a very good thank you i'm going to turn to the chambers is there anyone wishing to testify we have one testify or this morning rosemary robbins may you please come down to the  and just introduce yourself rosemary robins concerned citizen here this morning to speak in view of the second item on our agenda today its litigation matter is asking for the  additional so be the fifth the sixth time after the warrants not to exceed the original price of two hundred fifty thousand dollars to hire legal experts to defend the county and went over the items that was the agenda now went over the items that are on here in the first one mentions december third again seventh well folks w wonderful got the paperwork for me i read every piece that was in there and it talked on december third and that was a letter to the chairperson today asking that this be brought  december third was addressed on december twenty third and it was a request for like i say a cost of three million fifty thousand dollars that the taxpayers would be liable for i went and got the court decision itself this had been filed on the seventeenth of november and in that order it was adjudged that the fed had and indeed that maui had been guilty of putting waste water by way of injection w in to the land but then it reached the ocean which is a violation of a number of laws so here they actually this is the actual document and and it identifies that there is paperwork attached to it i read the documents and the paperwork that was attached to it and i'd like to read in the second page of this eighteen page document whereas on may thirtieth two thousand and fourteen and on january twenty third of two thousand and fifteen the court found that the counties just charges had treated waste water from each of the  four recycled water injection wells without having a national pollution just charge elimination system permit violated the clean water ac mean that that was enacted by the us government in seventy three fourteen years after hawaii went from territorial to statehood status so that's forty three years ago that that  anyone wishing to testify ok moving on to the next item on the agenda we have the authorization and status of the hawaii wildlife at all versus county of maui civil number twelve zero zero one nine eight s o a b m k the committee is in receipt of the following the correspondence dated december third two thousand and fifteen from the department of corporation counsel requesting consideration of the proposed resolution to authorize settlement of the plaintiff's claims  for attorneys fees and costs related to the case the case involves allegations of violations under the federal water pollution control act also only known as a clean water act caused by to discharge of wastewater into the ocean from injection w operated by the county of of maui the hyena waste water reclamation facility the correspondents of number two the corresponds to december twenty third two thousand and fifteen from the department corporation counsel requesting seventeen four four seven united states court of appeals for the night circuit and an opportunity to provide a status update the purpose of the proposed resolution is to authorize three hundred thousand in addition to the compensation for special counsel for the appeal in this case for the total compensation not to exceed three million fifty thousand the community may also consider to recommend adoption of the pros proposed resolution noted in paragraph two with or without revisions and may also consider other thank you chair so i'll take up the december third request first briefly we did meet with this committee previously and received instruction relating to the settlement of attorneys fees claim and i can provide the details and those of the agreement in executive session but we have been able to successfully resolve  that claim moving on to the request for an increase in attorney's fees for special counsel related to the appeal as you know the settlement agreement for the lower court was entered in november of two thousand and fifteen and the county filed its appeal of the matter and twenty fifteen of the ninth circuit court of appeals which set a briefing schedule all over the counties opening brief due and mid march so the current industries across the nation so the corporation council has taken the lead on that effort and we have been basically we have divvied up a quite extensive list of agencies municipalities et cetera and have worked to give information to those entities and educate educate the entities and try to garner support for the amicus effort  the appeal so that's basically where we are with that and things are moving along very quickly members germany questions in open session  by their hawaii court's decision so obviously entities in in the hawaii district would be directly affected but it sets a precedent in this district but as we go up to appeal in the ninth circuit the ninth circuit includes the pacific states generally and hawaii and depending on the court of appeals decision their head can have far reaching effects very serious effects on other municipalities and agencies in those states so amy guests support is a friend of the court briefs so these are entities not involved in the lawsuit which would be affected by a decision made by the appeals court and they can briefs either supporting the plaintiffs or are supporting the county and the positions raised on the appeal and and they can inform the court how a decision would affect their operations and their kind of b s it's a very important effort and there's quite a bit of interest across the nation i should say in this case and the outcome  for the last several months actually has been to you know go out and look at which agency is a municipality is stay yes that we thought would be very interested and affected by the court an appellate court's decision and then make contact with those entities and provide them with information about the case and we have basically developed a relationship so that they were aware of the case and its status appeal or you had mentioned that there were several i guess maybe entities that were interested you have a somewhat of an estimation of how many that would be or if you can't really a large coastline which uses injection wells for various purposes both for disposal are treated affluent and also for salt water intrusion barrier so our technology that we're using h hawaii is replicated in other states and having a court's decision such as the hawaii court play out either you know within the ninth circuit or being used as precedent in other cases  can dramatically affect other municipalities so we're getting a lot of support and interest on a national level but i prefer not to mention the entities by name at this point ok so basically we are we are the this is the first type of first case of this type of nationwide it is the judge's decision that extends the clean water act in a way that it has not been previously extended and exposes not only marin county but you know all of the state of hawaii and other municipalities or agencies they use similar technology to legal uncertainty so it's both legal uncertainty and then financial uncertainty you know with the disposal methods that are environmentally sound and now being exposed to them being perhaps found legally wanting that that leaves us whether you know leave question is you'd like to ask in open session requests to convene a executive session if the members have questions that should be answered in executive session  then we could but i don't have anything further to present at this point members if you have any questions that you would like to pose any executive session as mr o'connor are we going to use the information r s to consult with their legal counsel and on questions and issues pertaining to the powers to g s and privileges and immunities and liabilities of this committee of the council and the county  motion carries thank you and will go ahead and move on to the next agenda item which is the veronica gray case farmers insurance hole y incorporated on behalf of of his insured veronica grade claim three zero one five three nine eight four three five zero dash zero zero zero one cow one twenty seven committees in receipt of the following the correspondence dated october twenty third two thousand and fifteen from the department of corporation counsel requesting consideration of the proposed resolution entitled authorizing settlement of claim claim number three zero one fourteen cents course and number two the correspond stated january fifth two thousand and sixteen from the department of corporation counsel informing the committee that the claim has been settled and matter may be filed the committee may consider whether to recommend filing of the correspondence dated october twenty third two thousand and fifteen transmitting the proposed resolution and the committee may also consider other related actions this is more of an update so we have  to is handling this case and the floor is yours thank you chair i had this matter actually settled within discretionary limits provided by the county charter so we don't need to have any further action done by fence because the driver's too lazy to push the fence open i'm trying to understand this this settlement because i don't get anything from the report  i don't have any information other than the report but if we need to get into a deeper discussion of this we'd have to get into executive session because there are some things that were negotiated in this matter that can't be discussed in open session dash seventeen four for seven united states court of appeals for the ninth circuit so moved by mr couch second second and by mr okama and you further discussion seeing none of those in favor next genda item farmers insurance why incorporated on behalf of this is sure chronic agree claim three zero one five three nine eight four three five zero zero zero one cow one prime twenty seven pursuant to our discussions in executive session the chair will entertain a motion to recommend filing of the correspondence dated october twenty third two thousand and fifteen no we have six eyes three excuse motion carries thank you members moving on to the agenda item that was deferred to the end of the calendar one print twenty six and for the are opening statement i believe this is mr bryant bilberries case the floor is yours to commendation for his disability we've received a settlement offer from the point if the offers expired they gave us ten days to respond to it but nevertheless we would like to  take it up for discussion because we have a settlement conference with the second circuit court judge peter cahill next week and so we're here to discuss possible settlement authority with you for the settlement conference  so i would like to go into executive session to discuss the settlement proposal i have copies here to show you in executive session we'll be asking for some limited authority and  a committee of the whole shall now reconvene in open session members pursuant to our executive session for item cow one twenty six the chair will entertain a motion to recommend it option of the proposed resolution