Opinion ID: 1036927
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: February 8, 2008 meeting

Text: The agenda for the MCC meeting of February 8, 2008, listing the first reading of the Wailea 670 bills as an agenda item, was filed with the County Clerk’s office on February 1, 2008. Prior to the February 8 meeting, MCC Chair Riki Hokama distributed three memoranda, all dated February 7, 2008, to the other MCC members. The first memorandum detailed floor amendments relating to the wastewater component of the Change in Zoning bill that Hokama intended to propose at the February 8 meeting. Hokama explained the substance of the proposed amendments and detailed the language that he proposed to add to, or delete from, the bill. Chair Hokama’s second memorandum detailed two proposed amendments, also related to the water component of the Change in Zoning bill, which would require Honua#ula to offer the County the right to purchase the water system it develops at the cost of development, and also require that the water rates for the 8  FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER  residential workforce housing units be no higher than the water rates set by the County. His third memorandum detailed a proposed amendment to clarify that the maximum number of dwelling units referenced in the Project District bill includes any offsite residential workforce housing units. All three memoranda concluded, “I would appreciate your favorable consideration of these proposed floor amendments. Should you have any questions, please contact me or the Committee staff[.]” The names and extension numbers of two staff members were also included. Member Michelle Anderson also sent a memorandum dated February 8, 2008, to Chair Hokama and the other MCC members, detailing three amendments to the Change in Zoning bill that she intended to propose at the upcoming meeting. The amendments would require Honua#ula to provide a bond and annual compliance reports to the MCC, and require that all residential units in the project be constructed to meet applicable Energy Star requirements. Each proposed amendment was followed by a section titled “Justification,” which detailed Anderson’s rationale for the proposals. The memorandum ended, “I would appreciate your favorable consideration of these proposed floor amendments. Should you have any questions, please contact me.” Chair Hokama’s three memoranda and Anderson’s memorandum contained notations indicating that in addition to 9  FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER  being sent to the other MCC members, copies were sent to the County Clerk, Director of Council Services, Planning Director, and Corporation Counsel. Public oral testimony was taken at the February 8, 2008 meeting, including oral testimony by Petitioners Kanahele, Buchanan, and Conniff. All individuals who submitted requests to testify were given the opportunity to do so before Chair Hokama closed the oral testimony portion of the meeting. The MCC did not consider any of the proposed amendments detailed in Chair Hokama and Member Anderson’s memoranda during the February 8 meeting. At 5:02 p.m., Chair Hokama announced, “The Council shall stand in recess, till 9:00 a.m. Monday morning [February 11], when we shall reconvene in these chambers.” No new agenda was posted for the February 11, 2008 meeting. Prior to the February 11 meeting, Member Anderson prepared two memoranda, both dated February 11. The first memorandum set forth five amendments to the Project District bill that Anderson intended to propose at the February 11 meeting. The first three amendments sought to clarify the percentage of dwelling units that would be constructed, phase the development of dwelling units to minimize the impact on traffic during construction, and incorporate by reference the conceptual land use map for the project. The fourth and fifth amendments 10  FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER  concerned the “grading of the project site and native Hawaiian access trails.” Anderson’s second memorandum detailed two amendments to the Change in Zoning bill that she intended to propose at the February 11 meeting. One amendment concerned a timeframe for the widening of a highway prior to the commencement of construction. The second amendment sought to “re-describe the conservation easement” on the project site and to “allow for title to the conservation easement to be conveyed to a land trust.” Both of Anderson’s memoranda concluded in a manner identical to Chair Hokama’s February 7 memoranda, by stating, “I would appreciate your favorable consideration of these proposed floor amendments. Should you have any questions, please contact me or the Committee staff[.]” The names and extension numbers of two staff members were also included. The memoranda contained notations indicating that copies were sent to the County Clerk, Director of Council Services, Planning Director, and Corporation Counsel. At the February 11 reconvened meeting, the MCC considered the proposed amendments. During the MCC’s consideration of the amendments, the members were asked to reference the memoranda that had been distributed.7 7 For example, before consideration of Member Anderson’s proposed amendments, Chair Hokama stated, “I’d like to refer you now to the remaining three different communications from . . . Ms. Anderson, regarding proposed (continued...) 11  FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER  The MCC voted to adopt all of the proposed amendments. Among the amendments passed unanimously was Anderson’s amendment to the Change in Zoning bill, to add a condition requiring Honua#ula to provide a bond or cash deposit to the MCC in an amount that would assure compliance with the zoning conditions. Chair Hokama then asked Mr. Jencks to come forward to “provide comment” on the amendments. Mr. Jencks went through each amendment that had been passed that day and made suggestions or indicated Honua#ula’s position on the amendment. Mr. Jencks was specifically asked to comment on the February 8 and February 11 memoranda distributed by Member Anderson and the amendments proposed therein, which he did by referencing specific sentences from the memoranda. He asked the MCC to “reconsider” certain amendments that had been passed. For example, Mr. Jencks stated that the bond requirement would be “impossible” to comply with, due to the difficulty in estimating the value of future work and his inability to obtain a bond until the construction drawings were completed, which he estimated would take five years. Towards the end of the meeting, Chair Hokama suggested that the MCC either pass the bills on first reading or recess the meeting. Chair Hokama stated, “And the Chair expects any (...continued) amendments. The first one I would ask is that you refer to the February 8 memorandum from her to you, Members, so if you can have that before you for consideration[.]” 12  FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER  proposed revision shall be completely written up in advance of the meeting reconvening for the courtesy of the other Members to review so that we can take votes and make a determination on this application.” Chair Hokama announced a recess of the meeting until February 14, 2008. No new agenda was posted for the February 14 meeting. Prior to the February 14 meeting, four MCC Members prepared and distributed a total of eight memoranda to the other Members. The memoranda contained notations indicating that copies were sent to the County Clerk, Director of Council Services, Planning Director, and Corporation Counsel. Member Michael J. Molina prepared three memoranda, dated February 13, 2008. The first memorandum stated that he intended to propose reconsideration of the Council’s vote to adopt the bond requirement for the Change in Zoning bill, citing Mr. Jencks’ comments at the February 11 meeting. Molina stated that if his motion for reconsideration was carried, then the bill would return to the point when Anderson’s motion to amend the bill to include the bond requirement was pending. Molina’s second memorandum stated that he intended to propose reconsideration of the MCC’s vote to add a new condition relating to energy systems, again citing Mr. Jencks’ comments. The third memorandum proposed another reconsideration of the MCC’s vote on grading, in order to incorporate revisions requested by Mr. 13  FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER  Jencks. Member Anderson also prepared and distributed three memoranda, dated February 13, 2008. The memoranda detailed Anderson’s proposed motion to reconsider the MCC’s vote approving the bond requirement, citing Mr. Jencks’ concerns at the prior meeting. Contrary to Molina’s motion to reconsider and rescind the amendment entirely, Anderson proposed reconsidering the vote and amending the primary motion to permit the bond to be provided in four five-year phases. Anderson also moved to reconsider the MCC’s vote on the grading condition and to replace one of the maps that had been attached to the Change in Zoning bill, in light of Mr. Jencks’ comments. The memoranda on grading and the map were accompanied by a separate “Justification Sheet,” detailing Anderson’s rationale for her motions. Member Bill Medeiros distributed a memorandum, dated February 13, 2008, setting forth his intent to move for reconsideration of the MCC’s votes related to the wastewater treatment and sewage disposal conditions of the Change in Zoning bill, also citing Mr. Jencks’ concerns. Member Gladys Baisa distributed a memorandum, dated February 13, 2008, regarding her proposed motion to reconsider the amendment to the Project District bill, which limited the number of dwellings permitted to be constructed in the project district per year, again citing Mr. Jencks’ comments. 14  FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER  All eight memoranda distributed concluded with the same phrase: “I would appreciate your favorable consideration of my proposal(s). Should you have any questions, please contact me or the Committee staff[.]” According to Chair Hokama’s deposition testimony, all of the memoranda distributed were “prepared as a matter of courtesy.” On February 14, 2008, the meeting was reconvened at 9:05 a.m. At one point during the Members’ discussion of Member Medeiros’ motion to reconsider the MCC’s vote requiring Honua#ula to construct a wastewater transmission system and a reclaimed water system, Member Anderson expressed her confusion over the motion. When Anderson asked to clarify the motion to reconsider proposed by Medeiros, Chair Hokama responded, “Yeah, so, . . . you have his proposal, and you must . . . just take what he has presented, Ms. Anderson, as part of his communication to the Members.” Several of the proposed motions for reconsideration were passed with no discussion (other than stating the proposed motion) prior to voting on the motion. For example, Member Molina’s motion to reconsider the MCC’s vote regarding the bond requirement was passed unanimously with no discussion on the merits of reconsidering the vote. At the conclusion of the February 14 meeting, the MCC voted to pass the Wailea 670 bills on first reading. 15  FOR PUBLICATION IN WEST’S HAWAI#I REPORTS AND PACIFIC REPORTER