need  to increase or decrease the the rates we should be asking those questions and find out what the impact is on the on the owners in those classifications industrial has gone up by fourteen point six percent agriculture seven point two conservation four point eight hotel and resort five point eight timeshare has gone up eleven point two percent homeowners has gone up seventeen percent again we don't know how much of that is through added units versus increase in specific values and the commercialised residential has gone up about ten percent so any questions for the administration and page one with future yeah i might note that on april twentieth right after the certification and i recall that that presentation includes a number of units in each yes classification i don't remember seen the previous years number of units so maybe you could ask the real property tax folks copying costs for the apps the larger the map you want the more you're going to face it increases the charge for a sheet size of twenty two inches by thirty six inches from a dollar two to three dollars and and then it adds a increased fee for something for a square foot that's larger than that so any questions for the administration on that item you might want to mark these pages as we go through them so that you can get back to them easily when we get to that point the discussions later in the budget no questions ok and the next change is on page eighteen and maybe you can explain that mr director the citizens of our community who are required to hold harmless agreements from the development service administration permits for various reasons and it's since we them and heating the cost so we wanted to be able to charge many people would be very very happy to pay a fee to do it because it saves them a couple months worth of time if we can do  so this is basically for us to recoup the cost of something we were basically doing already that the people have been very supportive of actually paying the fee on it's a minimal fee and saves them quite a bit not just a question ok members questions mr couch thank you mr jenner i guess the question for the captain would be do you get more false alarms  t businesses than you do residential it's implied in this fee structure but i just want to double check yes definitely so it's mates mainly the business is that you get the right ok because all right then that that's a little bit more understandable is the way why they did this ok thank you other questions members think mr chair you know i apologize i have not been following this false alarm code implementation until it's presented in our rates and fees let me review that and ok i'll get back to you but no to answer question there was no special fun but is it correct to assume that it will be set up if that's yeah let me review the code ok thank you and you have any estimate of how many chair how many registrars do you expect to have you know we have about twenty six alarm companies who provide service to the county  to get them to tell us how many clients they have it really difficult but we're on average roughly between six and seven thousand a large halls every year so i couldn't tell you you know there's a lot we're in the process of getting on our feet together to hire somebody to administer this ordinance without having to go into executive session is there any you monitor that is there reason why there needs to be an extension you know we just not ready but just not ready on time and it's my understanding that the fees collected on the registration portion will go into the into the fund the alarm and so once we develop this then we'll be creating it in putting it into our appendix a we're discusses a special fund thank you thank you very much toure i'm kind of wondering where the proposed fees came from you know is there some rational next is that we use in order to start with twenty five and fifty are we comparing it to what other people charge or or tom also provided information from other jurisdictions and so we just incorporated the average and that's what we came up with the fees include any estimate of revenues in this year's budget based on this rate thank you  moving down the page to camping permits current permitting and our code revisions that we are currently transitioning to we will not be in for many any changes so the change fees will not be changing with this current budget when our ordinance our quota visions have been completed it will go before council and will then if need be amendment to the fees at that time so t restate are you saying that these proposed changes are actually not going to take effect in this year's budget because we have to change the ordinance first chair yes so there'll be no dollar bond changes will continue with the current for permits for residences and that's just to make it consistent the rest of the changes on pages twenty twenty one  twenty twenty twenty one are really just changes to the description of the type of permits that the department parks are creation issues  typically know their type one type two type two are type to see type three type you know all these kind of different types and what the parks department did was go through and review those and provide more district descriptive and accurate names to those different types of permits as to the actual functions of the permit east so while you might see like for gymnasiums in the first one on page twenty twenty one there are twenty i guess the numbers are changed but it's really just if you look at it changing the columns that they're in where which is co sponsored which was used to be a type two zero so apologize it's kind of hard to look at that on the table like this but if you follow through each one of those lines you'll see that the  fees didn't actually change we're not increasing any of the fees it's just the types that changed and the way the rams your version shows it makes it a little bit difficult to see that you can  see that now that you've pointed out but boy it looked like you guys were making wholesale changes ok members any questions on page twenty couch thank you i know we were asking either last year the year before about potential increases in the fees for the facilities is that part of your study as well and then you're going to deal with that might my only concern is if we do increase fees we probably want to do it gradually because i think the department tried to do it back in two thousand to saying you know the use of these parks and camps and all these things are so important to our families and it's usually our families that can be step forward and this is a way of taking their families out for recreation and i remember when you know we were young parents we took our kids to the beach it cost us nothing just to pack up whatever food we had and go to the beach and i see a lot of local families on the weekends these beaches are just crowded with all these people agenda is to and i believe it was in my committee twice and the department came forward and said they were not ready to present due to the fact that they were still working on i believe the permitting process but there has been movement in my committee to try to get the department to to move on it or act on it but i can send so many letters and you thank you yeah i will i would just reiterate that this is something that we've been looking at for quite some time and we had discussions regarding the gulf fund and and and we we do sensitivities in this area at the same time i think we need to keep the pressure on the department to make changes where changes are appropriate because the you know the department spends a considerable amount of money operating the parks and all the facilities that we we do and where we are utilizing or setting aside a specific part of the park or or a facility  and keeping others out i think it's appropriate for us to be charging at least a portion of what it costs us to operate so i think we need to keep the pressure on the department to come up with some solutions and we i think we want to keep the majority of park use free but we want to make sure that we're also recapturing some of the cost for things that  three of these pages notated under parks today or is it just that one page about camping permits it's the following page page twenty there are no changes other than in title but we have the red in the blues so what does isn't it mean we were minus seen the the red bracketed numbers in adding the blue numbers and some of these are jumping from ten to fifteen dollars so what's happening is they're actually just changing columns so we see for example and gymnasiums with air conditioning in the fourth and on the fifth column there's a blue two hundred if you look for there on the left there's a red bracket around two hundred so basically we're just moving it is a bit confusing we're moving that two hundred from one column to another so we're just changing the name of the charge as opposed to actually changing the amount of the charge ok be any changes to the fees currently to answer the question as was bought from mr has been on the department is desperately getting those numbers for you folks over the decades there was basically no no history of how we can pull it which is part of the new system there are try to transfer me to the active areas is hopefully where that we can go and transfer anything into that system and then have an accountable tracking system per per unit per park for community center so we are there was just a couple switches that weren't that didn't hold so there's on the ball feel lights that two dollar increase for the in the second column should be zero yeah not so not the not the ball field with lights but just the ball fields yeah looks like that two dollars you're correct stuff the ok good catch staff yes well not those changes and also not a comment regarding the the terms being used is not consistent yeah at which time the code gets revise i think it would be appropriate to then revise the schedule ok thank you and then yes along that line those lines then do we make those change these changes now and hope that before july first we get the code change from the committee or something we'll have to discuss because a prior to that would make any sense to make any changes now until th otherwise described in this table seems similar were just there where they were switching the amounts in the columns didn't exactly a line so like in the first column they have a change in their the governmental whereas in all the other categories there was no change so i believe it should still remain at ok so department if you want us to keep that consistent or yes ok thank you members just a reminder i just recalled a conversation i had with the folks from cuckoo this morning to keep a favorable distance from your microphone when speaking where we're causing them challenges i know i'm the worst offender so i want us to keep a hands distance away from the microphone ok and then moving down the page which we are on page twenty one there is a deletion of significant chapters or verbiage partment chere you referring to the the red with the types of permits yes ok so those are the types that we have types one two three four and five and then two are in everything else so those are  the name changes that eventually with the code are visions those types ones to threes fours and fives would be transformed into the other names that mr boss had mentioned government general use co sponsored and therefore so those are the current names as we're using right now just basically on a number reference compared to a name reference ok so as as staff as noted the new terms that you placed in here are not recognized in the code so members questions edits with that so there are some minor i mean gathering everybody together to go through the revisions on the code revisions it was a lot so we keep going back and forth the core council does have a copy as well yes thanks shows a change from five thousand to forty eight hundred the only challenge with that is that the contract that we just entered into staff is pointed out that the  contract says for the term of this agreement the annual rental fee for the use of premises for the activities shall be five thousand dollars and so are reducing it from five thousand and forty eight hundred which seems inconsistent with the agreement so i can follow up on that again if the contract was written at the five thousand i don't want to soon but i would think that that's the rate they would pay so again that change in the blue hasn't really been implemented currently anyway so we still would stick to the five thousand on the lease agreement well the question is should we and it doesn't seem that we should be changing that at all if you could just confirm to us that that is the fact that the five thousand dollars should be the rate ok ok i believe that does it for parks peach twenty or so one one more or we get to planning on the upper part of page twenty three members  the department could please review that with us we think the chair so that go to baseball league is no longer in existence so currently right now that wouldn't pertain to any changes and then there's a new fee schedule for adult recreation programs and leagues which is which is all new with their fees for these practices before such are depending on the type elite if it was our county sponsored run leads to the recreation there is no fee but if there is a private per se league going on and there is a fee these particular ones are recreation fees from our department but again intil we implement the code revisions and changes this is also part of that permit changes in process with the fee structure change ok so these are new fees not existing fees yes you get members any questions on that just for the public's understanding at recreation programs slash leagues and we will have to make sure that this is clearly spelled out  the director is saying that the if is a county sponsored league there are no fees so for things that are not county sponsored as a fee of a per game fee for softball of twenty dollars basketball twenty five volleyball ten kickball twenty baseball twenty and other sports activities twenty so this  couch thank you mr chair those fees especially on outdoor courts are only if people have permits if they want permits otherwise if there are it's an unprecedented time anybody can go out there and play right ideally for our playing fields it has to be permanent and our true playing fields would be of course just baseball stadium football stadium the literally fields ideally they have to be permit if it's going to be an organized run game  organized right yes so if it's a pick up basketball game and it all you know you get twenty guys you're going want to kind of play around that's fine they don't need to get a permit unless the court  you thank you any further questions on the myspace but i'm going to ask a question and show how much i know about sports but if there's a bunch of guys playing on the field and somebody who has signed up for him numbers for the permit holders there is a contact number to go forth with and ideally yes you know we don't want any confrontation obviously but if you have the permit you have the use of the field so at that point in time we hope that the permit he would call the department we always  somebody on call and they would come down and then again in force the permit use ok i can just see a bunch of guys scrapping them but we were here first and i don't care if you have a paper but i get like i said i don't get in the middle of it but i do know how things work thanks very good perception ok any further questions for this section and the other questions for parks before we release mr brown can say  to thank you mr brink and say home and move on to planning when you're off the hook as you haven't had any closing remarks i'm not sure just thank you for the time and again the department is aware of the few structures trying to be sustainable as much as we can i think remember cochran for jogging my memory on this one you do have other sports and activities and usually it looks like everything's all the same price for the most part for the same type of field question i have is why is soccer not listed and there's also a big push for rugby now too you just going to lump that all under other sports and and the fact that you have kickball on there which i know it's an adult knows get ball is not soccer it's just i'm curious why you haven't broken that out but soccer is huge here and rugby is picking up and kick balls coming up but it's not that referees so that was my mistake on that one for soccer and some of the other leagues they do have their own zone series football m i l will provide their own refs and not coming from a colony officiated from our recreation department so that would be  in soccer a lot of i do notice that a lot of the for the younger kids it's the older kids that are actually refereeing the flags so again just to reiterate on that one so then maybe we would want to add that in there somewhere i think it would certainly help good morning mr chairman good morning please feel free to provide whatever opening remarks i would like to make ok i'm not sure if the committee would like to go through you know table b schedule where a public hearing is required and actually at the actual numbers start on page twenty four the only change to table a proposed change for this year is an additional public hearing notice of five hundred fifty dollars sometimes we had a couple incidences  where perhaps an applicant has not provided adequate notice and under certain sections of the code the planning department you know the applicant is supposed to notify the neighbors within five hundred feet or whatever th particular section of the code says and then the planning director is supposed to publish in the paper notice a public hearing ok on occasion applicants do not provide the required notice to all the neighbors within five hundred feet or as otherwise required by the section of the code and so then the planning department is stuck re noticing in the paper we will cancel a public hearing and then re notice again on the paper that's an additional expense at the planning department bears so we're proposing that we be able to charge the applicant for that mr coach talk about shoreline setback rules again you're listing the location and then you're pulling out one hundred fifty dollars has a looks like it was in the wrong the wrong place that city was in the wrong place ok that's just that sort of like a requires a public hearing that i'm not sure why that was never separated out for the planning commission but it it was were just correcting that to make the table consistent ok and then  only talking table a right now or can we go to table b once you want to go through explanation of the changes just three pages of changes i think it's best if you go ahead and finish your review of the range of and they could include things like minor estimate permanence landscaping approvals signage plans etc and the proposed change is that instead of providing a valuation just because of the processing of these is basically the same it takes the same amount of time at cetera it's just a charge a flat fee of one hundred sixty five dollars rather than trying to go through and get about you ation on each of those the and then and then the additional review if somebody wants to come in and change something of a previous previous permit or make changes to an application again that would be one hundred sixty five dollars and i still think i think those are actually quite reasonable rates as they are the going to page twenty five there's no changes proposed for b permits are short term runnels or signs etc until you get down to the to near the bottom of the page landscape planning approvals that was basically moved over into  the flat fee of one hundred sixty five dollars going onto page twenty six there's a actually bottom of twenty five exceptions to fees and on to page twenty six i don't know if the chair would one of them is that if you're filing for multiple applications that once we charge full price for for the first application and then we g fifty percent discount for subsequent applications for instance if they're if somebody files for a landscape planting application and applies for sign and an estimate assessment all at once we would charge for the first one and then each one of the other ones receive a fifty percent discount my question is what if all of those  are after the fact permits the following exception i mean that it's really clear if if those are new permits and nothing has been built yet but in the in the next exception it says after the fact permit assessment fees the minimum fee is a thousand dollars so if we're if we're processing multiple after the fact permits does that fifty percent discount on those multiples apply or is it simply a thousand dollars per after the fact application and as in previous years we've had some discussion that after the fact  are because after the fact permits will require some additional processing so it's more of a cost recovery thing it's not supposed to be punitive our interpretation  has been that the after the fact fees it's it's a a thousand dollars minimum for each one and the fifty percent doesn't apply so as i was going to ask clarification from the counsel for that  there's some question whether it's the the after the fact is the application fee plus the one thousand dollars and then the third question will be does the planning director have discretion to lower those fees if needed i don't see where i do have that discretion but since the council sets this  at the beginning which is on page twenty three the changed show in my planning commission rules of practice and procedures do you recall when these rules were put the rules have been in place we had administrative rules since the planning commission has been in place and as just been they've been amended over time so i think the last amendments were possibly two three years ago ok so they're there current and we will be proposing other changes to the rules  but members questions on page twenty four count thank you so the the table b fee schedule it's your opinion that he just should be a flat one sixty five and that would help you guys you're processing better or because i'm a little hesitant you know some things valued zero to ten thousand dollars that's that's a huge increase from fifty five to one sixty if it i believe the one sixty five is administrative administrative fee or permit it still takes about the same amount of time to process so it's the hundred sixty five dollars that may you know that's roughly three times the amount of the fifty five it something original cost but one hundred sixty five dollars is still a pretty reasonable rate and we're still not recovering  the actual amount that it costs the county to process them ok and where does the shoreline step back fees are they appear and i don't know that i a shoreline setback determination that would fall that would that's not a public hearing item just to determine the shoreline that would be administrative so that would fall  and i guess ok so i just it doesn't matter whether it's struggling setback variation variance or any ok all of that's all lumped in the same thing all right thank you yeah but it just depends whether a public hearing is required  section where you're just doing a flat rate for this what's the average valuation of the project or the because i think that that hundred ten dollars jump by you know i hear mr coaches from zero to ten i mean if it's a five hundred dollars project and you know a two hundred dollars project it's going to cost them just as much to i mean is that never happens or just kind of curious what the know just pulling a number of the are we probably process five hundred permits every year that would fall under this three to five hundred it just at the time the application comes up they work with the applicant to come up with that valuation and charge accordingly and this this would certainly make it a little bit easier for staff just to charge a straight hundred sixty five if you really if you really need that average you will we could probably come up with that no but i'm just wondering if that's a steep price for someone a lot of your permits are com in a three hundred dollars and then one hundred sixty five of it is just to process the permit that's quite a huge charge you know i mean but if it's average temp thousand fifty thousand or whatever then already i can see it's not so drastic of an amount but that was just my reason for that question chair i don't need it i'm just but i think it's a very valid question is that i think and looking at this range of rates it might be appropriate to have to blend the two lower rates fifty five n one ten and into some great other than the one sixty five maybe you can take a look at that back to us whether that would be acceptable could you repeat that mr chairman if we have right now we have one fifty five i'm sorry the fifty five for things up to ten thousand and then one hundred  ten from ten thousand to one twenty five there may be some blending of the fifty five and one hundred ten that say let's let's just say for anything under a hundred twenty five thousand and ninety bucks then it goes from there to the one sixty five we can we can certainly look at that and just as i agree if it's a small value project it's tough to feel like they should be paying the same rate as somebody with a five hundred thousand dollar value i understand that perspective it just it still cost the department the same amount of money to process a fifty dollars project one hundred twenty five thousand dollars project under this week we get a we get a set of plans we review it we enter it into the county database  it's it's still roughly the same amount of time and so and we're still not we are not recovering the cost the actual cost it takes to process these permits  you know the whole rubbish thing it's like if you start charging more they're just going to the road because they don't want to come in and bring it to the right i think the other cost that needs to be considered in this is what is the c borne by the applicant to get everything put together that the planning department requires and i've shared with you guys before in other discussions you know when you when you go in for an estimate permit i know this this is not necessarily at that level when you go in to for an estimate permit you've got to provide a significant amount of studies and drawings and so on and it's all for the public's protection and it's all stuff that we should be doing but to put it in perspective for a fourteen unit addition to our plantation in law hina we're in the process now for twenty six twenty eight months and the cost is over one hundred eighty thousand dollars for what we're responsible for providing to the commission for them to make their decision whether we can even proceed or not so this has nothing to do with it we don't have working drawings we're not ready to go to bed as a whole nother year of design work and permanent work before we can actually build anything so you know well you know when we've had this discussion in the past we've never felt that the department needs to recover all the costs so anyway well if any of you want to weigh in on what what might be fair it might be fair just to leave the fifty five dollar rate for those from zero to one twenty five and then go to one sixty five over that but anyway i'm just throwing that out mr couch th six if i still had ok one question on page four the requirement for the five hundred fifty dollars additional public hearing notice what is your actual cost for posting that public hearing notice as are these the fees that generated that fund or where did those fees come come from chairman i believe that i believe that's where those funds came from it was over a gosh like fifteen years or something so i i'll double check on that maybe it's a question for mr baez the there are if if there was three point six million dollars and a fun d is separate for the are there two separate funds or four more in the planning department into which these fees drop sorry to have to get back to you i believe there was a number of the fees dropped directly into the general fund and then there was so there's a special trust an agency account wasn't a so special fund it was a trust agency account with understanding from this from my recollection and from understanding that the the funds were were paid as a as at the posit or as a reimbursement for cost  following up on that question please what were they you know they were putting money into it but what what authority do they have to take out or or what was it supposed to be used for withdraw from as opposed to just moving it all to the general fun that question in general of a trust an agency account they are a trust an agency account or not it's special funds necessarily they are generally a trust account where we we receive revenue receive i don't see revenue lose the money and either be on behalf of somebody else or as a deposit  for for the parks facilities different things like that right we're going to have to end up paying theoretically we're paying that money back to somebody another example of the trust an agency account is the money we receive for doing a commercial driver's licenses where it's a state function that we do it on behalf of the state the state pays our so we take all of the money and we keep a portion of it based on the grant revenue section and then we pay out the rest of it to the state so that money isn't really ours it's just holding it temporarily and that's really what that is supposed to be for which is understandable however i believe that money that was in that fund was transferred to general fund so yes we were holding it for somebody or over there in he said it was over the course of fifteen years so that's where i  want to bring in the finance director who was intimately involved with the auditors on that i believe it was a recommendation from the auditor to recognise that as as revenue to the general fund because of the determination of the original source of the funds wasn't necessarily at the positive it was a fee that was charged and so we can't go back fifteen years and figure out why the accounting system in the state at the time said this is the index code and you put these deposits in these these monies into but it's been cleared up since then and that's so  to recognise the funds that are in that and the way that the auditor recommended it was actually posted into the general fund as revenue miscellaneous revenue ok that makes that makes sense is it mr boswell to be correct to say that the monies that are received are if you're applying for a permit you're required to pay certain fees if you decide not to proceed with that process then those fees need to be returned so and it makes some sense to me that these fees would have had to go into an account  so that if you needed to return the fees there was an accounting of them being received and then if you proceed with the plans of the review then those funds should have been recognised as being transferred to the general fund at that time because there's no longer a need for you to pay them back what might have had that's possible like they can go back in the room exactly why we do provide refunds to people  out of other you know without having to put it into a trust and agency account prior to the you know when we receive the fee and they decide not to do it we provide them refunds and it's not necessarily from  and we we go through a significant amount of processing like we'll have short term rental apply and then it sits for a year and we request information we review the documents we request information and that information is not forthcoming are now click and we if we have to close the application or if an applicant applicant withdraws we generally do not refund their money we refund money when we find out that no they didn't need to apply for something or they paid the wrong fees they paid higher than what  was called for we're glad to refund money when it is when that's justified but as a general rule if if we engage in some kind of processing we do not refund thank you thank you for that explanation members for the account anymore or is that closed down and that object code is gone and in the xcode is gone we have to verify it with the finance department done not sure but to your knowledge mr spence having only been there for for eight months but still i had never heard of that fund so i'm not sure if mr spence even knew about it till then know we didn't know about it it came to our attention and we were like we have three point six million dollars sort of like to keep that and now we can't do that so now it came as a little surprise to us as well  talked about mr spence the whole fifty percent of the second application as long as they're being processed at the same time and you had some questions on the after the fact permit would you be amenable to adding language at the end of that the first sentence at the top of the page where it says person extent processed at the same time as the first application  except for after the fact permits if if that's a way that the council wants to go committee wants to go we would appreciate that transparent sometimes after the fact these are four really small things somebody called in and asked just i don't know it must be a ground mounted  air conditioning unit was installed without any permits they're coming in for f e m a as an after the fact it's a thousand dollars for a relatively small you know kind of permit that would normally just be exempt but you know and then you know we have instances also where there are people coming in for i mean it's it's a matter of doing business coming in for after the fact and i guess maybe we need to talk about this further in committee but i would think somehow we c leave it up to the discretion of the planning the b v a or the the planning director when it i mean there are two huge differences like you said you know  thousand dollars for somebody not knowing that you had to put a pad down or get a permit to put a pad down versus somebody who has a course of doing business saying i'm going to just build it and i'll pay for the after the fact later if they get caught if they get caught so maybe that's something we should probably bring up further either in a different budget in finance committee or policy or even planning committee of the day after the  permit issue is a more significant issue now that we have heard from the real property tax assessment director that there change detection review indicates something like a lot twenty something thousand yes potential problems with things not being permanent or at least not being recorded properly whether they were permanent or not you're going to get those notices the chair of the committee for his consideration because it does make sense that we treat after the fact permits separately and make it clear that it separate you have further questions no  i if they if the department in the committee wants to go with that language it's going to ask or counsel as he walks away yeah if that's the place to put that language it would be at the end of that he was playing candy crush me i know he was well he's trying to determine that yeah well i guess that my next question might be for him to it's acceptable there may be better ways to achieve that purpose but it's acceptable thank you ok and mr katz any further questions i had a question for the director  the calculation for after the fact permits a minimum fee of one thousand dollars plus up to fifty percent of project valuation as determined by the director do you is there a problem  do you find pushback on the fifty percent of value or are the values as you stated always very low and what happens if somebody comes in with you know values of two hundred fifty thousand dollars for something they've built on their eg property that and without anyone knowing think we look at it on a case by case basis on what was constructed if that's you know if it's a minor addition the somebody's built line i on to their property and they need an estimate sassaman we will charge them a thousand dollars just flat if if something really  onerous we will look at the you know we'll start looking at the percentage or how and because the fees are so if there's supposed to be fees and they're supposed to help cover the cost of actually processing the permit if if it's quite extensive then we'll start looking at the percentage the i think i think at some point we've gone up to thirty percent but it's rare we don't go much much past that ok and then this is for a court counsel the charter says that we we cannot charge penalties of over a thousand dollars and so that has been translate into a thousand dollars per day so is the department within the range of reality with respect to charging a percentage of value challenge from a charter perspective if they were to say well you're you're charges one hundred and one hundred thousand dollars because it's fifty percent of value and if it's been there for five years it's less than  thousand dollars a day council thank you i believe the distinction is between a fee versus a fine are a penalty this is essentially a regulatory fee so it went fine fall under the charter restriction on and due to missed by says point do we have to have a rational nex high but it smells more like a penalty than a fee i mean is generally to recapture cost x i was just reading a case on that it's a regulatory fee which has different conditions on it and i believe courts have ruled that regulatory fees can be used to i guess also prevent certain behavior so however this the way it sounds like mr spence is actually assessing this fee is basing it on his department's costs for the project then reviewing everything likely to have significantly more after the fact permits coming down the road so i'd like to be absolutely certain that what we're doing is within the purview that we're allowed by charter  so staff if you can just send a request to corp council to validate how we should approach this pencil just to make it clear it's all up to fifty percent of project valuation just so it's clear right thank you thank you for the questions on this members chair discussion were not on the after the fact but just below the other two changes the special management area appeal of director's decision goes for fifty five dollars you have five hundred fifty and then the one number for the petition to intervene also has a big jump and so just is this just to recoup costs of these processes yes i realize the big jump is yes thank you remember cochran i and i missed those in my opening remarks both of those there is there is a significant amount of work whenever we get a petition to intervene or an appeal of a director's decision and this is this is also too there's two fold one it's a whole lot of work to process the user's papers go back and forth and attorneys are involved at cetera but also to you know we occasionally get frivolous appeals people who don't really they just say i don't like this and they just appeal and so they pay fifty bucks you know that's really nothing part so part of this is to say ok am i really serious about this appeal is this something im that important to me that i'll put out five hundred fifty dollars or am i just going to hold up the works because i can write a check for fifty so it's a dual purpose proposal ok thank you sir real quick i guess the petition to intervene i guess that's what you're trying to say as he was i just don't like it you know and but i think also other people who have the right and have strong reasons five hundred fifty bucks could be a huge chunk you know for this they have an organized group and backup with attorneys and who knows what but if it's something that's totally legit and it's just a homeowner whatever on some could be on a land as it was going on what you know they wanted to speak out and they got to cough up five hundred fifty that's so i mean sure i understand but then again i concern the reality is that both of these issues are a huge amount of work for the department of these don't even begin to reflect the cost recapture like and and some of the other areas  and i think with with most appeals or petitions intervene there's enough passion there that you know the groups in many file is probably a fairly small number in comparison to what they're willing to spend and and you know when you're when you're filing to intervene you've got a lot of passion and you're going to going to get them going to find the money and so  i think their perspective on stopping the purely frivolous one i'm not sure this is going to stop anything but at least it might cover some of the cost that is involved in the department a couple of things one going back up to the a t m fees is for clarification is is that one thousand dollars minimum in all cases or what the director have the ability to waive or reduced fees in the case of hardship or disproportional to the size of the project m go i believe we were discussing whether or not we should have this whole discussion in somebodies committee and we weren't sure which committee i mean if you're willing to have it now that's fine but i think that senate committee because of what the real property tax division has uncovered right we're likely to have a significant number so if if the director and the body feels that we should make some adjustments i really think we need to make it during this budget cycle and that doesn't mean we have to solve it today but it means that we need to you know schedule some time as i have it set up this is your and in many respects it's completely under the purview of your committee i'm sure the chair would appreciate it if you would take the time to have discussions with with the department to the extent appropriate to come up with a recommendation that can be put into the rates and fees sure  time we're finishing up the budget so that during our budget sessions are absolutely you know you know and when the meetings are over you guys all get to go home but the staff and and the chair in particular are sticking around so i'm i'm sure mr spence would much rather have some some clarity if he's going to be hit with a lot more of these after the fact permit requests and and the public deserves clarity as well discussion before we break for lunch but i'm sure that these discussions are never short  thank you chair white and also members of the budget committee you're only going to notice just very small changes and the first change is that you will not see the disabled fixed wrote fayer any longer we had a total of seventy five individuals that had applied for the eighty a fixed pass for the entire calendar year we are unable to track how many passes that resulted in but it even assuming that every single person bought every single month it's still not a lot of passes i think it was somewhere around nine hundred passes that would have been in total sold we have been getting however a number of requests for disabled and you know fair assistance people wanting discounted passes for disabled we do offer our regular paratransit passes on our monthly passes to people with disabilities but in addition this year you will note that we added a section where it kind of mirrors a program that we had proposed but we felt that with m e o's capability and how well they had handled the  basic administration of the other houses we wanted to do a low income fair assistance the money will still come back to the county of maui but it will help with the fifteen dollar month subsidy for a person that wants to purchase and all systems pass and particularly the disabled people wanted some kind of assistance where they could access every single aspect of transportation not just the fixed or not just paratransit so we are offering that so what i will do is i will have my deputy though go through any specifics if you have questions or hold a fair will be actually or this program will be administered so thank you mr chair y good morning chair white and council members basically i'm going to go over the low income fair assistance program that we will be working with emil on so as of right  now propose in this years or in twenty sixteen fiscal years budget under human services transportation it's going to be fines for fifty thousand dollars that's what we're looking at setting for a discounted passes for seniors who are fifty five years or older as well as passes for students with valid school i d s so what's happening is that we're seeing the middle section who aren't people who are not seniors and who are not students that aren't able to afford to purchase a monthly bus pass and that current monthly bus pass would be a general boarding general monthly bus pass for forty five dollars so we working with emil we kind of came up with this idea where to for people who are low income they can fill out an application with or it would be very they would have to have of income verification to make sure that they meet the federal guidelines of low income status and they will be able to get a fifteen dollars subsidy so in essence  they would be able to purchase a general pass for thirty dollars instead of forty five dollars and so this program that we're doing it will be handled and i have to say i just want to in general say you know as i travel more and more late at night now because later i see the buses are quite full this is heading up country and i think that's wonderful because you know we always tell people it's going to take time for this ridership to pick up and we're seeing it it's really wonderful to see how many people are using the bus and i think it's a wonderful alternative for people that cannot cannot have a car so i just want to say that i think this is good i have a question and i got into this this morning because i was looking into something else i had seen on the front people hated of paper about the health connector and how people were getting in trouble with and i had referred many people so i was kind of concerned about god in my putting him in some kind of trouble with diarist by telling him to go because then later on the subsidy was reported as additional income so now these people are in trouble and having to pay additional was clarified for me by the folks at the health connector because i called i didn't want to put people in trouble by telling them you know go and get a reduced fee and then later on they run into trouble with i r s i don't want to be that person but what came with that was a lesson just this morning was about if you qualify because of income and your income changes somehow either you have to take responsibility or for letting people letting the people to give you  big no and if you don't well sorry you're going to get penalized by a rest it's your responsibility to say when i got this i was making five hundred dollars a month and now i got a job and i'm making two thousand dollars a month so really i'm not qualified for this anymore so in regards to this program i want to know how long is this certification good and how are we going to monitor that there's no abuse of this thing because they qualify when they come but they going to be required to report is the going to be an annual certification are we going to deal with it i do want to do it but i want to make sure that you know we get a handle on it chair basically yes there would be annual research patients every year if this program continues to move forward every year they would have to reapply for this program as well as for the fifteen dollars subsidy we don't actually give the applicant any i had yet it's basically internal accounting where emil will then feed us back the fifteen dollars you know that's good you know we want to make we want to help people that really need help but i think it's important that they take responsibility for letting us know so that if they don't qualify someone else can get money because fifteen thousand you may run out of it or or you may need more money or whatever so you want to make sure you know mr couch thank you so i'm i'm assuming from your discussion and kind of from the language here that this is just for the general boarding passes only right you may want to put that in there because if somebody is fifty five or or older or you know a paratransit person say oh it looks i can get low income assistance and get fifteen dollars off my with you we can update that language in this but in when we actually create the program with a meal that will be all stated in our in our what the program is about what the rules are and what we expect they guess of grossman thank you so you guys are do the department is deleting the persons with physicians certified disability that category that's correct so on the on the general boarding pass when you're including low income fare assistance are you recapturing the i'm assuming the disobey the people with this abilities that are under fifty five but would if they disability but you have a disability and if you're under fifty five then this will apply and then when you're going to the low income what if you are disabled but you are at a low income level and what is the you know what are you recapturing that or are you just letting that category are those that target group left alone or something like that chair  plea yes we pretty much recapture i would say we actually have the statistics of all seventy five people that applied for the persons with disability for fixed route and we do ask for their household income in the survey part and by looking at what was provided i would say all seventy five are would meet that this and wanting to make sure that persons with disabilities weren't going to be negatively impacted and one advantage of this is that with with the current with the current structure fiscally fifteen's fare structure the person has a disability don't have the ability to use a pass on the paratransit system so if they buy a thirty dollar pass it's for the fixed route system and then on a daily basis they would have to pay four dollars if they're using the paratransit system this general boarding pass would allow them to use that for all of the system so so it does then create a pass that's available to them for use on any of the system and that was a request of constituents as well mainly people you know they just the rock cards we did have something additional proposed and i think it was in consummate coaches committee when we were talking you know and it may have been past times about advertising in buses in general and one of the things that we did discuss and we sent forward i believe for drafting to corporation council is to change the actual ordinance to allow us to vend it similar to city and county of honolulu and allow them to do some of the new advertising media which would be some of them have audio visual where they have small screens in the buses that to me is working in other jurisdictions we have sort of and it's you know i'm not pointing fingers at corporation council but i know that there were some issues originally about repealing certain aspects of it and then having the authority i guess of our departments have the discretion to go out to bid on it but we sort of propose it as a pilot project to see if it would work so most of the individuals have not approached us though to put in the rack cards because you know they just don't want to pay now i think we have a total if if we're putting in out of fixed busses about sixty four busses so if you add up twenty four times sixty per month you know and it's just a rack card that's commingled with all of the other nonprofit advertisement it didn't seem to too attractive to them so you know sad to say we haven't really been marketing ourselves we would be looking at an outside entity to do meaningful marketing and probably using a different venue allowing the records for the non profits to stay but then possibly going the route of doing more of the current media advertising you know which would be in some kind of audiovisual and that's what city and county stewing so we've kind of been watching what they've been doing so if we can get this through and get it drafted by corporation council and the administration thinks that we've you know answered those questions properly then we would be proposing that to the council an actual ordinance change ok very good i mean they have a captured audience you know in his  for the question members of the questions that i had was that the the code specifically requires us to have a fare for disabled passengers so i don't know whether that means in using the specific term but do you feel that this your current proposal follows the code with respect to the requirement disabled or a rate for persons with disabilities yes and and because that's section of the code we kind of went over it beforehand because we had not had a fully fledged pira trances operation at the time we do have the daily as well as the monthly passes made available and those are discounted actually so we feel in combination with offering this  low income fair assistance as well as the current passes that are available to paratransit even though it doesn't say disabled paratransit you must be disabled that we felt satisfied it i believe it says a specific great there is a stablished a person with a disability identification card and disability party bus pass fair it seems somewhat broad but i just want to be sure that it's broad enough and the code also doesn't specifically recognize passengers fifty five and older either so i just want to be sure that we're not putting something in here that is not supported by the code limiting you as to the different i guess categories you want to create for various fares thank you thank you and to what degree have you taken this new fare structure out to the public we we have our paratransit at pfizer e group has actually been getting the word out we also are going to be having a forum a writer's forum which is going to be actually right after budget finishes but we have discussed with many of the people in the disabled community one of the things that we were reluctant to do because so often you know i talked about fear assistance in the past i talked about it ad nauseum for years but what ended up happening was it was never adopted and so people would get their hopes up and pen you know have it kind of dashed but if the council is supportive of this and particularly the way that we structured it with  think at that point just through meetings like this there will be a much greater awareness but for all of the people that i have spoken with they're very supportive of doing this kind of  systems there are some people that are not disabled to that look at this and they're supportive because not everybody necessarily that's disabled is low income and for those individuals they really do not mind paying even a little bit more if they're not eligible for this fare assistance question i have  current section the molly current code does allow for you guys to set up a couple fares are rates thank you and i'm i'm still having a little difficulty with and the assistance of fifteen dollars so we're we're setting aside money to go to m e o to pay back to you all of us i'm missing something isn't it when we accomplish the same thing for just establish a low income fair of thirty dollars you know if it's is your i believe structurally to do it within a grant we had discussed this with ministration as well and we don't currently have sufficient staff to be able to administer this emil has been doing through their qualification process they do a lot of other i guess it would be in call targeted qualifications so they're very familiar with doing it and this is probably more of a pilot project to see how many people actually take advantage of it we would also gather some statistical information from doing this but it's not really setting aside a fund because it's a section of their grant and if the monies are not utilized fully let's say only ten thousand might be accessed the money would be returned to the county because emea would not be accessing it and that's kind of the way that we've done their grant in the past i understand the process but isn't it the same as asking amnio to be the ones who determine who qualifies and then just given the thirty dollar rate sort of doing the grant we're going to work with me oh the income qualifications just follow the standard low income criteria established by the federal government so it's not something new that we're creating because our past structure is so complex already to offer one more pass it already many of the people who call us they ask for these different rates and passes and to do one more to produce it it just you know it did not seem to really be a good and stand your question and it seems to make sense that you have a general boarding pass even though it says forty five dollars on there if they have the qualifications that emil has verified and have something from them then they can go buy the pass the forty five dollars pass for only thirty dollars so i would think that would be the way to go as opposed to giving money to somebody and then have them give it back to you just say you're ok and if somebody who has this little card goes to buy a forty five dollars pass they get it for thirty dollars get a discount yeah it's not a different pass right it's the same pass same piece of paper it's just a discount i would think that would be and why didn't you take we can take a look at that we're happy to do it you know we thought from this perspective you know it would be easier to track because we also asked for other information you know which i mean our department can do that yeah but i'd prefer m e o because they've been doing this for a while they have the expertise and what we're saying is is that they qualify qualifies them as low income and gives them a letter a card something to then if they have that card they go to you and say i want to bus pass and get a fifteen dollar discount right i think that's what mr white is talking about not a separate pass that says because i'm sure they wouldn't want to be giving a pass out saying oh i'm low another there's another little challenges that we're taking general fund money right and give it to any you know than pay back the highway fund yeah that's the other part that might be  so i understand what we're really i think we're really a green with what you want to do in the end it's just that it's the way it's a convoluted way of doing it where they were just saying yeah if you don't have the you don't have the correct pass or you don't have the  ability to do the qualifying that does we all agree with that we agree with the concept but i think it's it's crisper to me that you let them authorize and then they just get a discount off of the existing pass you know creating a different path and i'm guessing that it would be a lot easier for both the county and amnio to not have to deal with get receiving a grant than tracking the grant and coming back to you and the county has to do the index goes the finance department has to go all over the place and you guys have to go a place it's just that ok and emil has approved these folks as being low low income fifteen dollars off the the fare i seemed i think that would be a lot less bureaucracy in make work in my opinion well and i think that knowing the chair  would have a problem giving general fund money to come back to the highway fund so i may stink we can accomplish the same thing that the barber wants to accomplish in a slightly different fashion mr chair yes i do have a question right now we have it set aside where we would allocate fifty thousand dollars so we do have a cap so i'm not sure if if you guys would allow us to then set certain caps so if we can only give out so many subsidies so as of right now with the fifty thousand dollar budget for this subsidy that would give us around three thousand three hundred  thirty three subsidies and if you divide that by twelve months that's roughly two hundred seventy eight subsidies in a month so i mean it we're kind of having it where it's a little bit more limited then just having the subs subsidy where potentially it could grow out more than fifty fifty thousand dollars i don't have a problem with you capping the number of discounts you give but i just i just i'm not comfortable with setting aside general fund monies for the process especially i think for a pilot program let's try it out set a cap you were it goes and if it turned into you know something members how many i mean mr couch go this is a different sub subject on this it is sure to us in which the question for the body at this point is we're ten minutes past our lunch break and i don't know how many of you have commitments you need to get to if we can wrap up the department of transportation in the next ten minutes and everybody's happy to do that and we'll keep going and you're ok with a shorter thirty thirty second question i'm done ok mr couch the only thing that people have come up here and talk to us about was was  you know they if they have a disk paratransit pass they would like to occasionally go on the fixed if they can if they feel mobile enough can they do that now yes yes and no so yes in the sense that if they're not a senior are not a student they qualify for this subsidy and so it would be yes however right now in our first structure because we have it set where seniors on fixed route pay twenty five dollars whereas seniors on paratransit pay thirty dollars those passes don't don't allow you to go between two services so if we were to consolidate those passes th it would make it where then seniors would be able to go on both fixed route or you know are paratransit so the only the only concern there is if you consider consolidate the senior passes then it would either most likely would happen would be the fixed route people that pay twenty five dollars would be bumped up to thirty know if you mr chair if you were to increase the twenty five dollars to thirty four the fixer out based on the average number of passes we sell for a fixed route seniors that would increase the revenue by around forty thousand dollars thank you members any further questions actually staff remind me that the department of transportation is going to back its afternoon anyway the next item is fuel tax so they're going to be here for that discussion as well so i think well we'll break for lunch be back here at one thirty and we'll start off with just department of transportation if you have any questions that you think of during lunch we'll start with them and  if there are none then we'll move into the discussion of the fuel tax but that we are in recess until one thirty  of budget and finance committee will come back to order and members we finished up most of our discussions with the department of transportation but we're there are available now to provide some calculations which we requested that they provide us over lunch or calculate during lunch and provide us here in the chambers and so what they've provided is what the result is if we combine all the rates at thirty so in other words taking that to the one twenty five dollar rate up to thirty he gave us that number before i think that was the forty thousand dollars you mentioned earlier right yes and then what he's calculated in addition to that is what would happen if we reduced that to thirty dollar rates to twenty five dollars so mr moore if you could share that with the group and thank you for doing that during lunch for us sure no problem yes if we were to consolidate the senior and student passes and bring it all down to twenty five dollars  ok so if we just to clarify if we move the fifty five years and older up by five dollars we would gain forty thousand by changing the other down to the  rate as the fifty five year old or we would be giving up nineteen thousand members questions or comments on th history comments is that seems to be the safest and most straightforward way to go just one pass we're done with it in my humble opinion that  twenty five dollars because it we're losing one thousand dollars on a seven million dollar loss already i know that i know you don't want to lose any more of it but we're subsidizing that seven point four million dollars so seven point four one million dollars might not be too much of a difference in my as much as i like the idea of you know trying to do what we're trying to do which is to help a group help other groups and make it less cumbersome i'm concerned about losing revenue you know unfortunately transportation although it's the number one most valued service it is expensive and  it may not be the place where we want to scrimp i don't know maybe we feel that it's worth putting that because of the people who what they do with that transportation many of them go to work many of them go to school many of them it's life activities that they participate in as well as speculation or whatever people need to do with transportation i know that you know we're in the mode where we have to think about how we're going to continue to pay for transportation and you know it's not just us it's everybody in the entire world i kid students dealing with it definitely in the nation so i'm kind of afraid if we're going to broaden it and the loss is greater but  if we do it i can live with it because i realize the benefits sometimes you have to look at cost benefit thank you i feel similarly to you very simple for us to have a blend have just one rate like you i'm not terribly excited about giving up revenues when we're you know when we're looking for money to cover expenses  hopefully between now and the time we have to make any decision you know any final decisions on this we can get some input from the public as to whether they would look forward to us providing a a  blended rate and making things easier for the department but partment i believe you recommended mr baez said you recommended the thirty dollar rate across the board yes yes we did and part of the reason why is really just going back to what it was three when they kind of he went down say was thirty dollars before you went and broke it out to twenty five dollars so if we were to ask you what the cost  know it's not going to be apples to apples but we're looking it up right now mr chair for for the fixer out system we calculate the actual cost per passenger is approximately three dollars and fourteen cents for purchase or trip so a thirty dollars pass to your point that you make your point this by so just well you know i'm continuing to look at this thing and it's so difficult you know when you get torn up in looking at both sides of an issue that you can argue on both sides you know i can argue on both sides and you know give everybody the deal but let's call a spade a spade we have elderly people today who are not poor and they can afford to pay a little more you know when we started all of the social benefits that we started here in the county so i was there when it all began we're looking at pensioners from the agricultural workers and they were retiring with benefits like fifty dollars a month then one hundred famous one that i knew for many many years and i was his name i was shocked to find out that being the prominent person he was he was making a hundred dollar pension and so you know these are the people with a lot of these benefits were created to take care of because they really really were suffering well today we have a bill and we have seniors that are ok they've pensions and investments and retirement and things and we have pensions are still you know struggling the other night on t v we saw the lady that was looking for a house and i couldn't believe she was living on eight hundred dollars worth of social security that's only money she had you know a person living on that kind of income anything we can do for th makes a big difference having to buy a bus pass and didn't have money between eating and do i ride the bus so when we do these kinds of things for me the goal for me is to help the person who cannot pay who it's a choice between eating dog food or not eating or paying for my bus so when we blend these things all together which group are we trying to benefit and you know a lot of the persons with disabilities are also in this mess they're on very small disability payments trying to pay for manton you know everything that they need so there's poor and there's poor so that's what i wrestle  just kind of a random thought that we have if we were to establish the thirty dollar fares for those three groups at the bottom the forty five dollars fare for  for the general and we were to take the department's low income concept and we basically give and give vouchers or i don't know how you know once or once or qualified to have the ability to get the discount so that way if you're in the general population and you're zero income you get a fifteen dollar coupon against the forty five if you're in the disabled or low income and disabled or senior and you're low income you get of the same fifteen bucks but it's off the thirty dollars price  and there really are addressing it is you have to have somebody determine eligibility you know i've been involved in that for many many years and it's paper intensive you have to interview people to make them fill out forms and you have to give eligibility and you have to to be careful that you know they don't continue to get it if they don't want it you know there were people receiving as you hear this nightmares people receiving social security that have been dead for twenty years you know because nobody ever reported in and finally did get caught so i think that it may be the best the cleanest way but it will involve more certification and what we paid and upfront because we have to pay him and me would do it they cannot just keep on adding and adding and adding we need staff to do it will save money and in the bakken because you can be targeting it to the people did you really want to help and i've heard that the stable community every time they come and they explain how hard it is for them to play that four dollars they can now well you know this business as well as anybody in this room yeah and so you know i wanted her to get to the people that need the help and i want transportation available because it is a lifeline to everything right but i think this i think we've got the mix of things maybe sure and i want to break staff out one of the staff brought up the suggestion that we have a lot of people in the community that are already potentially already qualified if you're a hollyhock at all or if your family life center want to gardens there are areas where like i buy i buy bus passes other commuter bus passes in bulk and i resell them to my employees and do you know and just take it out of their their paycheck and we can do the same thing with those folks in there if you're there you're certified there's no process that m b o has to go through so i think there's ways that we can make this happen we also have a lot of disability advocates that could readily provide the same certification so i think if you in the department is up for it i would i would appreciate them taking another look at this and coming back to us with what they feel the impact might be of trying to do a little bit more for the folks that really need it but increasing the rate structure you know going to a thirty dollar rate structure across the board and maybe to afford it needs to be a little higher than thirty dollars i don't know but i think i think i tend to agree with the department and their original direction if we can take care of the folks that can't afford it mr we're happy to do that i just want to clarify one thing the way that we have proposed it in the way that because the disabled community was principally the one arena that we had not satisfy their needs in accordance with what they were requesting which was a disabled pass we came up with the concept of the  the low income which would also incorporate the ability for people to purchase that forty five dollar monthly pass for only thirty dollars so i think a dollar a day if somebody travels on the bus every day a dollar a day is really it you know not that bad end because we also get much like you purchase the commuter passes for your employees many of the agencies where it serves communities that you know if whether it's mental health or some of the other programs they come and they actually make up the difference so i think some of those individuals have fall into the really low income category through the social service programs and the generosity of the council in funding those nonprofits they're coming in and they're also helping those individuals who cannot purchase those i know the hospital comes in for vouchers as well i don't know given their current situation that they're going to be able to continue to do that but our concept was not to offer any discounts on the thirty dollars pass only on the forty five dollar all system pass ok well and we can come back to you with a way that it might operate ok thank you members and we've got lots more to discuss this afternoon so with unless there are some burning questions i think we should probably move into the other transportation issues like gas tax and so forth and of they'll be sticking around for that anyway and the burning questions see none mr good if you'll be good to join us good enough to join us  members of the highway fund fuel tax issues are on page twenty seven haven't found it already be talking about post changes in the fuel tax and vehicle weight tax and like start by way of background for the highway fund can reviewing its revenue sources  pays a franchise tax of two and a half percent of their gross revenues which is about ten point six billion dollars per year and that's by state law that's some highest we can charge for that and then there's the  fuel tax which is currently sixteen cents per gallon of gas for my county and we're proposing about eighteen cents and we're also proposing that bio diesel pay its fair share of bio diesel has been zero cents per county gas tax for many years state law allows that to be biodiesel to be charged at half the rate of record gasoline so if we're going to go to eighteen cents tax represents about ten and a half million dollars last fiscal year under this proposal arrangement of about eleven point eight million dollars here and then the vehicle weight tax is what some folks refers registration fee when you register your vehicle every year and there's a state fees and there's a county fee i actually don't recall the state fee but i know it's about half we talked about the nature of these revenue sources and you know the need to work work on our roads to manage our roadways system and the  basically flat you change that significantly and the gas tax is a cents per gallon charge so the question really is how many gallons we sell every years ago up or go down and then the vehicle fuel tax you know it's cents per gallon the number of gallons being sold per car is declining every year as cars get more a philly fish and we have more electric vehicles etc course more people take the bus all that  stuff adds up so what i did was i took a look at all that for my county are some interesting things to kind of keep the back your mind as we go through this one is that the number of vehicles has increased about three percent per year for the last fifteen years  varies a little bit but if you go back fifteen years ago to look at the numbers as a twenty thirteen per d bed it's about three percent per year so that's compound it three percent per ye interesting lee the annual miles driven per vehicle is almost exactly the same as it was twelve or fifteen years ago it's about eighty eight hundred sixty four miles so we have more cars are driving about the same number of miles of the total number of miles driven  up maybe three percent per year but the number of gallons of gasoline per vehicle has gone down significantly down twenty five percent last twelve years or about two and two point three percent per year less gas being used per vehicle which is which is a good thing people won't one argue with that but that's that's our source of revenue to fix the roads on top of all this the federal government initiate what they call the cafe standards you may have heard about that it's the corporate average fuel economy i think it's i think it's an agreement not a law that basically the major manufacturers bottle deals of all agreed that their fleet  miles per gallon is going to go up every year and quite another there are standards by twenty twenty five they'll be about fifty percent increase in miles per gallon across their fleet if we all drove new cars at the instant but the average vehicle on the road is about eleven years old so it takes time for all this to be incorporated but if you throw it all together and run some numbers on it and ends up being about one point five percent per year average increase in all the cars we have on the island per year all this together basically means we have more cars getting better mileage so that our gas tax actually revenues theoretically would go down if all those numbers stay basically the same you get less money per year and yet the average cost percent so the average cost of fix things on the road labor materials etc is increasing at four percent per year so from a revenue side all things being equal cars getting more fuel efficient our revenues are going down just in general i mean they're increasing in like two percent i should say two percent increase because of it the number of vehicles keeps increasing at three percent we do collect the weight tax but in general are increasing around two percent in our costs at least in the construction site are up four percent and as you're all well aware of with collective bargaining agreements and all that that's what two or three percent have less and less funds available to fix the roads so the gas tax is one that i think nationally a lot of jurisdictions are looking at it is the best one of the best systems as a page you  you use the more you pay you know if you drive eight hundred miles per year and you get twenty five miles per gallon it's like fifty dollars they actually don't pay that much to fix the roads but we have a lot of vehicles so it adds up but for us to i think maintain the roads the quality that folks want and what's declining revenue sources even as we squeeze our budgets here and get efficiencies over there you know we're still out of work on backwards so that's why a lot of agencies states counties cities are looking to the gas tax until a better system come along so for us we thought the sixteen to eighteen cents per gallon represents about a little over ten percent increase the number hasn't changed for years let's say at least what seven years maybe so like that just for reference members in two thousand and four the fuel tax increase to eighteen cents and then in two thousand and seven it i know mr good did an excellent job describing in detail the analysis that he he worked on and he and i have discussed and have been discussing for a couple of years now understandings that you know the highway fund you know we want to maintain its self sufficiency we you know it is right now self sufficient fund and we want to maintain that self sufficiency so driving you know a i don't see fairness but a little bit more consistency in the vehicles that are using our roads and the wear and tear that it's provided so that there's some coverage on driving to hybrids so that's where i'm coming from now i'm driving a plug in hybrid so we've been getting a member on seventy miles a gallon now so that's what i'm prefacing these remarks  your mr good you were reading my notes again the fifty six dollars and thirty two cents a year average is what everybody's paying everybody who buys gas is is paying for the  roads that's not a you know i was thinking it was in the three or four hundred dollars a year but that's that's not very much at all so i i i don't have an too much of an issue with the  raising of the of the tax but i do have an issue that the people who have hybrids or fall on electric vehicles aren't paying their fair share because they usually those cars are heavier because of the batteries and so therefore adding more wear and tear to the road so my thought would be is that we leave if at all possible the motor vehicle what weight tax the same for gasoline engines now if you have a hybrid then you go to this rate if you have an electric vehicle you go a little bit higher i know that's a disincentive to do electrical vehicles and  bridge but you know it is a use tax the only reason that we even have a gas taxes because that's the was at one time the easiest way to say hey you're using if using gas you're driving on our roads essentially but now we're going to start getting be getting liquid natural gas cars maybe sometime hydrogen cars sometime a whole bunch of different types of cars driving on the roads and not paying for the roads other than neko and whatnot is a per mile tax but that also says you've got to pull off the gas tax except for maybe the five cents for that we use for the bus system i believe it's five dollars a year average the concerned there would be if you do it once a year you know every time you register here's my old odometer reading here's my new adama reading here's what i got to pay for you so the roads that's going to be a hit of an extra eighty eight to one hundred fifty bucks depends on how much you drive a year on your registration fee people are already concerned about their registration if you so i am wondering if and we probably should have mr avila here if there's a way you can do if you want to do it like g e t if you think you're going to be driving a lot then maybe you can come in once a month and say here's my domino reading i want to pay this month's tax or once a quarter or  know twice a year kind of thing as opposed to getting that big hit in a year is that something that i know that's not in your purview but at that might help with the highway fine make it a little bit more tested in oregon so oregon has a pilot program where people can volunteer to have their car participate in the program which means they have to disclose exactly what their odometer says there are folks obviously are concerned privacy and so they're now the organ just kicked it off they're going to monitor and see how it goes and see what what comes out of oregon as something to perhaps bring in bring into a white one advance we have as we have a safety annual safety check so the annual safety checks an is being tested in oregon but it's probably premature to try to to do it here as relates to electric vehicles which will use any gas and all i did a i did talk to mr via can we have four hundred sixty seven registered electric vehicles as of july one of last year four hundred and sixty seven as of july i think it was of last year and so it is probably worth having him cut  you want to continue this discussion he did say so i asked him is it can we tax them differently and he felt that would be difficult based on the way their systems are set up at this at this time but you could have that discussion with him  but assuming they're not powered by solar vehicles their electric they're playing in so that they're buying more electricity which we get two and a half percent of the revenue from electric right so we are collecting more on the on the electric side assuming it's not p v so in that case again they if they drove eighty eight sixty four miles per year at forty cents per kilowatt hour they would actually be paying us twenty six dollars and fifty nine cents in additional now electric fees so that would have to be incorporated into this perhaps anyway at any at any rate with electric vehicles were only four hundred sixty seven vehicles out of but you know trying to track down five hundred vehicles and how we tax and differently out of two hundred thousand ours is probably something i felt is something we can put to the back burner for now try to develop a better system but those are the raw numbers mr using those numbers you just gave me and i'm going to redo it again but on electric vehicles if they're doing an average of eight hundred miles a year i just used eighty eight hundred sixty four we're losing six hundred  thirteen is the determination of the rate but to forty nine is a chapter that we'd have to just discussing very briefly with corporate counsel here and review because they're fairly specific in what we what we charge  and and and we have to look and see if we can specifically create a rate for electric vehicles or other type of vehicles them to discuss the weight level and differences you know and that's why we have the two rates for for  you know over a certain weight or commercial and under for the noncommercial items stuff thank you dear it sounds like this is a bigger debate about yes tax you know we recently attended the energy conference and of course i participated in the  and have been watching this the problem with the electric company and their loss of revenues because of peavey's i mean i'm guilty we have a p v system and we saw a bill go from almost three hundred dollars a month to eighteen or nineteen dollars and how do they get the revenue to do the trans transmit transmission and you know maintenance of the lines we were running into the same story here we're going to encourage people to go electric we know about energy and we get less gas tax but we still have to maintain the roots so it sounds like you know this shift to green is wonderful but there's going to be some some money this is a bigger dilemma and i agree with you mr good this probably requires more study and more in depth looking at how do we take care of our streets if we're going to continue to decrease our revenue also we all know that the press aghast right now is wonderful and we'll happy with it but i'm not living in any if you know craziness camelot it's going to go up again and so we increase the gas tax now nobody's going to cry too much because it's two cents and we're used to paying a lot more but when we go back to almost five dollars a gallon then it becomes significant so this is not an easy decision but you know we all know all of us members know that one of the biggest things we get asked for constituents is about roads they don't like potholes they don't like poorly maintained streets they want adequate roads and why don't we have a stoplight here and why don't we have a department there or whatever bump or whatever it is they want a lump or a bump and we have to pay for it so this is much more than talking about the two cents but i think immediately we have to decide on the gas effect because we don't have a whole lot of time to get into all of this big energy debate even the people that are in the energy business are deeply involved in debate and cannot figure out what to do every day i receive all these emails of informative papers and whatever that people are trying to work on it to solve the problem and you miss a chair think in member by so that what we what the mayor proposed is you know with the parameters that we have currently how to deal with are definitely many different options we'd like to pursue and we have had some of those discussions but you're right we have to deal with what's in front of us right now and so that's what we're proposing so i think you cochran thank you and just rule briefly because we've got a lot to cover but i think this and i want to concur needs further in depth discussion but especially with mr vilar here and it think  and i think it's usage so we need to like somehow set aside because we got electric and who knows one day p v and all this i mean it's the usage of these roads the system the road system and how is that going to be paid for obviously we can't it's not the taxation on the fuel source itself is not going to be the sole answer and so i mean i think that's why there's tollbooths on the mainland help assist with the payment of that bridge that you're crossing over and s know that is not being used as frequently as their everyday car so but yet you pay that price and i've had people ask i think big island has some type of system and i spoke to mr riehl about this so i think these cut concerns that i hear and over i would like to get address and it is in conjunction with you know a lot more people at the table under for their in depth discussion for me personally though i've just if anybody can answer the trailer the taxation on a trailer it and it's not used commercially i had to register as a commercial trailer and it's one hundred eighty bucks for this thing that so i don't there's no to say freeney how this chair is just  not using that trailer as a commercial vehicle and if used sign i know i had to do it for my truck and believe it it's the same thing for trailers and then once you do that it would fall into the lower category ok i'll d the other things that we're dealing with is that not only has the gas tax not been increased but over the years we have been putting more and more of the gas or the highway funds towards the transit system so funds that used would otherwise be readily available for road maybe this are now being put into the transit system and for you know for a very good purpose but the reality is that it's it's reduced the amount of revenues available for road repairs which account sort sort of i think and i don't know if mr good remembers or not but i seem to think i'm around two thousand and three two thousand  five cent per gallon was put on a tax used to be thirteen cents and went up to eighteen cents and that five cents was specifically for the bus system and now we're definitely using way more than that for the bus system out of the general fund but i think that's what that extra five sense was for mr chair thank you member i was sitting on the other side of the railing at that point and every member of that discussion intently because the money for a meal was held out based on that that increase and it was in fiscal year two thousand and four as deliberations so those two thousand and three you know the council is was reviewing that and you're right it was it went from thirteen cents to eighteen cents to assist in developing a transportation system obviously you know that's kind of been lost in the last few  years i guess since then i should say in the actual allocation of that five cents if you wanted to do it specifically and only but that's that you're right and that was the discussion back in two thousand and three mr good you mentioned the fuel tax revenue generated by fuel tax was you say ten point five million for this fiscal year it was projected and the wait tax was seventeen million seventeen million last year one thousand million proposed if i sixteen ok and just by rough calculation it looks as though on  you use twenty mpg on the four hundred forty gallons yeah so that would be eight dollars ninety cents and then the increase in the vehicle weight tax would be an additional ten dollars so any cars looking at a twenty dollar or eighteen to twenty dollar increase per year and they also like to point out on oahu compared our commercial or our commercial rate is four dollars i'm sorry for it point three six cents at five and our proposal at three cents compares to honolulu has at four cents so taxes we have control we don't have control over what the franchise taxes are that's a state we don't determine that right when you do  right on the county level ok and so hearing about nico declining because of other types of usage more renewable being added here and there next era i guess has been revenue side and i don't but it may be without the fuel surcharge that is something i'd have to look into so the fuel surcharge faeries over time but our revenue source is pretty consistent or vehicles turn to it you know i know there's ok and the and the scope of how the funds are used is that determined by us because you know i think any charice states where we can use or ok so we try to keep it on the roads the line of flood control is considered a storm drain or what or how does that fit in to the uses that would be that would generally be a general fund activity but thought on our monday discussion highway funds were we use it or we part of our maintenance is by our highways personnel but our one of our the how we fund also has a small influx of general funds to account for the fact that we the highways personnel are paid by highway fund also do some general fund work so that's the way that works ok well you were talking about the after you spoke about the electric vehicles charging and i texted my brother to find out how much he is calculation per mile and he says as in at full mico rate it would be around ten cents ten cents per mile but that most of his well he said that's just so this is a very wild and quick calculations they may be wrong but he charges his using his p v so that doesn't go through me go at all so we're not going even getting twenty we're not even getting our two percent out of that so course another challenge so you must drive around at night yeah yeah we're currently spending in about of the transportation money we're also spending about two point six million just on the para transit system as well so that's another that's another issue came with the transit system and another significant cost if we were to take the percentage of the gas tax at five cents five cents to about twenty i'm about thirty thirty cents or thirty percent of the gas tax is collected on behalf of transit are in three point two eight million so so if you look at the at  collecting for transit it's it's about thirty three it's about a third of what we're spending in transit so that's another thing to keep in mind as you have any other burning issues or do you feel you have enough information to work on tween now the time we have to make decisions ok thank you very much but all right go  our machines are very very expensive i think the last maybe five to ten years but probably seventeen to twenty thousand dollars which is the scale machines and i think the stuff is just primarily to address the hold harmless agreement he's a before lake after the fact permits that people take and maybe for construction that didn't have a permit and they are holding the county harmless i believe  vance's over the last two years working with a wake of and we have a contract which was passed out to you folks and basically what it is is a three dollar fee to record it electronically through my office and what it will be it is we would be passed through so it would be a cost that they're charging us but ultimately we're collecting from the taxpayer so that would be a recording that we would go through our office and go through the bureau and it would probably be about a twenty four hour return turnaround time so that's quite significant for the hold harmless agreements but what i'm asking is that maybe we could strike the words he hold harmless agreements and change that document  corporation counsel because what we're trying to do also is we've been working with the bureau of conveyances and they've been very supportive of us recording our documents electronically as long as it's not convene documents so we're trying to do is  the collection section with treasury does a lot of liens for a lot of properties that are delinquent i believe they may be a lot two to three hundred maybe four hundred a year so we would be able to electronically file those liens we can also electronic follow the release of liens were going to if the ag bill ever passes we're going to be able to do the ag dedications electronically and in the future hopefully all maybe county permits or leases we're going to be able to file those electronically so this is a very big advancement for i think for us to go paperless and be able to do it through our office to record with the bureau from dances so chair the the three dollar is a fee that is in the statement of work or the contract with it says even according to a deal in our view of conveyances so that is a nonrefundable fee for the taxpayer if the county was to be recording leans to charge fifty cents so all those are in the documents for any questions some i'll be happy to take into but i think you just answered the big question the big question was whether we should be limiting this to hold harmless agreements or broadening it so you've just provided us the wording that i think all of us are we're thinking about any questions members i think this is this is a great great move in a direction that we need to go so there are no no questions thank you very much percent rate increase which we haven't had a rate increase for the past five years and that's because we've been able to install p install more energy efficient equipment and we've kind of come to the end of the efficiency improvements we could and so this year we're asking for a five percent increase with super fun in the waste rates regarding solid waste we are also asking for a rate increase in the tipping fees to try to reduce the subsidy that's required from the general fund to work toward being self sufficient over the next within the next decade we can go into it in further detail but that's kind of a general overview of the reach trucker for those to the patient could you pull your microphone up a little bit oh sorry members too much lunch today i see a couple of nineteen heads how do our rates compare to the other counties you know and are you comfortable that this is going to allow you to continue to cover all of the operating costs and and see ip programs yes specifically for as far as what a monthly bill would change if so for the for a residential household which you know we charge a base charge and then up to nine thousand gallons of usage  there's a cap and right now the cap the monthly cap is fifty eight dollars and forty five cents so if you have a single family household the max you pays fifty dollars in forty five cents with this rate increase it would be sixty four sixty one dollars and sixty five cents so roughly three dollars a little over three dollars more per month thank you jay i think that's impacting you know we have the documents in front of us but none of them i just fifteen and then look at what their proposed rate is but currently it's sixty eight dollars thirty nine cents where are our basis twenty seven dollars ninety cents and then the per thousand gallon charge is four dollars and eight cents as compared to what we're proposing is three dollars and seventy five cents ok thank you county appear to be about twenty seven dollars so very close to what ours are for two thousand and fifteen it looks like the base charge is sixty dollars for single family and fifty for multi family three dollars eighty seven cents difference but why is that so it's either change or it's almost like they're there in my district there's a lot of residential a lot of filipinos that take care of the elderly and paid for but i'm just wondering why this is if you're still higher than the rest  researcher yes go ahead so really the comparison is between the the sixty one sixty five that i had mentioned versus the ninety dollars and fifty cents because you know the for care home there are likely to be over the one thousand minimum not one thousand gallons of a monthly water usage and so for save in calo if you have a ten bedrooms but fifteen bedrooms they would be charged ninety dollars a month and ninety dollars and fifty cents a month for that entire dwelling unit versus you know say your household if you have four people in your household you'd be charged sixty one sixty five so we take into account the fact that the there is more more you say what a residential care home than a single family dwelling so that's where it's captured i guess my other follow up question would be how do you determine whether it's a resident whether it's a residential care home or versus a house with seven eight we provide comment and we know what it during the primary process i believe that's how we get notification that a residential care home is actually in operation and would be charged in that ma  rather than a a big family  i don't know there's a rational nexus for charging that much more maybe you can help us understand that i'm not sure i think it's because it's a greedy usage because it's more of a kind of a nursing home situation but i'm not sure how they'll that was there i mean i we just i just kind of look at the delta of what is currently versus i mean it's across the board five percent but exactly i mean the usage is based on i mean if the reach trucker is based on the usage and based on  feeds i find this very interesting i think both sides of the spectrum might be looked at for use you know if you had a whole lot of infants probably use a lot more water and generate a lot more stuff i think i think equal to the residential care home it's interesting that we're only looking at one in here but i do understand that you know there probably is an increased use but then like you say what if you have twelve fifteen people living in a house and we know this is not unusual we hear it all the time about four families living in one house these days so this is it an interesting situation because thank you mr chair dave taylor director of water supply former wastewater chief a number of years ago there was a rate study in wastewater that looked at not just volume but for lack of better term density of the waste water and and there was a cost allocation based on how much water was in there versus how much solids is in there from other you know from various types of uses and so the costs were the costs were allocated because it costs a lot more to process dirty your sewage then cleaner and so that's where the original ratios of some of these different categories came from so it was a combination of not just volume but how much of the water had wasting it human waste in it versus how much of the water was just you know water because that directly influences the amount of  of the treatment plants themselves which i was just processing water they're processing the actual solid material so that was the original basis for why these different categories had different rates so i just wanted to share that because i think that's the root of the question that i heard being asked minister this is a very interesting discussion we're having it after lunch however you had my comment about other people there groups that might also creating samples taken of various types of uses that went to the lab they were analyzed and there was you know just some basic criteria of solids content versus water content from various uses but i don't know that it got broken down into you know hundreds of samples i can imagine was that i don't remember the details of it but that was the basis of the of the original ratios between between types of users you know like i said i can understand the idea that we might want to look at people that are generating maybe more solid waste but that's yeah well no no we're  was and this was a study done long before i was wastewater chief i mean i remember it happening when i was staff but i it was so long ago even i don't remember who did or how it was done i just wonder that was the basis of it maybe time to look at the county share that's correct ok good any other questions on these rates members actually do have a little bit of history too on the pricing for the residential care home a number of years ago we stick charge them at the commercial rate which gave them and quite exorbitant sewer fee so instead we created this particular rate class which is the flat the questions on page twenty nine members questions on page thirty could walk us through the rationale for the increases for the company and the septic disposal and so forth we actually know longer do cesspool pumping or septic tank pumping you may recall one or two years ago hi we we used to pay on the order of a few us ten to fifteen thousand dollars from sewer fund to highway fund where highways had a pumper truck one in more one on and one in more to address any any resident who would want paying an order of over ten thousand dollars for that program which highways no longer wanted to do because the equipment was quite old and so rather than replace that equipment at a time and continue continuous service which was very underutilized we actually got zero it out in our operations budget but we keep it here because we haven't yet changed the county coal where it says if the county cesspool or septic tank pumping it should be a certain rate so this rate is kind of a phantom rate because we don't do it anymore so i and then the fees for reclaimed water for the next section sure regarding the reclaim water service that one we are trying to recover more or to trying to reduce the subsidy that's required for that program overall for the last five years we've spent on the order of about three point one million dollars a year for their program and got in revenue about four hundred eighty thousand dollars which is really on the order of about eighty five percent subsidy and so we're looking at trying to recover some of those costs because we haven't had a reading crease on this as well for the last five years  which would be more in line with you know getting toward the revenue getting closer to the cost for this resource rate classes there's major agricultural which there's only one user currently that utilizes that rate that's a ranch and every presents less than one percent of the usage and so is very little the second rate class which twenty five percent of the revenue and the all other users category which is the third quarter category is for hotel resorts commercial establishments and parks that comprises about thirty nine percent of the usage but about seventy five percent of the revenue so we're trying what we're basically doing is right now we're collecting a blended average of roughly sixty five cents per thousand gallons addition system for reclaim water it's on the order of two dollars and ninety six cents so it's about a three dollar per thousand gallon cost for us and instead of just getting sixty five cents per thousand gallons we're hoping to get roughly eighty two cents per thousand gallons with this rate increase so it still would require a significant subsidy by the rest of the sewer users so you're saying that the the most usage of the most gallons used  the middle category yes ok so potentially upping that just a little bit more might help recover more yes and and the thought was that because we haven't increased in a while we didn't want to give a rate shock but we hope to gradually over time get it so that the revenues more closely match the costs i mean if you look at you know the u s want ag water rates i mean it's significantly more than what we charge of sixty five cents per thousand currently and so you know we feel like if we kind of reduce difference would be able to capture more of the costs or reduce the subsidy in that manner you think you're special and ask a question that was asked of me because i want to make sure it's answered correctly somebody asked me as a small farmer an egg user could i get our one water and haul it and can't use it on my farm yes answer is yes yes they could use it for their farm and get it the difficulty for our one usage is that our distribution system is not as expensive  as our sewer system and so that's really what's limited the use of expand or expansion or one water you know i don't think it would i think would be cost prohibitive for your friend to bring a water tank or try to fill it up and in take it somewhere because we have places where people get water for like dust control or other uses but i think he or she would not want to be hauling each time but rather would wait for the opportunity if we get our expansion of the distribution system but that that has been i mean in other discussions are our primary concern or hindrance with utilizing more recycled water but what you see in this when we get into the c h p section we are trying to expand that distribution system for o to be able to utilize more water unfortunately for your friend it's really to help get kaanapali resorts the recycled water if he or she is up country or other places in the water he there would i  think people are looking at these kinds of things as we talk about you know not having water water shortage sure you know recycling water and those kinds of things people are beginning to look at options and saying well if that water is there couldn't we use it and we won't be using potable water so i think it's going to lend itself to a lot of discussion and i thought it was i thought we should ask the question because then they know right thank you thank you to follow up on that isn't there an issue with farms using certain farms using our one of that for instance i believe leafy vegetables are not allowed to use are one w care thank you i don't believe that's a question for the department of environmental management it's probably you can sell it to anybody it's i think the director stated me made available but as far as food health safety  it is part of the rules what what types of uses there are for agriculture but not i don't care i don't want to misspeak i know leafy green is one of those that i thought was counterintuitive that you could use it but maybe you cannot but it is in our department health rules oh no we don't enforce it yeah cochrane just a question for clarification in regards to on page thirty at the top of the surcharges and it stated like some poundage of solids and what that was a lot dirtier than normal a c some kind of industrial facility or something come along this provides us the opportunity to charge for that added concentration of the discharge that they have but to get to so you know we would look at it when a new use like in the building permit process when a permanent process if there's something we do we feel might trigger something then we'll test and see if they fall on their this criteria ok me with the charges for the recycled water is that you want to create an incentive for people to use it and i think that the department is probably reached a reasonable balance between you know the subsidy on the other users is because they're responsible or we as a county are responsible for diverting as much of the treated water as possible so it's it's appropriate for all users to pick up part of the tab and and at the same time we want to have an incentive for people to take the recycled water and use it so station and or it's it's for our own purposes within the the collection system of the county so that's what that back truck is for it wouldn't be to reinstate the cesspool program that we have had for a couple of years of the budge and finance committee will come back to order and members we are on the solid waste portion of the rates and fees you can find on page thirty one so with that opening remarks actor sure so we are asking for a slight increase in the tipping fees for minas with solid wast and we added three categories which is in response to what happened a couple months ago where we had to take in some construction demolition waste so we feel that some of that waste if adequately segregated in a future we could actually utilize for landfill and purposes or for recycling for other contraction use so we'd like to add those other  so that we have that flexibility to accept that and utilize that you know and i feel thank you members questions mr couch thank you miss chair mr going to just wanted to double check that the difference between the three and a quarter cents per pound for clean earth in material concrete rubble and two cents per pound for clean earthen material elsewhere to save on that cost so that's why we segregate otherwise if there is purchasing rebar we have to do a little bit more work in order to try to recycle that so that's why we have two rate classes there so if there is a bar you just don't take it or you take it as regular refuse it would be as regular refuse to be at that m s w weight which is the first charge for i misheard but thank you for that what is the status of the construction landfill currently are they back up and operating and with the long term permit or what's the status as far as you know so earlier about a month ago they went to the my planning commission to receive  recent interpretation of their permit and the my planning commission sided with them in their favor to allow them to continue operations unfortunately for the county the operations that the are allowed to continue for me be on order avoid another year that you know they collect material depending on how development goal is obviously and so we're concerned that in absence of another private contraction demolition landfill we would be accepting it so we kind of heady early taste like kind of night and day from monday to the next of what it would be with a sudden influx of construction demolition material and we foresee in the next year or so we would have that same issue a rise and so we have been working with various private entit to see if they will indeed develop an alternate site or a new construction demolition landfill unfortunately up to a novel there is no imminent private enterprise that will seamlessly take on conservation demolition waste after the demolition construction landfill fills up so it is something that is of utmost concern for the department that we want to plan to try to utilize recycle and further utilize what we can from the construction demolition sector but the same time we are steel facilitating diverted to the county landfill it upon closure you know what i'm not i know you may have had a surge but i'm just wondering what the annual volume in cubic yards would be to can comparison of what you guys are already doing with sure we we expect an order of i think is like twenty five percent so roughly twenty five percent increase in tonnage we get roughly one hundred fifty hundred sixty thousand tons per year of municipal solid waste and so we estimate on order of or they ever do have a requirement to keep track of it yes and they do have reporting requirements through the department of health as part of their solid waste permit and we have been in communication we've got in their records to try to figure out what is the composition of what they get in their loads to help us better understand what we might get particularly when we got it yearly to close one day and we all of us and started getting it so that's how we know it's roughly about twenty five percent ok but the forty thousand tons is that from their records or from your short period time that you were receiving their refuse i believe it was partially our records but also looking at what they had given to deal with as part of their i believe it's annual reports ok if you could just verify that tonnage sure i'd appreciate that numbers any questions on the shipping fee we always have that price per pound what does that work out to and and sure to the municipal solid waste which is the first one would be eighty dollars per the second one which is green waste would be twenty dollars per ton the third one which is grease trap waste would be fifty dollars a ton and the last one o and the next one is sixty five dollars per ton for the clean earth and material with no protruding rebar the next one is forty dollars per ton for the clean earth and material  and the last one ten dollars per ton for non hi fi non a t f advance disposal fee subsidize crush glass which is two inch minor so i have a particular size why don't you just do it i know we asked this a while back and i still has haven't been completely satisfied with the answer but why don't you just do it a ton since that's what you charge you don't charge on even tons  i think we charge by the palm you do charge and so it is by the by the palm but when we discuss it in this kind of spectrum it's a lot easier to talk dollar amounts but i believe the skill is by the earth and material that you're considering c n d clean earth and material i mean isn't construction basically construction waste such as drywall and pieces of wood and whatever there's basically different types of what they would bring in to a landfill and so what happens is you know when you do site work you'd have more earth and material that have to get rid of and so we don't take like for instance you know the dirt that from a site work we wouldn't take it out or our landfill would take it but they wouldn't come to our landfill because the to charge for for taking that kind of material would be much more than they could dump it out to sea in the structure even at a private c n d landfill they do because you can utilize or repurpose earthen material versus dry wall mix to mix with wood and other things they give a reduced rate material ok along with the concrete concrete rubble you're seeing here that the concrete rubble we're looking at possibly crushing it and providing it as aggregate  you know for another purpose so we wouldn't utilize the sixty five dollar tip for you on the first ramsey or one for earth and i'm sorry for cover material that would be more for  recycling for the construction industry so kind of keeping that aside what i guess i thought i heard and maybe i didn't hear it right but this was this is being introduced in future anticipation landfill closure so this will help accommodate that but you're saying you this isn't addressing that you know because i've been there i and we did a tour and we saw the type of items that are being brought in and  things like screens and mover window panes that's it me just a jumble of different things so anyway i just thought that's what i heard why this is kind of here and but then it's not it's talking junk at the landfill but the earth and material and the rubble that they do receive they are able to utilize or try to utilize in other areas by selling it to contractors and so forth so what's left and actually landfill is primarily so if you look at this this last category we have not been able to get department of health to be to allow us to utilize crushed glass because they don't feel that that's a recycling activity and we get recycled i mean glass to be recycled and so as i think we mentioned in your committee what we would utilize this crush glass for is kind of a leveling layer you know when we have our municipal solid waste that we compact you're still kind of some  the trash so we have to kind of level it off before we put the six inches of cover material and so if we get this crushed glass we can then use that rather than earthen material before we actually put the  yeah it's about it's about a ton a yard as it is really good because it occurs to me that if we're going to if we're going to be able to use the earth and the clean earth and material for cover we may want to we may not want to charge them forty dollars to drop it off if we're pain for cover material part and when they have to drop it off anyway i'm just i'm just wondering suggesting if i guess if there's me it would normally be the take it but yeah i would normally the eighty dollars a ton so we're giving them a break i would think that it's something that you know in some cases i guess they could spread it somewhere else what is your your average cost now for landfilling you know you gave us a figure last year but i can't remember what it was the it's somewhere in the hundred little over one hundred dollars  ok thank you if members other questions on page thirty one mr mr couch this is it may be a kind of thirty one and a half because good fit on both sides of thirty one and thirty two where in here would you be charging extra for the three cam plan if you were to continue it on i know that there was some talk about an extra charge for anybody participating in three can't plan where would that go probably page thirty two but it has to do with the recycling dish talking about in the in the other section here too short to me would be in thirty four thirty one and the fees for refuse collection  when we get that sure and we are proposing increasing it to twenty two dollars per month for we estimate the cost to be county y roughly forty just under forty two dollars per account per month so it is an attempt to try to reduce the general fund subsidy that's required for this part of the program so the twenty going to twenty two dollars a month and for they get basically half the service and the manual has the full service just once a week ok just i guess out of curiosity as you might be aware that i'm being inundated with calls about three can plan  the question i have is how much more expensive is it per month if you will to do that since you already got the same equipment they already have their cans at this point it's the same route it's just doing something different with it at the end of the after it gets put into the truck i know you run out of money i guess when it was all allocated for the full year we did not run out of money for the three can plan we but that's part of our operations program that we are running short of funding and so we just felt that why should the rest of the  for the service that only one portion of the call to get us i don't know offhand what that that cost is for just contained a service and not kind of backed charging two years ago or years ago two years ago and so now this next year it should be a certain amount x amount of dollars per month more is it because of a contract you you say ok i'm not going to dump it in the landfill which doesn't cost us anything i'm now delivering it to somebody else who is charging us per tonne yes to essentially tiffy so we can provide that information of just what the broken down operational cost for the continuation of the program we provided it from the perspective that the county recover the costs including the the bin costs that the rest of the community help to not really because if you look at what it costs to provide a service is on the order of just over four dollars we could say we don't recover the cost of the bins or we don't recover the cost of being but heavily more heavily subsidize the collection it's kind of hard to write allocate costs but one way or the other we as residents who subscribe to the service do not pay the full cost so either the bins or subsidize and or the the actual collection service ok so and he acted in all of those costs into what is the cost of service not what is the marginal cost based on the bins being kind even more so is that people who live in a family home like myself we don't get any trash service and still subsidise help subsidize and i don't have an issue with that per se for helping out the folks that want to do the three can plan because it diverts from the landfill i think  you know i think their support is there seven hundred folks in the three camp plan right now and how many total accounts do you have twenty thousand twenty five thousand total but some of them are still manual so there's like i think twenty two thousand and automated accounts so if you spread out that little extra cost for the cans amongst everybody it's only you know maybe a dollar a couple dollars a year so for a benefit to the whole county for landfill diversion i mean that's the whole idea is landfill diversion right so i'm just i'm just a little concerned and you know my constituents are concerned as well as to why i get stopped and be how much more really is it because as you heard they said that they re willing to pay more and you said you know seventy dollars a year and they worked it out there like five or six dollars a month but then i guess they got a letter saying oh no it's really twenty two dollars a month more so  i'm not sure what the number is and how you got to either of the numbers so i think yeah there's there's a bit of confusion because the budget amendment that was sent to us states twenty two dollars per refuse collection unit per month for a limited three can plan pilot extension so that indicates that it's not an additional twenty two it's twenty two compared to eighteen right but the members of the people who got who have the three can find they got a letter from that and i understand that and i think that's why there is confusion because the  men amendment that we were provided doesn't indicate that it's an additional twenty two dollars per month right it indicates that it's twenty two dollars per month compared to eighteen  thousand currently thousand dollars a month refuse collection account fee and then to participate in the limited extension of the pilot program would have been an additional twenty two dollars per account so the for fiscal year fifteen net paying forty dollars per month which is a lot more than seventy dollars a year so i think we need to have somewhat of an accounting for and that's what i would like to ask if we could have a breakdown of the actual costs and i think we had a letter from another meeting the recycling of water and similarly we want to we want to be responsible and recycle so if we're subsidizing the if the rest of the users are subsidizing  do wish mr o my concern is if we were to pass the budget amendment as provided to us i think it would establish a twenty two dollar collection per month the way it reads forward that three can plan participant correct yeah but they have to have a residential trash collection account to participate in three can plan that's not clear at all but the amendment it looks like there's you have an eight hundred dollars refuse collection unit per unit per month on the islands of maui molokai and you have a refuse collection unit per month on the island and then you have a twenty two refuse collection unit so it's all refuse collection unit so it's nothing that says you need to have office a financial breakdown should we discuss that budget amendment or you know later on you guys want to vehicles that you could provide that to the committee and helpful yeah yeah because i mean that might be it might be will want to do in my proposal and that whatever charge an actual line for the three can plan and then potentially expanding it through right but i don't know when is a good time to talk about three can plan what happens after we pick it up i don't know if that's for this discussion now or because that will help make my decision whether or not it just gets thrown away or if it cost us you know five hundred dollars a ton right now as is the time for the discussion and i think if you need additional information from the department with which to make the decision  when it comes time to putting this in the budget then let the staff know it will be happy to request whatever information is sorry you know for me i would like to know how the accounting was done sixty dollars a year to fifty yeah mr cherry i was not aware of of a seventy dollar amount spoken but the information that was given to me from the department if i recollect correctly it actually balanced out to twenty one dollars and eighty six cents per month and so we had rounded it up to twenty two dollars and we can get you that but i think the what i'm hearing from the community is we were told seventy dollars so it would be helpful if we could at least have a sense of how we already came up with that seventy dollars in comparison to the more recent calculation and then it again is that is that the total cost of the total marginal cost i think we all that but the question in my mind is with the regular service we have a forty two dollars cost per account and we're charging currently eighteen proposed to go to twenty two if in fact the cost is that if it's an additional cost of sixty four dollars total right sixty four total then should it be should they be pain they're going to be paying a higher percentage of the value of the cost to service them than the rest of the the rest of the folks on maui so it would just it would appreciate a little more detail on the accounting for that discount and maybe you can do s this off the top your head right now but once it's collected and driven off to whomever what is the cost to the county for that per ton going so right now for the mixed recyclable so for that is one hundred thirty dollars per ton and for the green one currently i believe it's zero that they take the green waste for free but that's only for the pilot and our concern is that once there's additional volume or tonnage that that rate would not be sustained because part of the part of what we have been engaging with the department of health about is how much we're able to take without having modifications to our composting operations so for instance we cannot take food waste currently without having a concrete slab and having it covered and to prevent order in vector and so that's why we don't accept food waste which is a second significant part of the way street that we would like to capture you know how many tonnes but let me yeah maybe how many tons of mixed waste the blue canned per week or per month that pilot project generates we do have it i just say ok it's part of the documentation we provided to the budget director i just don't have it in front of me so we could provide that information i would like i mean it is detailed as you can to find out really what the cost is sure of what the what everybody i mean as mr white said we're already getting subsidized twenty two dollars a  everybody is getting subsidies twenty two hours a month i find it a bit hard to believe that it's actually forty four dollars a month more to do the recycling it's twenty two dollars a month more but it plus the twenty two other subsidy so i you know i would really like a pretty good breakdown before you respond and just did a quick calculation and the  at the current rate of eighteen dollars forty three percent charge to the customer if we apply that same forty three percent charge to the sixty four dollars of cost for the three can plan as as you guys have detail that that would that would mean that the three can plan charge would be twenty seven fifty or thereabouts  if everyone was given the same level of of charge that based on cost so i think that's a again that you know it's a it's a policy decision what we what we add as the charge because in some respects the folks that are taking part of the recycling plan are helping the process more than the people who aren't i'm not suggesting that they should get a bigger subsidy necessarily but  i think it's worth the effort to take a closer look at it and thank you for those numbers mr that that kind of jives with the seventy dollars a year that there's a forty three percent you know we're charging forty two percent of the actual cost so if you do the actual like you said sixty four dollars that's a reasonable amount i think going to i think part of why we felt that they should get a full cost is because when you look at just conventional m s w municipal solid waste refuse collection it is something that is like a necessity that everybody wants and would mean and some people want to pay for it some people don't and true and we're doing a survey now with some of the existing customers in some other areas to see how much people are willing to pay and just from from feedback we've received people love the twice a week trash pick and don't want to change your habits of course that's human nature is and whether we want to make a policy i mean you want to make a policy decision forcing that habit on them that's something that's beyond what we could propose but that was kind of the hour of four there there are many people who did not want to pay more to get less trash service and a hybrid try and pay more for hybrid trash service so that's i mean not everybody feels like that i mean there are people who are willing to pay even more than a twenty two or whatever it is but that's you know again something for you to decide for the community and so i see both sides and i see where you're coming from and it's a tough decision and i agree i mean i know people who who you think are the best biggest environmental just through all their stuff in the trash can and want their two times a week and they won't take the time to go down and go to the dropbox and i'm wondering if those same people would at least you know throw their mixed recyclables in the in the blue bin in the green waste in the green bin and because when you do that you don't need the two cans to brown cans of wheat because a lot of that stuff especially up certainly in maui meadows that's all green waste a lot of their stuff is a lot of green waste down down and i'm guessing it's a little bit more half half and they still don't fill up both the can so i guess mr chair we need to have the discussion and i don't know when or where that this question should be but like you said just same with the water the recycled water is it incumbent upon us to  because for the municipality to run two trucks one that would be just the brown cans and one that participate in a program i mean be double the cost for the collection for that particular day so it really is an all or nothing proposition for a particular route right right and saw what we follow and which you know we'd like to do more education you know if you decide to bring it back because what we've noticed is i believe the contamination was an order of twenty something percent meaning what is going into the blue bin twenty something percent i was trash that we kind of pay twice because we pay one hundred thirty dollars and we in a blend filling it for free so i know we did a lot more thorough analysis you know when coming up with what the actual number was and i take full responsibility for that seventy dollar number what we did was kind of a quick and dirty calculation based on what was provided that the part sorry the division did one and then when we were getting to actually what are the co and the briley broke it down to what are the costs that's what you see in the the budget amendment another thing that caused the difference between the seventy and twenty two is having it island wide versus just one part of  community but it's something that you'll see in the analysis in the in this speech he will provide i think the important thing for me is that the two analyses are done using the same factors right now mentioned before mr chair the only difference i can see and correct me if i'm wrong it's after it's collected is the only difference is where it goes you're always doing this using the same trucks same route same number of times a week it's just different cans and then on a brown day you take it to the landfill on a green day you take it to the compost on a blue day you take it to whomever charges you one hundred thirty dollars  that the only difference that's where the difference starts to come in is after it's been picked up there's also other factor cost factors such as like the education and  a dedicated truck for this route that we cannot we don't use for other other routes because we need it clean they don't want trash oh so it's a different truck then yes it's a completely different truck to come on the green day and a different truck that comes on or the green oh it's one truck to do that service that we don't use that for say the trash day for something else ok and you do two days a week right now so that same truck if you had two more routes you could use that same truck right for the full week if you were to expand three can plan to two more routes you could use that truck the whole week and you wouldn't be sitting idle for the days that it doesn't go around there's definitely economies of scale i don't know the exact how many makes it a full run versus right but you're right that because it's a small sample that we're applying the three can plan on it will be more cost then if we expand it island wide or cont wide but offhand i don't know what that you know what kind of that sweet spot is for that dedicated truck and you see our frustration too i mean we have to come up with rates and fees by whenever whatever date and we have to have the discussion which means we're probably going to have to have you ended not another time for that and then come up with our policy decision whether or not we want to expand continue the existing one or whatever so the sooner we get the stuff just mentioned that they're scheduled to come back on the fourteenth and so with the department can bring the bring those numbers are higher if you possible so we can have a chance to digest them when though we can discuss it again on that fourteen ok so we could provide we have the information readily available we can provide that any next week and so i was the is when our department's operational budget will be discussed and we can if the chair would like discuss and break down the information that we do have to be a different chair so you can convince the other guy to do it ok thank you thank you chair i'm sorry for extent it's a it's a it's important discussion to have it is an important discussion and you know one of the things that you guys remember from our discussions last  last budget was that we didn't increase the the presidential pick up rates because of the concern that people there are already some people who don't pay it and take their trash of the hopefully take their trash to the landfill and we've all heard that when the rates were increased before that people took just didn't take it they just dumped it  in the nearest cane field or down the nearest road that's not very well utilized i don't don't think we're suffering from that right now and it's a little bit of a concern for me to increase rates as we discussed last year and i'd look at the tipping fees somewhat similarly not the same issue but because we are so heavily subsidizing residential pickup for that reason the subsidy in large part is coming from the transfer of general funds to solid waste but it's also there's a also a level of subsidy coming from those who are paying the tipping fees because it's all commercial folks so it's all businesses condos hotels etc that are paying for the majority of the the land filling cost if not all of the land filling cost so to some degree they're subsidizing the residential pick up as well now and so the at least the rationale that was used last year to leave the fees flat was that we don't want to we don't want to risk residential guys dumping on the side of the road and since the others are already pain this the lion share of the landfill and by not increasing the rates we simply increase the transfer from general funds the general funds are paid by all taxpayers and so it's it's just a different way of looking at it we can reckon we can raise the rates or we can leave the same to sink that increase the transfer i don't have any idea which which direction  chair is going to want to go on that but that's that was the rationale that we used last year  materials we hear that certain like glass has very little value because it cost so much to ship i don't know what the values are of the you know cardboard and plastics and so forth i'm assuming that when we contract for the recyclers to take take these materials that we're calculating into the into the amount that we're pain at least a certain amount of  recapture that they're able to generate out of the materials that they end up with you could you share with us what kind of an analysis we go through on that sure as you can imagine the  commodity pricing for the various recycle recyclable materials varies quite a bit and from what i can tell from my understanding is that really china and really china drives the pricing for a number of the recyclable materials that we currently collect and and send there are elsewhere so for instance something like cardboard you know back maybe  five or ten years ago there was really a big dip in cardboard where it was something like five or ten dollars a tonne was what they were paying delivered to to that destination and you know at other times it's on the order of one hundred twenty dollars a t and so there's quite a big swing depending on commodity prices and really depending on the demand from china the way that we we bid the processing of the recyclables was to ensure that we had enough money to make it through through the year and not be subject to such wide fluctuation having to come to this committee for budget amendment we put the risk on the contractor as far as the fluctuation of that and as i mentioned it's a one hundred thirty dollars per tonne flat rate for that mix recyclables so we didn't we didn't make it where it's a certain percentage of what we pay for the cost of getting it to market and then we get a rebate for whatever that commodity proceeds would be and so yes dollars so in other words there is a cost to the community providing a service so i don't know if i answered your question but that's kind of the commodity values kind of go like this right and to kind of temper that for a budgeting purposes we made it a flat rate ok thank you members other questions mr chair it's just budget and presented the information here the solid waste landfill was was receiving the c in the waste at the time and we projected that based the information given to us as actual revenue in the solid waste fun for fiscal year sixteen it wasn't until i was monitoring the meeting the other day and they mentioned that they're no longer collecting that seen the waste that i found out that they're no longer collecting it the projected revenue that we were expecting based on the rates and fees that we proposed was about two million seven hundred thirty thousand dollars so if we are not collecting that c n d waste the revenues for the solid waste fund will be reduced by two million seven hundred thirty thousand dollars  that's a big chunk which yeah which we're not currently collecting so that's something that i mean we have to deal with now that the situation's changed mr chair yes given that  news is that have those numbers been factored in with the i mean if you if you have this if we come up with this cheaper rate here for c n d material or ok when you just made that announcement is that supposing that we are going to get any more at all or with these numbers bank it more enticing for them to come to us as opposed to the other location the two million seven hundred thirty thousand dollars is is totally projected with these proposed rates i believe they're higher than the private  those figures are factored  that collection it was it was assumed that we would be taking it on for quite a while till they got their act together i'm so we included the revenue for the year based on that ok and so it's sort of monies you were hoping to collect so this kind of a scary way to budget your i mean you know it's like i mean we know what we're go certified and that we know that we're going to receive everything else is estimated we estimate how much fuel people are going to use we estimate how much tonnage is going to be delivered to the landfill on a regular basis so that when we prepared the budget that was that was the estimated numbers that were given to us ok and i guess what i was going to speak about prior to that coming up it's jumping back to the recycling aspect of the budget and the new division that's being created is solely seems to be focusing on diversion type efforts and here we are saying it's not it's a low priority at it's you know number four on our strategy list and so i mean that will come up when this department comes back to a share and when we get these figures are reacting for a buffet three can plan and what have you but that part just really boggles my mind and i and i know  and i were seen eye to eye on this one so i'm i'm sure i'm looking forward to further discussion and i know so is he so be awaiting that day to come and hopefully we'll get some answers and more hardy on if the cost to landfill is seventy nine seventy nine dollars at central maui landfill there's that mean that our costs are reduced by that seventy nine thousand or at seventy nine dollars per tonne and what tonnage was that revenue of two hundred two point seven million dollars based on  i can answer the first part of seventy nine dollars was based not on having any c n d that was based on our current operations for the bellas i think it's in our one of our performance measures so  also had additional costs involved so what i'm asking for is for you guys to identify what costs are what our cost reductions are with that removal of  what i'm what i'm looking for is what was the tonnage based on what was what was the tonnage of that revenue it was based on sure and then what will that you've put i'm assuming you've that information readily available because this was a late add on to the budget and so my set when we discuss the operations of the department and i guess the fourteen then we can that and if you have it readily available if you can send it to the committee ahead of time so the members who want to dig into it a little bit more can take a look at it  other questions members can share just just in closing real quick to close on the three can plan i was trying to look it up but i know other another municipality of sorts has been actually mean or you know putting a sticker on the bin say and or any please separate your you know your suit your food waste from this whatever whatever so it's educating yes but it's also giving for warning but as long as they're explained on how to and then they just kind of get a habit and learn how to you know and then eventually for just recur reoccurs then there's some type of i mean you got to penalize somehow or and say don't do this otherwise pay the cost coming up on friday if you all don't mind we will take up the water water fee issues on friday no objection that if the chair of water is in agreement will human concerns their operational budget not including their grants the department of liquor control and civil defen