the meeting of the policy in the government affairs committee will come to order to the september twenty second two thousand and sixteen it is twelve p m and i want to think the members that are present for giving up their lunch hour thank you very very much dawn are you there and dawn do you have anyone wishing to testify you know what we think ok i'll call upon you after i finish the in the chambers if the anybody shows up in the meantime with no objections i would like to open up to public testimony thank you today we will be limiting testimony to the items on the agenda obviously if you have not signed up and wish to sign up on the a floor lobby area we have a desk and you can please sign up there just a moment would be limited to just three minutes to add two and a half minutes the light will turn yellow and at three minutes it will start blinking red and i will ask you to conclude pre state your name in any organization that you may be representing we have established a connection with just one district office today so we won't be rotating locations or we only have don and i had office so with no objections i would open up public testimony oh but do we i think i forgot to introduce myself that you know michael vick do you know sorry i sometimes move along and leave myself out at this time i'd like to call upon the  representing the realtors association of maui in favor of agenda item three to number five requiring which requires the counties to submit their general plans to the state land use commission for its review and approval sixteen get ahead of myself in two thousand and sixteen state legislative session the house bill two six one seven stalled out in conference committee when suggesting other sections of the document and we respectively respects fully would recommend that if this committee supports as a proposal then is should we we would hope that you would amend the proposed bill to could only sections one and two of the bill any at the top of page four the realtors association of maui supports this proposal because it would amount to an important step to reduce the time it takes to entitle housing projects in a why by the land use commission's own estimate it now takes an average of bridge housing project using agricultural land ten years to receive the necessary approvals from our multi layer be given to the counties the county government the basic idea for the land use commission was to and i agree cultural lands to keep them from being urbanized in that sense it was a success we now have two hundred thousand acres of farmland and no real culture meanwhile because we have so restricted the availability of how land for housing the cost of housing is gone through the roof is it is a gross understatement to say that the supply is not kept up with demand this compromise bill keep all you see in the land use and title move but instead of requiring each housing project to go individually before d l you see the commission would consider mass approvals based on the county set up the plants that work at years of the entitle them across as well still maintaining the state land use oversight when we have a housing crisis that we're not going to overcome by following the same patterns this compromise will be good for a good step towards getting government out of the way of building our own lives building the and well ms robinson is approaching the podium i'd like to recognize the attendance of mr robert e small representative it's good afternoon but ok you're the stupid one everybody stuck on the morning no problem good morning rosemary go ahead and i know that that's coming from other concerned citizens too that i had spoken with over the weekend and it is a bill in the legislative package heading over to the state wide meeting prohibiting smoking in motor vehicles by minors under the age of thirteen and ray i would recommend that we do the best we can as a paragraph two also would like to speak in a paper up and in accord with other people that are concerned citizens about legislated state bil proposal with the minimum wage to go up to fifteen dollars per hour and twenty nineteen the cost of living here being with the cost of living here has even up that we're going to have a tough time being able to keep up with that but i certainly recommend that three item three of the four parentheses two and i'd like to go over and talk about some things that certainly need more address and one of those is the important agricultural lands one the purpose of the proposed bill is to identify and map the important agricultural followed the community has spoken very clearly in a number of his shoes that to deal with things like the master in the state and not to deal with what the local  people have spoken means somebody is not listening and people are losing out because of that so we need to make sure that over on page two of our agenda today and backing that up is the bill for an act that talks in here about it's community stakeholders that have to be included in that so that's exhibit page one with three so it's been pretty well drawn out in there so it needs to be making sure that we're listening to the people who will be affected the people who are most proximate to it we need to hear from those folks and to listen and to respect what it is that they are saying so i also would draw your attention to the material that was in the folder that talks about we need to be careful in how we're doing our planning if the planning is only in view economic acceleration not that we don't need that but that's something that's like with the who where why do you know back into first things should be why and it's for the wellbeing of everybody not just a particular avenue people's personal especially if that avenue is going to be in terms of bringing a lie more people in long term or short term to maui when we don't have our infrastructure in place to be able to accommodate the folks  we happen to coming into beside us now they're not coming here to do hydrate but that's exactly what's going to happen if we don't pick up on that so that people residents visitors agricultural  without sufficient water healthful water for that and you have mentioned a number of times over the years mr picture you know about water quantity and quality both have to be there and in the records that we're dealing with we need to make sure that we are aware of the elephant in the room but people don't always want to talk about it because it's a sticky wicket in the package and also to be  aware the person who goes to confession and says i stole the rope and never mentions the cow in the other end of it you know we talked about all of this for so long so i'm trusting that when this gets before the state level that that's going to be showing our wisdom in being aware and respectful of all those folks and then in this morning's paper it talks about county officials  victims that's tonight so that's less than a day's notice that people to get there and i must say that i was over they are having a salad beside that stream now river and we had done something illegal about that a while ago too and their water was scary as all get out and i was watching rent a car people coming in and walking over to them and sure enough and came that dreadful scene you know control on but you know care that we're trying we're trying our best interests and yeah so just sort of people understand i don't want to get off subject matter because there's not a lot of my package today but thank you for that reminder and i was going to put it at the end of that meeting but thank you very much  saw give anyone in the room who has not testified i don't see anybody in the room but just the key somebody came rushing in an opportunity and seeing no one taking that opportunity with no objection i'm going to close public testimony thank you very much a lot don see you want to go and before we get started i wanted to recognize the attendance of back it so we had no objections i want to start with item number one which is the committees you receive of correspondence dated august twenty ninth two thousand and sixteen from me  state association of counties legislative package a state bill to allow certain government records to be shared among council members with no commitment relating to a vote on the matter is made or s apologize if it is the aug twenty ninth version yes go ahead mr coach and the motion is to add it to the package that is correct and pass the ok thank you if there's no more discussion all those in favor signify by saying i oppose let automatic voter registration for applicants for driver license and state identification cards the purpose of the proposals resolution was to prove is to approve for inclusion in the two thousand and seventeen regards to this kwaito there are some concerns that were brought out in issues i think that were not resolved and search here at this time i wish to not push this through at this you know at a future date i mean me and then it would do all of that automatically if not brought forward in this session next session someone could bring it up again and he would be automatically off filed at that point in time so with no objections and voting we got to get that number much higher we had ninety one thousand people this will still be able to registered voters and only twenty nine ninety three thousand showed up that that's a hurtful number so i would like to do something to get more people to revised proposed resolution approving for inclusion in the two thousand and seventeen hawaii state association of counties legislative package is the bill relating to the point in agricultural lands the exhibit a in title a bill of one act wheeling two important agricultural lands the purpose of the revised proposed bill is to allocate a total of two hundred fifty thousand dollars to the counties for the next two provision at the committee's request that they require the county to provide matching funds it is it was mentioned at the last mean that co i county had received funds in two thousand and five to identify and map important in agricultural lands stamp did some research and yes to original model of seventy five thousand and even though all that ordinance allocated the money for all four counties at the same point zero district thank you and i want to day mr will spans who flew back from co i this morning to be here and he's been attending the a c p u in conference but he felt it was very important meetings of available today so i would ask our members if we can really focus in on this so that we can have the suspense as a resource person and try to see if we can get this completed so  planners up in code why other people have similar position so at this time i'll turn it over to you for a brief introduction and then we're going to do any mr spence yeah n members of we've important agricultural lands as is identifying those lands as a concept that's been around for more than a decade now and as the chairman said it was the state who was supposed to pay each one of the counties or give each one of the counties the money to identify not just all of your ag lands but what are the really important ones what are the ones that have access to water to grow to you know transportation the soil types cetera and i mean we can go into other criteria as well those are laid out in state law but the the state has never appropriated the money for the counties to do this they did the seventy five thousand there haven't even completed their process yet the as far as you know taking it to the land use commission and all that so and i know they spent more than seventy five thousand to get that done so we have tried a couple of times to you know we brought forth budget items for the council to consider we have proposed legislation on a state level a state level it just it goes for every committee just everybody's in favor they just  when it comes to money that's where you know it doesn't happen so there's as you know there's a lot of competing interests my hope is that with the support of a sack w the support of the different mayors with the support of the other planning directors who we speak on a quarterly basis and we really push the designation last time at the ledge  know the land use commission is very much in support of this so my hope is that if if enough of the heavy players you know push this forward will get this get the money to get the designat done from l a county as you know we're a little bit different because we have three islands with very important agricultural lands on each one so my hope is that we get enough to get this going and get it identified and it also management i think you chair i believe that one of the components that was i guess initially started on koichi was the incentive portion which is actually the triggering mechanism for the i guess ability for the county to ask for more appropriations and i correct that statement i know it's one of the first initial hurdles that they county over a calmer at least complete before it goes into the next level which i cannot recall what the next step is  done whole initiative but you are correct there's a whole initiative program that's supposed to go along with us to help farmers whether it be provisions for i would say low interest loans and tax breaks and those kinds of things i water which we already provide some of the out there will be other provisions as well i'm sure i don't think that's one of the first steps that we have to do i think i mean it's one of the necessary steps that we will do along the way because until we can identify where these lands are on each one of these islands and i would say that the incentives may be different on each island simply because of the uniqueness of each but we will have to develop those incentives for sure and and the process i will say it does go out to the community it will we will have a advisory committee on each island and those reports will come back to this council and i would think at that time we could put together a package of incentives for farming so that being said since we we have to get organized and and create some type of package or incentive program the two hundred fifty thousand that's indicated in proposed bill is that going to be apparently it's going to be divided between the counties the two hundred fifty thousand so in your opinion do you believe that amount two hundred fifty thousand should be increased is a science of course i think it should be more but one of the thoughts in speaking with the land use commission as perhaps we should start out at a certain level and then say you get the process rolling and then go back again and say hey we have this you know we've made all this progress we have all this data we have identified all this stuff we need  finish the process that there's knows much less sticker shock on the part of the state lead so they're going to be under chair is there be an understanding that call whitey has already received seventy five thousand as compared to the other counties i don't you know i and i we didn't delve any further in that respect mr grossman i mean the whole intent was to get something down now so we may get this moved along when  less than the seventy five that co i got should they get more i'm not sure because mister spencer has indicated they're not even completed with theirs they haven't even got it to land use yet they have what they do have for us is the methodology and how they arrived at that so maybe that's something we can emulate and maybe adjust to our own use here anymore we can't be so that might be instead of reinventing the wheel taking what's there and making it better for us and maybe some tweaks here and there but getting a better job i don't know how to speak to the money i think at this point why i want why we've been trying to push this is first of all we need to be inclusive so that we know they know we're coming and we need this and they've  have to really if we were to get the moneys if it was approved in all of that then and only then would we be able to address that issue to be honest with you because when i can answer that question at this time but this is important to get it started or at least  public process which you know which is mandated in this not really mandate but is is going to require the county to do the heavy lifting to the process i think we need a combination of boat and i think  was one of those that came forward and was willing to do it then they had the money in an ability to do it we have a lot of small land owners that may not have the same ability and saw this maybe a we have assisting them also from the public sector so at this point this is just to get the process started how the money is divvied out and how we get that in that we get the private sector to chip in later on i don't know i think that will come down the road a little bit and also for me this is just  concept to be sold to get the process started and then from there again as mr spencer and you have both mentioned there's a lot more pieces to the puzzle that have to be put together but i don't think we're quick to do that today this is just to get the puzzle as it progressed through the through the legislative process days they left different lines for the different counties on their would be filled  in i suppose during the budgetary process i'm not familiar with that process how they do that on the state level but there was some intent that those figures would be filled in at that time if they decided to appropriate money ok thank you so it and a little bit more the the two fifty again was to let's hopefully avoid some sticker shock that they're not gone awol counties want all this stuff how are we going to do this because there's four counties or so if they got in the thoughts of doing it three ways well i think if you want to support it which is four counties  method and we're putting up for a stay in there or at least some some for which the state won't like me still will spend mention won't get sticker shock again not saying this is the end all and like he said there is a lying next to each county so they could put seventy five for ma in twenty five for co i don't know but i'm not the one part of that project budget process also i know how we do ours i'm not sure how they do it it's kind of funky we have doing budgetary planning but anyhow with that because i got it because they were they were going to do it and some of the other counties were not so and i'll leave it at that it's not all coase fault partly is other counties we're not ready to do it missed by some oh thank you very much no i'm in support of going after this money i think it's very very important thank you we've been talking about doing this for a long time to ask and get it done thank you thank you mr carroll can you put your grow anything there and you're absolutely correct so this is a good way of hopefully getting some money getting this study done so we can really address we appoint an ag lanny's to preserve it and where it's not to do other uses of that land especially if you're talking housing thirty we'll see how that works so the next agenda item is the committees in receipt of correspondence dated september fifteenth two thousand and sixteen from myself transmitting  revised proposed resolution into approving for inclusion in the two thousand and seventeen a white state association of counties legislative package a state bill to allow counties to petition the state land use commission for regional district boundary amendments after deduction of general plan updates as you heard earlier we had the version and mr de leon and others have brought come forward to say that we wouldn't take out everything from page four on saw i would like you to all open up your bill to see what exactly we're talking about so they were not thank you m dated favre september fifteenth two thousand and sixty when you put on your microphone think i believe the revised bill is a better bill i'll start out with that and the other dealing with one thing the ability of the counties to take their their general plans to the state land use commission for district wide boundary amendments and it does not deal with the enforcement issue which i do think in force meant for the line his commission is very important but that's a that's a separate topic that should be dealt with separately on the state level and i think up if i didn't mention the the other planning directors are meeting quarterly and we agree that you know the enforcement issue does need to be there doesn't need to be some legislation on that but what we should keep these two things separate to let me give you there's some of the of information in this bill but i just want to say you know we started our our state land use district land use scheme in one nine hundred sixty one and really what it was for was to protect the plantations you know that was the main economic engine at the time and the state land use commission was formed and it was really supposed to keep land use planning in a thirty thousand foot level in one thousand nine hundred eighty four there was an amendment to chapter two of five where the at that time it was the land use commission that was supposed to do a five year boundary review every five years they were supposed to look at the statewide boundaries and say ok we need a little bit more here we need some more there we need a lot more in this place or we need less in this other location in the last fifty years this is been done three times where the state has actually looked at the state wide looked at the boundaries and actually done something with them  so the whole land use commission process has gone down from being a broader planning kind of exercise to a project by project review where we've given gotten down to the the council members who are familiar with the level of detail we get into when you change zoning on a piece of property you get into the traffic you get into archaeology and you should but we do that also on a state level from people who are not located here on maui though we do have representation on the land use commission it has gotten down to the project by project reviews got into such a state that we're getting into requirements that a certain subdivision have low sodium low pressure sodium light fixtures those are to end up being the conditions on their district boundary amendments so we've lost sight of it least on the state level we've lost sight of the larger picture and we're into the weeds on project review this idea of doing more district wide as it has support from the other planning directors it has support even from the executive director of the land use commission because they would like to do more district wide kind of planning stuff there's let me identify quickly there's like five reasons or five big problems with things going down the project by project review the first one is only the big guys can get through this you know i mean we go oh my god a and b there are so powerful they have all this land there they're the ones that get everything that they want in mowing pine and and all this and those that's the feedback i've been getting for years now that it's the big project the big landowners get their way but the big landowners are the only ones that can tackle this process it costs i talked around with a couple of consultants it cost about seven hundred fifty thousand dollars to go to the land use commission and that's just simply because you own a piece of property more than fifteen acres so that's just to go to the l you see and that includes you have to hire an attorney and all your consultants etc then you come to the county and i'm not excusing us from our own place in expense and length of permitting but it cost a whole lot of money there too so our land use scheme is very expensive a lot of it is redundant from that e t a e i a s process we look at certain things we look at traffic we look at archaeology we do cultural impact assessments we look at water we look at a whole lot of different things the land use commission looks at exactly those same things we look at them again as a county with exactly the same things and if you're in the special management area we look at them a fourth time it takes about seven years to get through the entire process we talk a lot about good planning what we should be doing as a county and what we should be doing as a state and when you look at places like seattle and portland that everybody looks at them as a model of what should be done they are on the cutting edge of planning when they adopt a general plan along with that goes as zoning ordinance and they go ahead and these own write down in accordance with their plan they don't sacrifice environmental review that is going to be in there on a project basis but it's but they do it once and they do it very thoroughly instead of over and over it's also not just seattle it's  around the country that is zoning in and in this case because we have a multi tiered land use scheme that zoning follows your general plan and all that pretty much go ahead and stop with just this last session when representative yamashita proposed a bill to say you know the counties shall submit their general plans for review i thought that was a little too much i thought it should be more permissive i don't think we should the county should be able to choose when they're ready to go to the commission instead of just saying shall i do not again i i'm not saying this would eliminate environmental review at all i think that's critical to our land use processe i also think that we wouldn't just take all the projects say in the maui i don't plan to the land use commission there are some that are just not ready for prime time and redistricting perhaps we should do this  increments of like ten years at a time or something there are projects that are no longer on the books such as old wallaroo other landowners have have leased told me that they're not going to pursue certain entitlements so there would be some selection in this and what we take to the land use commission it wouldn't be just everything so we would we would certainly look as the way the law was it's something i live with every day having been to the land use commission probably a dozen times now and witness the time and energy on on the part of the applicants but also the burden on planning staff and on corporation counsel to meet numerous deadlines it's it's a very very intense process and there should be some intensity to it certainly we don't finishes this general plan and if this law passes let's say you go and try to redistrict all of mulayam and whatever and i see there's a one hundred landowners private involved you think they're going to just sit down and see half of whom object do it they had be vested right to get involved with these proceedings so you had fifty intervenors that the county would have to deal with you have anything you'd like to add after hearing that from mr goosey with all due respect to mr koshi i don't think this would be the nightmare that it already is ok ignition as a rule ok and he has county rules on me but through the political process the general plan changes it to  maui island plan that drew the lines where we said this is where we want for urban in this is where we were all in the spirit of home rule we should be able to go to the state and say this is where we've planned for our urban growth our rural growth so in order to make things get things done x you know with  and as mr spence said it's up to seven hundred fifty thousand dollars if you want to do a district boundary amendment all that goes in the price of the housing whether it's affordable or not it goes into the price of the housing and the number of years it takes as well so if we as a community have said this is where we want our urban in our rural then it should be ok to have us go to the state and say a state this is where we want to urban our rural you have any issues with that because that's what the land use commission is a for saying is this going to be agood just going to be urban or is this going to be rural not all right this is going to be urban but you can only do this this that's not their function their function is yes it's ok to go from ag to urban or ag to rural or active conservation and so i think that this will give us a little bit more of a home little thing  mr spence also said at change in zoning time then that's where we can do the conditions and get the conditions that are necessary so i'm very supportive of this thank you chair thank you mr culch any other comments or questions for mr spence or mr causey seen and i'd like to make my recommendation chair would like to entertain would like to entertain a motion to adopt the proposed resolution in title approving for inclusion in the two thousand and seventeen ma we hang on a second one moment i was reading the state bill to allow counties to petition the state land use commission for regional district boundary amendments after the adoption of the general plan updates so with the chair it is being moved and hopefully i'll be back shortly what i'd like to do with your permission is stop here with eight sack and move into the molly package and you'll find a lot of correlations so we can i think move along exponentially with the maui package and let's see how that works out so with your permission and no objections i will change to the maui package thank you very very much and that's why i was ahead of myself i had turned to the page seriously sorry about that folks occupied by minors under the age of thirteen years of age i had this time i'll call upon mr cochran to make an opening statement thank you thank you very much chair yeah i believe this isn't the first time this body has spoken in reference to this item and it's been so there's multiple reasons as to why this support for the smoke free vehicles when children are present i would like to see put into the package but first i just wanted if i can get clarification from staff i think we're doing some changes to the code if ms will and brink can clarify where we're at with this item mr turner you have something you can adjust to that question thank ok so are we clear with that that concurrently you're working on an ordinance for my county and at the same time we do including this in our legislative package to the state legislature to see if they will look at building something of the same nature so i guess just to highlight some bullet points as into the reason mean here's the ethical moral aspect of this and it's practical i guess in the sense we're children don't many children would not have the ability to speak out to the negative nature that this can can be there's i guess consistency too there's a lot of public education with since schools you see them and you see them in whether it's on t v or magazines and papers or what have you in reference to don't start smoking it's a bad thing and there's the i guess economic issue where secondhand smoke is a proven to be you know detrimental health wise and thereby the health costs that are associated with that too and i guess the public health and safety issues so those are some i guess some different bullet points as to referenc smoking has been the scourge of our society and we've now proven beyond a reasonable shadow over doubt that there are a number of adverse effects are helped and secondary smoking smoke is also contributory to health issues out there and i think that's something that really needs to be addressed well more importantly making sure that young ones because we have age we already have our you cannot smoke i think what twenty one no you cannot buy cigarettes you can to look at the right to own property and when we compare this to laws that prohibit smoking all of those are public areas now we're taking a step further and saying ok your private area which is basically a car or are now going to regulate i'm not sure whether we're going too far there's a got to be a nexus between what is  you have drinking alcohol but it's a certain level point zero eight right so they're allowed to drive but the nexus is it causes accidents if you're at a certain alcohol blood level now in this case  we far reaching are we now saying ok we're going to regulate smoking in a private area i'm not sure if we're going too far i completely understand the health consequences but there's the other balance do people have a right to do what they wanted to in their private areas you know and you have to compared to our public smoking laws those are in public areas where it effects the community as a about thank you chair and i will agree with you that you know it may be coming close to you know intruding on your private rights but also we'll see you do travel introversion public rooms ok i  waving at people you'll see how many people still use their cell phone while they drive and there's a nexus we know for a fact but yes right mr culch thank you mr chairman i i too have the concerns child has no say in the matter in there and in an enclosed vehicle least in a house they have a place they can go that's not you know they have to do with the secondhand smoke so there is that concern and there's a very legitimate concern the state and let them have that nice stuff on the floor and the other day other question i have if if this does move forward right why did it go down the thirteen i know  be willing to raise it up to sixteen or eighteen well i think if co i say example and they did something very similar and their chair basically said in his comments it's easier to identify a thirteen year old than a sixteen year old and if you use that rationale it's a little bit easier to identify a thirteen year old in a car than a sixteen year old soul and i think that was the rationale that they gave on and that's all they passed their bill so again just you asked a question and asked the question i was asked so i asked that question to the co i counsel and the chair gave me that response it's reasonable ok so just to give you those are the kind of things that i get from our smoker i live with one and the other questions that i have you know i don't question the health issue i grew up with a father who chain smoked and i think that set me up for allergies for the rest of my life i'm very very allergic to cigarette smoke and as a child suffered a lot from hay fever and asthma and it was my father with his camels which eventually killed him when he was forty six with a major heart attack so you know i'm very much aware of the health issues but when we get the other issues with you with members men i think those are very logical and my husband has raised those he says we're in are we to when do smokers have rights everybody else has rights we have no right if he he says if you're going to keep doing this just make cigarettes illegal and the whole thing and then you don't have to worry about all this and i totally agree too with the cheers remarks about enforcement you know i drive to and from work every day and all over this island and everybody's on the phone and so i don't know if we want to make more laws to keep our policemen busy they have so many other things that we want to do what like speeding and running red lights and those kinds of things i think a lot of this has to be personal responsibility you know we have tried for years in america to  damage of second small and that's what's probably really needed i really worry about the enforcement it's such a commonsense thing that i just  again if you're going to address it it should be obsessed more than one person in the car will spoken should be a load of the legal note of course would be easily in forcible because if there's more than two people in the car what we really need is to be spending more money and the tobacco wanted to come through every year the dismiss used government to go with the herd focus more and i would i would support it if they could if there was a correlation to safety on the road if there if there could be provided information that smoking would would of you know resulting of smoking in the car causes more injuries or people speed it has to be something traffic related because every law that we've passed so far deals with the safety issue on the road seatbelt law the cell phone law there there was a correlation of people speeding or not paying attention while they were using their cell phones so therefore cell for cell phone safety checks  that was another thing is your car safe for driving speeding all everything that deals with violations in a car deal with safety now and tell there is some type of correlation that causes some kind of result on the road it doesn't make sense to me i hate i don't get it i only get the health the health part of it so i'm kind of caught that way i could passes through i could see that the police could use this as a tool for probable cause just to pull people over and check them out you know suspects and if someone smoke and they could use that is probable cause you just pull them over and and go through a whole search and seizure and whatever they find they find are just like invalid safety checks it's used for cause all the time for pullovers so i can see the advantage for police officers so there's two ways to look at things thank you ok i think we we've got to figure out this is the enforcement part but i can tell you what i think this might do and i won the thing remember cochran for bringing it up people are watching this and they are listening to this discussion and it will bring the awareness up and  maybe some of the folks will get it and say hey i hadn't thought about that but this is causing trouble for the people in my car so maybe i shouldn't smoke while they're in it so that might help this is part of education well i think you hit the nail right on the head like my dad he was always a firm believer in never smoking also never smoked in the car when the kids and my mom was in the car if used by himself each more or anybody was in the car he did it and i again some people have common sense others do not you know that is a challenge and i agreed you can force me and next is to see fifty and all of that really is really a challenge with this this particular bill the awareness is important and i think that's good what you mention about  don't want to go there mr cochran thank you and so just in closing my last my last plea in remarks i say you know i appreciate that this is an educational thing i think number one that is why this is being presented here today for to have this discussion on the table and number two i think the in regards to mr hughes ms comments about the nexus between safety on the road how does this correlate is a difficult one to tie in when you reference the sea built in the cellphone distracted driving issues this is a health mainly a health issue it's a contained area where it's smoke filled and it's saying it's detrimental to the passenger in the car being thirteen years and under and that it is our obligation as a government as people who pay for health care costs in social services and what have you have kind of that direct relationship to it so if we can address that on our behalf in this manner in putting out this type of you know law then so be it to address the health aspect which trickles down to yeah we fund these types of health services and the other thing is you know it's another form could be a form of abuse of us in a sense  you know we don't want to have parents harm their families in it whether it's physical mental verbal this is another action of sorts that is a form of abuse as in health again factor because it's been studies have shown that is three times greater smoke filled cars three times greater toxins in the air than in a smoky bar not that we want to drag our children into smoky bars either and the vehicles with a minor present and that legislation also carries a hundred dollar fine to anyone this also includes e cigs for eighteen and under is even when the windows are rolled down so state house a transportation to prohibit such measures so it's not something new others have done it and have lived with so i just wanted to put that out there and again mainly to put it on the table for discussion at this time states have done it and i think you know we can but we'll see how this goes mr carrol discussed it do the math so what i was looking to do is to really say to all of you whichever way you vote is not indicative of your ability to understand the health consequences i think we all agree with that i think what we're we're kind of stuck in the mud for lack of a better term is in force meant and the next is to health and safety or safety i shouldn't leave the health or safety on the highways which all or all the laws seem to have been promulgated on the safety factor eight saw i'll just put it out that way that way your clear when you wherever you vote whichever way you vote it's based upon that the that's the next is that we're looking for more than anything else so is there anything else anybody to add yes mr guzman it's curious on the what mr cochran was stating on the record about the a bill that was passed out of the department of transportation that committee so i would have to look look into the low further but just in the context of their committee work it had moved out and moved out so my question chair is if there's already a bill there is there is already checked and it also ok so he died not in conference i mean it did never went any further after the committee it died oh it's a case of i mean so that's why it's really what you're trying to do is if anything in this would probably overly stimulate people to think about it again i don't know but it did die in so i did not pass so if the purpose is to educate i mean by passing this bill out and by educating bringing up the topic wouldn't it be i guess really i guess it would be reasonable to pass it through to have the topic brought up and discussed at the state level well that's i mean if we're talking education purposes did there was more than that that purpose but i mean i think we can if we were to pass it out i think that's where it's going to start as as an educational tool and and hopefully seen that this would up big because  your call but again we know what the issues were you brought them obvious to college others the health issues the one thing the next is as far as your like you said when it comes to the safety and other aspects of the law how scratching their ear when they try to buy sell it you've got no you know so whatever you decide yes or no up or down it's not i mean you know nothing against what you're thinking i think it's what you believe putting on the table right now ok chair i do have an update on the bill from last session and let me just clarify bills are introduced on the odd years they carry over to the even years and then they either die or move forward the bill last term was for minors so that would be eighteen and under and it did go all the way to conference  this at a county level we could do it at every level apparently since they've done it so that might be something that ms cockermouth want to introduce at a county level and have a discussion here the other one is if it's already been through conference committee for minors they've had that discussion over and over and over again so sending it to them again they're just go bathwater you know i'm i'm very torn and i think if it can be done at a county level maybe that's the level that we should have the discussion and we presently working on that right now so i can said is it's hell to and we got that but on the other side what safety issues are brought up because of it and if we don't have really something to connect to see fifty shows on the state level that's probably why it's not going anywhere whereas on a county level it's really a county issue and maybe it's more public palatable at that point and i think something like that we could support if you talk it's helping local again like we did with ourselves off cell phone bill we did it thank you chair in so the ordinance it was an ordinance passed through quite a county with their code and that is the reference that ms really made earlier for my my p f that is in progress right right through our county levels so what mr coach is explaining is currently occurring right and so i'm just trying to cover all bases in a sense to put it here and then also working on the site on the county level so be it however the body decides but this is why i'm just trying to see where it'll stick and if it doesn't then i'm going to go here instead well i think that the county level is occurring let me be very honest i do wish doctoring i wouldn't waste my time with the state and i'd go work hard on getting the best on the county level i think you'd have a much better chance and i think you have better support so that's fine chair and you know we the votes can reflect that and we can move on ok so if there's no further two eyes five nose and two excused sorry about that i get done with my man sometimes you know what we're going to take a quick break hopefully mr white will be here shortly if not we'll continue with our molly package we've made some good progress i want to give you a good break be back at one fifty five in your chair if possible thank you this meeting is in recess the meeting of the policy intergovernmental affairs committee will come back to order at this time before i move any further i would like to bring forward seven of our bills that have been approved under the  and that are identical in the mali package and so i would like mr whimpering to call up those particular items and i have my i had my you know hang on hang on and bring up t seventeen maui county legislative package the state bill to allow persons with disabilities to indicate on their identification cards their disability number two approval for inclusion in the two thousand and seventeen mally county legislative package a state bill to allow certain government records to be shared among council members where no commitment relating to a vote on the matter is made or s number three approving for inclusion in the two thousand and seventeen maui county legislative package a state bill relating to transit accommodations tax number for  the two thousand and seventeen just later package a state bill to enable council members to really attend community meetings the five approving for inclusion in the two thousand and seventeen maui county legislative package state bill relating to important agricultural lands six approving for inclusion in the two thousand and seventeen now accounting legislative package a state bill to allow counties to petition the state land  seventeen how why state association of counties legislative package a state bill that allows a representative of the of each county council to participate as a non voting member in  bargaining unit negotiation and to change the allocation of votes for bargaining units eleven and twelve the purpose of the revised proposed resolution is to improve in to be improved collective bargaining the purpose of the revise proposed state bill is to amend section eighty nine days six to why vice statute two provided the counties have agreed a portion proportion collective bargaining units eleven and twelve which are for firefighters and police officers respective really mr white at this time i would let you start and discuss those revisions that you have brought forward thank you chair the the build regarding having a council member able to sit on one of the committees i believe was brought forth before but we added to that  the concept that barring units eleven and twelve are primarily or that the only units in which only county general funds are expended because there are no show up on members that are under the state's responsibility and there are the only firefighters under the state's responsibility those at the airports they're paid for by special funds and i think part of the confusion that we have from time to time is that the state may have a significant significant surplus of cash because of their tax structure and it is it's possible that that is seen as being the same way in the counties and that simply isn't the case so i believe it's appropriate for us to have the state take a lesser role in those negotiations because they don't have a general fund exposure like the the four counties do so the the question is should we have dropped to two votes or one vote or not having any vote since there is no general fund expenditure and in show potion that also be dropped to two one or or the session meeting needs to be called for that you will advise us at that point mr chair well i just want to know just want you to answer that question first and then while working as you hang on a second we just don't know which bill we're talking about right now there's two almost identical bills and i'm not sure which one we're discussing is the one dated they're both dated the same day mike wise version it would be because the other one is  legislative package a state bill to allow a representative of each county council to participate as a non voting member in the relevant bargaining unit negotiations and to change the allocation of votes for bargaining units eleven and twelve   i'm concerned about on your version member why is it you have the reallocation of votes on the bargain eunice to eleven twelve but you also have the provision where a council member can sit on the as a bargaining non voting but to spin to negotiations for the other units what about units eleven and twelve in your version you don't have that language you know that was i actually thought that the be the change the vote count was going to come in a separate measure but it's been combined with the other two or the other one as eleven in twelve because i think that's what you have brought forward the other units that was in the same concern because of the intertwining of of their funding in our funding in that respect right but these were the two that you in particular brought up that   what you your discussion is if you just take your version yes and on page two regarding bargaining in this eleven and twelve just as we reallocate the votes you know the governor as one to me is each a one and deep that language in about representatives from the council being in there that would cover all your intended changes be open to that i mean i i have a problem going that was my intent to bring it that way so so what you're asking for is to change it to read that the governor would have one vote all the mayors would have one volt for bargain units eleven in twelve and then the rest would be representation ok that you would like to entertain a motion to approve the for inclusion in the two thousand and seventeen hawaii state association of counties legislative package a state bill to allow  council to participate as a non voting member in the relevant bargain you unit to go she change and to receive updates from the administration on bargaining unit no go sheesh ns and to change the in here mr wade what we started to is all those that have been approved on the sec package earlier we approved under them are we package saw well we're moving forward now is all those that have been approved like this one now has been hour resolution and i think there may be one more but i think we are close to how many more we have to approve as each act that will be approving on the mali package went through with each that ok so the one just this last one there we just approved would be the last one we have to approve for the my package well that identical to a check i think so yes ok into their package and then it goes to all four counties and all four counties must ok i think that's pretty clear now so let's go back to the an hour in by two thousand and nineteen the proposals the purpose of the proposed resolution is to approve for inclusion in the two thousand and seventeen ma we package he's proposed a bill that's to the proposed resolution as exhibit a in title a bill for an act relating to the minimum wage the purpose of the proposed bill is to raise the state minimum to fifteen dollars an hour beginning january first two thousand and nineteen miss cochran and thank you very much chair and this isn't two i believe we spoke about this while ago and just trying to bring it up and revive it from the dead basically i get to expedite the it's pretty much the benefit of course the so when low income people start earning more money more they will often rise above the income threshold to qualify for government anti poverty programs which in turn would help the states by on line but i think it's just to improve the quality of life for everyone concerned in order to reach the cost of living rates that happen here in hawaii as we know i heard that you know the employer's concerns or what have you but there's other states of the have passed this and have come across with there's a huge job the state already has you know they go from year to year incremental year mentally and then all of a sudden there's from ten dollars and ten cents to two fifteen dollars would miss cochran consider a little bit more gradual increase maybe one more step i won't go there this point let's let's go and discuss this and maybe they will put that as a thought to not question and we sometimes the it's difficult just to even keep up so i will have that also but i do support the increase in twenty nineteen if we're looking at twenty one thousand but there's still consideration on i'm a little has a dent because of my district at this site thank you thank you mr grill and i will also add that you will quickly you know in the mean and then enemy of the big cities the trusts was really a lot of the large longer can operate you know the big corporation somehow someway find a way but when you talk in the low moment pop stores in your district my district all of our districts have a number of them it becomes a lot more difficult and i can say also that we've received testimony from the chamber opposing this again vehemently especially when it comes to the mom and pop and small up small operators so something to consider i understand your concept and i agree jewish cochran there are living wages in fourteen and fifteen dollars  was not a living wage yet but it gets you a little bit close and hopefully we do says government subsidies mr bush one thank you after question i'm not sure whether this cochran can of the federal minimum wage not always minimum wage the federal minimum wage minimum wage for a business that would close in one hundred ten thousand dollars in annual sales is four dollars minimum wage increase to nine dollars january one two thousand and sixteen the minimum wage has been twenty five dollars higher than the federal as well as providing are are working families comparable salaries you know school yet nor are you in again remember when these minimum wage was changed way back when and i was working for mcdonald as a manager and you know again if you're talking people who are earning a living and trying to support a family it's one issue you talk in high school kids and others that you're just doing it for extra spending money that's another issue but you really could never ask them all off in one and then we brought in the medical issue and that's very expensive and getting much more expensive each and every year and not every state has that it's part of their we each package so that's another issue so i  get more discussion but i guess let's stick with this story now and then we can discuss a little bit more another i guess perspective you can look at it is if we if we send up a high number to the state then they've got something to work with right if we send a lower number they'll probably say that's the ceiling so there's a range that they that they could work with so if we pass out fifteen we'll probably get nine twenty five i don't know but they'll  use our number as a ceiling so you can look at it that way the higher number we we send up to the state level right now what is the way to hang on to say what is that is incrementally moving up and then in the next year and two thousand and nineteen because the state is gone up from seven seventy five starting last year and this year started eight fifty next year and january first is starts at nine twenty five and then the year after in january first two already in place in the way the law it's been set up ok so then i moved mr white thank you chair i've got a number of concerns with this because the concern is that over time we've seen summer jobs for our kids simply go away and that's even with our minimum wage the current low level  i think we like the federal government need to have some sort of a dust but if you're being provided health care and health care is going to run you depending on whether you do single coverage  or double coverage or family coverage it can run you from you know three or four dollars an hour up to seven or eight dollars an hour just haven't done the calculation recently but but it's a big chunk of money and i'm concerned by by passing a number that's this high that we're really cutting out the ability for a lot of mom and pops to do it but also a lot of young people get their start when they're still living at home they're getting their start at wages like this like we when we've been able to do internships we generally pay them tween ten and twelve dollars an hour so higher than minimum wage but lower than we would pay somebody who's you know who who is doing a full time job the other issue that i have is that we have a lot and in restaurants and hotels we've got lots of people that are that make their living off of a basic wage from the from the business and then they make their significant amount of money on tips and and yet the tip credit is not a very big and big but a very big savings for the business so the higher we go up you know a lot of a lot of places have a really tough time making and making ends meet and food  the ten ten and two thousand and eighteen but i think to have this kind of a jump that quickly thereafter rather than a scale over a number of years i think would be too much too soon  yeah thank you very much and i heard their concerns and there is so california for example has implemented this and they've the employer the employer size and the business that is your mom and pops there's a certain so twenty six or more employees they would increase the fifteen by twenty twenty two employers at twenty five or less would increase fifteen key ice implemented this into their fifteen dollars for their employees and today they're still thriving and very successful in their business all the people who have gone this route have seen more productivity out of their employees morale boosting and on and on because of the quality of life they're now able to better afford has occurred so things of that nature is you know positive positive impacts so then this is a nationwide i think when i first brought this up it was a nationwide push to to increase wages in this manner so just trying to do it here too thank you very much  and i think all of us agree with you as far as the idea it is not a bad idea but i think what we're all saying is in the working nice california recognizes the size of the business i think what mr white is mention is they would also recognize here in hawaii the aspect of whether it's really cool job for living purposes or a job to earn extra money i guess that's and  really the state has he looked at this at this point in time you see ok so and again we just you know maybe we've got the cart before the horse right now so the chair so yes and was sorry and refrain back to mr couch big jump but yeah i mean the way the state has been moving to show you know full time five in two thousand and nineteen and then two thousand and twenty now so you're looking up to two thousand and twenty first to twelve dollars is that what you're i guess what i mean is this if we're going to move it or are we going to leave it the same i guess i'm that's my question you know if we're going to increase it the question would be what should be a more gradual increase then from ten to fifteen so if we're going to increase it i would add one more one more stop at twelve twenty five and twenty nineteen and and there if that seems a little more palatable to people i go that route i'm ok is there any objection to changing the number e fifteen dollars per hour beginning january first two thousand and nineteen and changing that to twelve dollars and twenty five cents per hour beginning january first two thousand and nineteen do we have a motion to amend i guess that's what the best way to do it first two thousand and nineteen any day now we can open discussion on that part so that would be the change to the original act any discussion seen none then of call for question all those in favor of changing number eight to twelve dollars and twenty five cents per hour beginning january first two thousand one thousand as amended also in the five by saying i  because i was thinkin people were ok with a gradual incremental increase so if twenty nineteen becomes the twelve seventy five and twenty the year twenty twenty comes the fifteen no  or fifteen dollars per hour beginning january first two thousand and twenty ok so we now have number nine there what is taken a while but ok already any discussion in that one scene and all those in favor of the amendment showing fifteen dollars per hour beginning january first two thousand and twenty seeing the five by saying i now we have in them added number nine and twenty dollars fifteen dollars an hour beginning january first two thousand and twenty any further discussion to the bill as amend fifteen dollars an hour in the year two thousand and twenty no two thousand and two would be twelve dollars and twenty five cents for our in two thousand and one thousand and fifteen dollars in two thousand and twenty which we don't really have to we could go to the end result because the end is what we're looking for what i mean that's  chairs some ok is there a second no objection ok thank you ok what else state bill to extend the time for the county councils to decide on an affordable housing project pursuant to section two zero one h dash thirty eight hawaii revised statutes i'm going to go from here the purpose of the housing the purpose of the proposed bill is to increase by fifteen days that time in which a county council has must approve approve but with modification or disapprove it proposed project carol i'll give you opening remarks for this since this was from you guess we'd try to do a one h we wanted to have it to an age we wanted ninety days instead of forty five days and that kept dying so i believe mr carroll's version of the sixty to sixty days that might be more powerful to them so i am very supportive of this thank you and i know fifteen fifteen days more me maybe more acceptable to the state i would hope so because the ninety days has england very far with them in the bass so hopefully this will be a step in the right direction anyone else have an income yes mr white thank you jerry i i agree i think the increase of fifteen days is reasonable and  i think if mr carroll can get them through in forty five with a bit of heartache does not give them a little easier time frame and i think it's reasonable but that doesn't mean the state will help thank you chair thank you m to get this through if we could get it to that point but this would be the best thing we could do to try to get more projects through i would hope political sober support thank you thank you mr carroll and thank you for bringing this forward i think hopefully the state was he the rationale in there be reasonable in this respect i mean fifteen days we does help us i mean you've been able and this council been able to do it a number of times with the forty five day restriction this really gives us just a little more time for some and what i call question bouyeri is where something more information was needed and we just never had the time to get it forcing us to me decision sometimes that we were really totally comfortable with yes mr carroll i really appreciate it because i don't think this is what i was thinking to pass on to the cultural with my community when i receive a two one age i have of old five or six days before the first meeting piers that's the first time i go toward the five or six days to go with you to present it to the committee and that's why with that extra fifteen days you give me some more preparation so that we're not forced into decisions and sometimes uncomfortable decisions because the time frame is against us so i hope the state sees it this way but we'll see what happens any other comments or questions or this i if not i'm going to make my recommendation you got me in the wrong place recess subject to the call of the chair that's it right we get at it mr chair yes i move to pass the revised proposed resolution intitled approving for inclusion in the twenty seventeen maui county legislative package a state to a representative of each county council to participate as a non voting member in bargaining unit negotiations and receive updates from the administration on bargaining unit negotiations and change the allocation of votes for bargain units eleven and twelve thank you for your patience thank you very much for your due diligence and with no further business today i will remind again a very important meeting for our area my district down here at the  public who are watching if you have suffered any damage or you have any major concerns that you would be there this evening at five thirty at the white gym which is on the corner of well and market street so with the name thing else i will