BOARD OF WATER SUPPLY
COUNTY OF MAUI

JOINT WORKSHOP MEETING WITH
THE MAUI COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION

MARCH 15, 2000



A Joint Workshop of the Maui County Planning Commission
and the Maui County Board of Water Supply was held 
on Wednesday, March 15, 2000.  The workshop was held in
the Planning Department Hearing Room located on the 
first floor of the Kalana Pakui Building, 250 South High
Street, Wailuku, Maui, Hawaii.

Planning Commission Members in attendance were Chair
Robert Carroll, Vice Chair Jerry Edlao, Commissioner
Barbara Long, Commissioner Mona Richardson, and
Commissioner Star Medeiros.  Board of Water Supply
Members in attendance were Chair Robert Takitani,
Board Member Elmer Cravalho, Board Member Clark
Hashimoto, Board Member Howard Nakamura, Board
Member Michael Nobriga, Board Member Peter Rice,
Board Member Jonathan Starr, and Board Member
Orlando Tagorda.

The following is a transcription of the recording of the
discussions held during the joint workshop:


MR. CARROLL: Alright, the Maui Planning Commission
Meeting/Workshop with the Board of Water Supply is now
in session.  We'd like to thank you all for coming,
especially the Board for extending their meeting today.
We appreciate it.  And we're going to begin by - first of
all, I don't know if everybody knows everyone over here.
Jonathan, can you go right around and introduce yourself.

MR. STARR: Sure.  I'm Jonathan Starr.  I live East Maui,
and I'm on the Board of Water Supply.

MR. CRAVALHO: Elmer Cravalho, East Maui, Board of Water
Supply.

MR. RICE: Peter Rice, West Maui, Board of Water Supply.

MR. TAGORDA: Orlando Tagorda, Kahului.

MR. EDLAO: Jerry Edlao, Wailuku, Planning Commission.

MS. RICHARDSON: Mona Richardson, Haiku, Planning Commission.

MS. LONG: Barbara Long, Upcountry now, Planning.

MS. MEDEIROS: Star Medeiros, West Maui, Planning.

MR. HASHIMOTO: Clark Hashimoto, Kula, Water Department.

MR. NOBRIGA: Mike Nobriga, Water Board, Makawao.

MR. CARROLL: Robert Carroll, Department of Planning, the
Planning Commission.  Alright, we're now going to turn
over the time to the Water Board for their presentation,
and after that, we'd like to go directly into a question
and answer period between the two boards.

MR. TAKITANI: I'm Bob Takitani, presently the Chairman of
the Board of Water Supply, Kahului.  This idea was spawned
at a meeting that we attended that dealt with the H'poko,
or the Haliimaile water for A&B.  We all thought it would
be a good idea if we could jointly share between the Board
of Water Supply and the Planning Department what we all
did, and we were more integrated rather than continuing to
go off on our separate ways.  So this afternoon, what
we'll try to do is present the Board some information as
to where we presently stand and where we intend to go and
some of the accomplishments and how we try to measure
ourselves in our goals and objectives.  So with that, I'll
turn it over to Director David Craddick and Jacky Carroll.

MR. CRADDICK: Thank you.  Actually, we don't have our goals
and objectives in here.  Since this was a joint...

MR. TAKITANI: She's coming back with that.

MR. CRADDICK: Oh, okay.  We're mainly trying to deal with
the policy issues, mainly with water but I think the
things that you'll see in here pertain to planning also.
Jacky Carroll, my Administrative Assistant, will be doing
a presentation here.  And if you have questions, just feel
free to jump in and get them clarified.

MS. CARROLL: Okay, what I'm going to talk about is first
an overview of the Water Department and what we're all about,
how we evolved, and what we do, and where we serve, what we
have to look forward to, and then some of our issues.  And
a lot of those issues I think will affect, you'll see an
overlap of some of the issues that the Planning Department
faces.

THIS BEGINS MS. CARROLL'S POWERPOINT PRESENTATION;
CALL 270-8046 FOR A COPY OF THE PRESENTATION.

MR. CARROLL: Is this the end of the slide?  

MR. CRADDICK: Actually, Bob, Jacky was going to get some
additional stuff on goals and objectives.  But I guess if
you want to talk to each other regarding this...

MR. TAKITANI: You can ask questions, but the way we thought
this was going to be presented, we thought the Planning
Commission was going to present us information as to how
they operated so it would be a joint - but I guess...

MR. CARROLL: We have no presentation.

MR. TAKITANI: You have no...

MR. CARROLL: We have only questions.

MR. TAKITANI: We'll have Jacky go up and get the goals and
objectives that we try and operate by and try to determine
how well we're doing as far as accomplishing our goals.
So we'll present that to you after she goes and gets it.

MR. CARROLL: While she's doing that, does anybody have
anything they have to say?

MS. LONG: You know I do.

MR. CARROLL: Ms. Long.

MS. LONG: Are we on here?

MR. CARROLL: Are the microphones on?

MS. TAKAYAMA: Yes.

MS. LONG: I'd like to shed a little light on how the
Planning Commission does operate because when we receive an
application for development, that application is generally
reviewed by the Department of Water Supply.  In the five
years that I have served on the Commission, we generally
get the standard letter which says the applicant should be
aware that the timing of this project may be affected with
possible delays until new sources can be brought on line.
No guarantee of water is granted or implied as a result of
comments made for the approval of the requested permits.
Water availability will be reviewed at the time of
application for a meter or a meter reservation.  We get
these comments whether it's a three-lot subdivision or a
special use in the ag zone for a project district or a
monster development.  And it became obvious to a lot of
us with what was happening in the newspaper about the
inadequacies of the Iao Aquifer and the fact that there's
an awful lot of building going on in Kihei and other places
that draw upon that that nobody was saying no at a certain
level, and the buck was being passed to the Planning
Commission.  And some of us felt that whether this is fair
or not, there ought to be a way to work together with the
Department of Water Supply and with the Board that hopefully
has access to the Department's long-range plan to come up
with a better way so that when a subdivision is approved,
even the Dowling project up there, when things like that
after 10 years in the community plan process, when they've
already got their entitlement back in the early 90's, and
people know there's no water, and they're in a drought
situation, and they see the headline in The Maui News,
Planning Department approves 400, whatever it is, 200
homes Sprecklesville Mauka, whatever it is, how can they
do that'  And I'm hoping that one of the results of this
workshop today will be a sensitivity on the part of the
Department and the Board to the fact that we, the Planning
Commission needs to get more than this letter.  The Planning
Commission needs to have better guidance, and the planning
process needs to be improved.  I don't know, and I'm going
to ask the Board a question.  Do you folks during the
community plan process, do you review the individual changes
in the community plan maps where there is a change say from
agriculture to urban when there's a project district
suggested?  Is that something that the Board or the
Department reviews?  Did they review it in the early 90's?

MR. TAKITANI: Mr. Craddick?

MR. CRADDICK: When the community, the CAC groups are meeting,
we do provide input there, but the answer to your question is
basically no.  When it gets finalized, we're not participating
in the process.

MS. LONG: In other words, a major land owner can come in and
change the designation in the community plan map which would
provide a great deal more density, residential density, and
require a great deal more water use, and then come in and get
their zoning change five, six, seven years down the line
because they have the entitlement of that community plan
designation.  So what you're saying is the Water Department
isn't involved in that determination of whether this is a
logical thing to do in view of your long-range plan?

MR. CRADDICK: If they're changing the community plan, I
believe we do put comment in on that but, again, you saw
the drawing up there how much water is available on this
island.  It's not an issue of availability of water, it
is an issue of timing and finances to get that water.  And
when you make your decision, I suppose we could give you
numbers of what it costs us per thousand gallons of water
to supply such and such a development with water.  And if
that information were used properly, perhaps your
decisions would be different, but a...

MS. LONG: Mr. Craddick, excuse me, I'm talking about before
it gets to the Planning Commission even.  The things that
come to the Planning Commission have been decided, a lot
of them, in the community plans.  You folks supposedly have
a long-range plan that says we're going to have 'X' population
here, so we're going to provide infrastructure for this.  Do
you have this, and is that connected at all to what goes on
at the CAC level?

MR. CRADDICK: Again, I'll say that the amount of water that
is available on this island will at least support a population
in excess - Honolulu currently uses around 160 to 170 million
gallons a day on average.  So you can see that the water we
have will sustain a population much larger than Honolulu's.  

MS. LONG: According to what you're saying, you don't care.
The Water Department has no policy that considers how
appropriate it is to give land owners entitlements to
increase residential density whether you know you're
going to have the financing or not.

MR. CRADDICK: I would have to say that that's probably a
Board policy issue, and probably better directed to the
Board, but essentially, you're right.

MS. LONG: Okay, I'm going to ask one more question and then
I'll shut up and go on.  Right now in the Council committee
that's reviewing the Wailuku/Kahului Community Plan, there
is a request from C. Brewer to upzone on the community plan
map 80 acres which they call Iao North from agriculture to
multi-family residential.  You guys know anything at all
about that, and has anyone commented on that?  

MR. CRADDICK: The answer to your question is yes, we know
something about it.  And in the 1996 agreement with Wailuku
Ag on developing North Waihee, once we developed 5 million
gallons a day, they have the ability to participate with us
on developing additional sources up to the sustainable yield.
So they have made provision for getting water for themselves.

MS. LONG: So this is kind of an agreement that you have with
Brewer that's reciprocal.

MR. CRADDICK: No, Wailuku Agribusiness.  You have to watch
out with us.  We're very, very careful when we say Brewer
and all the different entities these days.  We were once
confused by all the different groups too.

MS. LONG: My point being that these changes to the community
plan maps, these upzonings to more dense residential - rural,
urban, whatever - communities don't just happen in the CAC
process, but they happen along the line, and then the changes
in zoning happen.  My point being that if the Board and the
Department don't have some sort of policy and a long-range
plan, and a knowledge of what your budget requirements for
infrastructure are going to be for these things that are on
the books, is it fair to put the burden on the Planning
Commission to approve or deny something when it's really
based on your planning?  

MR. CRADDICK: Actually, again, I don't believe it is based
on our planning.  It's based on your work.  When you say
you're going to approve it, you can ask us what the cost
is, what the unit cost is, and I guess you might be able
to make some decision whether that unit cost is more than
Maui can bear, if you will, to develop.  But that's all
we would do is we would say this is what it's going to
cost you per unit of water, and presumably that developer
would tell you how many thousand gallons a day or million
gallons a day of water...

MS. LONG: That's a really scary burden to put on nine
volunteers.

MR. CRADDICK: I guess the - what I see you're doing when
you approve your planning, is you don't mind me saying
what I think is going on, to me you're allocating water
when you do your planning process.  You're allocating 
water to this use, that use, whatever you put on the
community plan.  Under the Charter, it says the Board
is to implement those general plans that you put out.
Now we do our best to do that, but it doesn't
necessarily mean we're going to put all the dollars
out to do that.  The developers come in and ask to do
that, the water is available on the island, if we can't
do it, we'll tell the developer, sorry, we can't do
it - you provide the water to us, and you go ahead and
do it if you want.  Now, maybe I shouldn't say this,
but if you do your planning that way in kind of an odd
ad hoc method, I think you're going to get the product
that we see here on Maui.  Where as if you said here's
your district and get some kind of a district area and
this is the district, then I believe we could then do
some much more micro type of planning and say okay,
here's this district.  We could make some kind of an
estimate of what water you need for that district and
get the water to it.  But when you're just blanket
whoever comes in, you get this approved, you get that
approved, there's no way for us to - let's put it this
way.  If we tried to make the water available for
everything that's been approved for Kihei, it would
require 60 million gallons a day of water.  And it's
ridiculous to even think that that kind of development
will be done.  We know it won't be done.  And I don't
know if the Planning Department doesn't know that it's
not going to be done.  I presume you know it's not
going to be done, but if everybody developed, I mean
the prices of land, everything would probably cave in.

MS. LONG: Okay, is our Planning Director here?  Clayton
here?

MR. CRADDICK: Those are just some observations.  I'm not
speaking...

MS. LONG: Okay, I appreciate what you said.

MR. CRADDICK: ...for the Board.  

MS. LONG: And I take note of what you said, and I wish
that Mr. Min were here.  Is our Deputy Director - where
are you, Clayton?  Okay.  I'd like to address this to
Clayton, then that when applications come to the
Commission, and I won't be there to make sure this
happens, that what Mr. Craddick has said if it turns
out to be the logical way to do it is perhaps covered
and the Planning Department review, and between the
Planning Department and the Department of Water Supply,
there is some discussion about what you were just talking
about - maybe this particular district, maybe the cost
of delivering the water, and get something in the
application to the Planning Commission that relates to
that instead of just saying 'we recommend approval'.
Because that's what we get.  We get 'we recommend approval'
even though we have a letter from the Board.  Let's get
down to the nitty gritty here and present the
Commissioners with enough information to do a good job.
And you got 700 people on a list, why can't we do the
same thing for them now?  They've been on the list longer
than these applicants who - all right, I've got to shut up.

MR. CARROLL: Mr. Craddick, we're ready to do the rest of
the presentation.

MR. EDLAO: Before we get into that, Mr. Chair, requesting
a follow up on Barbara's question, I think, you know David,
we don't know what your - where you're going to drill a
well, when you're going to have enough money.  And I think
what Barbara is trying to elude to is that if we know that
Upcountry you don't have the funds to do drilling or look
for new source in the next 10 years, if we know that, then
maybe our decision would be different.  And that's, I
think, maybe where we're kind of missing each other there.
Because we don't know when you're going to get funds to get
resource.  And like I said, if we know flat out that you
guys not going to do it in 10 years and then if something
comes up for rezoning, then we might say, hey, you know
what, we're not going to do this - I'm sorry.  But you
mentioned earlier, you do have some input in the community
plan update when the CAC is working on it.  Exactly what
input do you give - a letter?  

MR. CRADDICK: No, usually the CAC group, I'm not sure
whether it was the Planning Department that invites us
or the Chair of the group, but I now we get an invitation
to come.  We typically will give a presentation and from
that, they do whatever.

MR. EDLAO: Not to get nitty gritty, but what presentation?
This presentation that we saw?  

MR. CRADDICK: No.

MR. EDLAO: Do you give a presentation to them based on
sources, new development upcoming, what the potential
is within the next year, 5 years or 3 years.

MR. CRADDICK: We do usually get a lot more detail on what
water is being developed.

MR. EDLAO: And this is all given to the CAC?

MR. CRADDICK: I would say yes, for the most part as I
recall what all went on.

MR. EDLAO: You sound so convincing to me.

MR. CRADDICK: I would have to refer to Ellen because Ellen
did most of that.  If you want to get into the detail...

MR. EDLAO: Yeah, I just need to know because I think
that's a critical part of the CAC.  What Barbara's
saying is if it starts there ?????, then they will make
the recommendations for the changes that will, therefore,
come to the Department, Planning, and to the Commission
and the Council.  And if this is done initially, these
inputs are done right or presented right, then, like I
said, the decision would be different.  And ultimately,
the end result - you can say 'no' very confidently, as
opposed to 'well, we got that letter from David'.  I'm
not trying to make of you, David, but this is all we
get.  Making decisions based on something like that it
just doesn't give me enough confidence, but I do it
anyway but that's all I've got.

MR. CRADDICK: Again, I guess you have to understand
that in a normal, say a normal city situation like
say the city of San Francisco.  You know exactly
where that city is and the boundaries of that city.
We have a situation here where we are delivering water
to, on this island here, 750 square mile area.  There
are very, very few water departments in the United
States that have that kind of area that they deliver
water to.  And I think if you don't define your areas
a little bit better and say here's where we're going
to have development - like, let's say, take Upcountry
for instance.  We know Kimo Road is highly developed,
almost urban.  In fact, where you - anybody, I guess,
can do these ag subdivisions anywhere.  There's no
restrictions on them whatsoever.  The demand will
always probably exceed the supply in an area like
that.  Unless you're going to define that here's the
area where the development is going to occur, and when
you do that, we will be able to very easily tell you
the answers to your questions.  But where it's wide
open from Haiku, well not Haiku, I guess - Makawao
to Kanaio as an area and anybody can subdivide their
lots - ags, subdivisions, whatever - I don't believe
from a water resources standpoint you can do very
realistic planning until you define an area of here
is Pukalani, here is Makawao, and actually define
the area where it is, and it's not just a blanket
from Makawao to Kahikinui and say that here is where
the development is going to occur.  Then we can put
some realistic numbers to it.  But where the planning
process goes on the way it does now and districts aren't
defined, we have an extremely difficult time in doing
what you want.  I think both the Planning Department and
at least ourselves certainly know that.  And in most
major cities, that is the way the planning is done.
You have a defined area of what you're working with,
and we don't have that here on Maui.

MS. LONG: You mean targeting certain areas for a
particular number of meters that would be accommodated
in a certain period of time, is that what you're talking
about?

MR. CRADDICK: I'm not certain if in your planning
process you would be able to say time, but I think
economics would determine that, the time.  Certainly
if we know that in this area, and I'm talking about
a realistic area, not from Maalaea to Makena, that
there is going to be this kind of development in this
area, and we're not going to approve any more until
this is developed.  Once this is developed, we're
going to move on to this area.  And if the planning
were done like that, I believe we could do a much more
realistic job of telling you what kind of water you're
going to need for that area.

MS. LONG: Could you provide us with a map that you
would perhaps draw some districts on that you think
make sense to you?  

MR. CRADDICK: Could do that.

MS. LONG: Why don't you do that.

MR. CRAVALHO: Mr. Chairman?

MR. TAKITANI: Mr. Cravalho?

MR. CRAVALHO: We're going a little bit far afield.
Mr. Craddick is speaking for Mr. Craddick, and he...

MR. CRAVALHO: ...and it does and can.  With respect
to the sharper delineation of areas for services,
the other side of the coin is if you aren't careful,
you're going to be setting up many monopolies for
land use, land values, and the utilization of public
assets.  It appears to me perhaps one of the things
that needs to be done is to have a better understanding
and a familiarization to what state laws are with
respect to green belting and the highest investment
of lands and how these have implications.  The role
of making public policy belongs to the County Council
with respect and conformity with whatever applicable
laws are in existence.  That's the law.  Secondly, the
role of the Board of Water Supply, and I make a
distinction between staff and the Board, is to
implement public policy as it has been determined
by the County Council.  Now let us examine the steps
that take place in meeting these determinations.  We
have community advisory groups, and I have to shift
my hat because I served as chairperson of the Upcountry
one.  My memory - I do not recall precisely the exact
things that Mr. Craddick said as to what his
presentations were with respect to availability of
water at that time.  And I believe at that time if
Mr. Craddick will remember we had our very initial
sharp differences as to what should or should not be
done.  But getting back to the County Council's role,
and our role, and the Planning Commission's role, again
as I understand it, our role is to implement - is to
implement the decisions that have been made with respect
to public policy determined by the County Council and
the Planning Commission.  We implement your decisions.
So what you do need is to request the kind of information
that you do want because we are merely people to implement
as the members of the Board of Water Supply.  I change
my hat again - as members of the CAC, is to try to project
under the most satisfactory conditions in the next 10
years, what do we envision for this particular locality.
It's an expression primarily of goals, objectives, desires,
wishes, what have you.  They may or may not be as realistic
as they should be because we're dealing with laymen all
over the place.  And that's correct - I'm a layman like
everyone else.  And so you have these safeguards put
in - the County Council, the Planning Commission - where
you have greater expertise being supposedly available to
make a determination and in effect, set up some degree of
priorities and advices to us who sit on the Board of Water
Supply.  And incumbent upon this is the development of what
is lacking for the Board, our Board, which is an overall
plan for development and growth.  Because Maui may have
the capacity in terms of general area of accommodating
double the population of Oahu, do we as a community decide
that this is where we're going to go?  Those are the kinds
of questions that need to be addressed and public policy
determined, and that is not for the Board of Water Supply
to determine.  Our job is to implement the determinations
made by the Council and by you people.  And that, I think,
is where we should be coming from.  Yes, we do have a hodge
podge.  And yes, we do have a situation which is not the
best.  But I would like to think, Mr. Chairman, that within
the past year, there has been a gradual refocusing of our
intention of what our role is suppose to be, and some of us
reluctantly, oh so reluctantly, are being dragged into the
21st century to face these questions and make these
determinations.  So the need  for a better relationship,
and it's always there.  Under the best of circumstances,
there's always a need for a better relationship yet for
exchanges of ideas between Planning Department, Water
Department, and County Council and Administration.  Those
are imperative things.  And keeping in mind, if I may,
and I'll quit here - I think Governor Cayetano should be
commended for his decision on that airport for the
non-extension of the runway.  Okay?  Because think of the
implications with population growth, etcetera.  That,
however, does not detract for the need of improvements
there to strengthen the economy of this island to preserve
the bulk and the values of agricultural pursuits to keep
the plantation going, Maui Land & Pine, and the small
diversified farmers so they can get into new crops for
export purposes.  Now these are things that can be done.
If this becomes public policy as determined by the County
Council, Planning Commission, we can allocate resources.
I think we need to recognize our roles.  I wouldn't want
to have the director's job at the present time because he
has to answer to so many bosses.  And it's a hard job
sometimes to hear which one is yelling the loudest.

MR. CARROLL: I would agree with you.  I hope that by
having meetings like this that we can have the best
system.  And I think this is the only way by bringing
these things out between the Commission and the Board
of Water Supply to where we become aware of each others
problems that we can start to get a plan together...

MR. CRAVALHO: One last thought.  Mr. Craddick was - Mr.
Chairman, if I may - absolutely correct when he made
reference to the availability of water on this island.
It's to get it to where it is to where it is needed.
And this is what we need to do.  But we do not set those
priorities because we are limited, as I understand it,
by the Charter to the implementation of the general plan
as well as the community development plans.  And that
we want to do.

MR. CARROLL: Mr. Edlao has a question.

MR. EDLAO: Yes, Mr. Cravalho, if I came across like
questioning the Board, that was not my intent.  It
was more directed to the Department.  I realize the
Board is to implement, and we appreciate all that
hard work.  But I think the questioning was going
towards David and the Department in terms of input
at the community plan level.  We wanted to know - he
made a comment right off the bat that he does input,
and I was just intrigued what input because I don't
see any results as far as I'm making my decisions other
than whatever.  So that's what the questioning was.
It was not intended to the Board, okay?

MR. TAKITANI: There's one thing I think we gain out of
this is that the Planning Commission, the County
Council, etcetera, are the land use lords.  The
Board of Water Supply are the masters of the water
works.  We implement as Mr. Cravalho said the plans
that you all give us.  And we get water to where it
is desired.  Up to I think 1993 or 94 was it, David,
when they drilled H'poko Well, all the water that had
been developed on Maui all came from private developers.

MR. CRADDICK: Or the State.

MR. TAKITANI: Or the State.  We didn't develop any
water.  All that water was developed by private
developers and then conveyed to the Board of Water
Supply.  It's been only since then that we've been
in the water development business.  And necessarily
because of the EPA, the Safe Drinking Water Act,
et cetera, costs have been driven up according to
that knowledge very, very expensive to be
occasionally in the water development game.  So we
can not be possibly allocating our resources to all
that is required in the General Plan in the time
basis that you want and still be viable and not
completely bankrupt.  So to be very frank, we need
better plans on a more timely basis that can give
input to us so we can be developing in the three
to five or seven year window that it takes to
develop the water.

MR. CARROLL: I think it's obvious  now that the
Planning Commission needs to have better
information.  That information, we need some
changes on how it's compiled and delivered to us
in order for us to make these decisions.  Right now,
we do not have - the information we receive is not
adequate, and that's one of the problems we really
have in processing applications.

MR. STARR: I know one of the misconceptions that
people have is about what the Board and the Department
really are.  In effect, we're a utility.  Although
we're a public entity, we are really a utility that
is providing a commodity for our rate payers.  We in
a sense owe our allegiance to our customer base.  And
the Board has changed its outlook on how it does
business.  As Mr. Takitani said, in the past, almost
all our water development was done by private developers,
and water was developed by them for their particular
project.  Now we've decided that we as a board want to
develop water because we feel that's much more equitable.
The problem that we have is that since our current
resources and transmission were developed for specific
projects, there's not a heck of a lot more that's been
developed beyond what is being utilized.  And frankly,
Upcountry, I think we all realize we're in a shortage
situation.  That's why droughts have such an affect as
they are.  So we're behind the curve as far as water
development Upcountry.  And in Central, we're not very
much farther ahead.  At the current rate of growth, if
more water is not developed in the next year or so, we
will probably reach the limit of what's been developed.
Now this Board is working as hard as it possibly can to
develop new sources so we can try to move ahead, but
water development is not an exact science because you
don't know either what the ground is going to yield or
what the courts are going to yield either or what other
restrictions.  And also the water that we are currently
developing costs a lot more than the current rate payers
are paying for.  The wells that we are drilling costs us
more to drill than the water development fees.  The pipes
we're laying cost us more to put in than the water
transmission fees that we take.  So we're trying our
best, but we are behind the curve and to say okay in
five years there's going to be 200 houses here or there,
and for us to be able to say yes we'll have water for
that or even to expect us to be able to make that
decision is, I think that's really far reaching our
abilities.  And the other point is that we only control
about 10% of the developed water on Maui.  People don't
realize that, but only about 10% of the water that's
flowing on Maui is actually controlled by the Board,
and we have no input as far as the other 90% of the
water.  And this is one area that the Board is trying
to learn about and possibly invoke some degree of,
maybe not control, but at least some involvement in
the future.

MR. CARROLL: Alright, we're going to take a short recess.

** A SHORT RECESS WAS TAKEN **

MR. CARROLL: Back to order.  Alright, Mr. Edlao, you'd
like to continue the question you had for Mr. Craddick?

MR. EDLAO: I'll reserve it for later on.  Let's get
on with the presentation.

MS. CARROLL: This is a talk actually I had given to
the Board of Water Supply about a month ago concerning
some of the things that we've done in comparison to
the things that we had hoped to accomplish in the last
fiscal year.  There's actually two parts of this, and
they will overlap.  You'll see that as we go on.  But
the first part is how we've done in our CIP, our
capital improvement project program, the goals that
we had set up in the beginning of the year, and the
extent that we've accomplished them.  The second half
of the presentation is a little bit more - they're
goals also, but they're a little bit more abstract.
They're not as concrete as water lines and physical
things that we put in.  They're more things like
resource protection and long term goals that we
have...

THIS BEGINS MS. CARROLL'S POWERPOINT PRESENTATION;
CALL 270-8046 FOR A COPY OF THE PRESENTATION. 

MS. LONG: Jacky, where does that 18 million come
from for your CIP?

MS. CARROLL: Well every year they do the...

MS. LONG: I mean does it come from the rates you
charge people from?

MS. CARROLL: You know, Mike Quinn, our Fiscal
Director, is not here and I can't...

MS. LONG: That's alright, I'll get it from
somebody.

MR. TENGAN: Jacky, I can answer.

MS. CARROLL: Oh, here's our Deputy Director
George Tengan.

MR. TENGAN: We basically get our CIP monies
either through development fees - the water
system development fees, or state grants or
appropriations.

MS. LONG: The development fees to developers
who share in costs?

MR. TENGAN: Commonly known meter fee.

MS. LONG: Okay, so development fee is another
word for a meter fee?

MR. TENGAN: Right.  And we do provide some
money from our general revenues - from our
water revenues for replacement projects.

MS. LONG: Water revenues being you rates
that you charge to customers?

MR. TENGAN: Water sales.  Right.

MS. LONG: Meter fees, Jonathan said to me
before, there's some sort of ruling about
how you can not use the money from - can you
educate us on that?

MR. TENGAN: Basically the water system
development fees are used for expansion
projects that take care of new customers.
It's a fee charged to new connections more
or less on the basis of determining what
the equity would be...

MS. LONG: ... I just need to clarify because
Jonathan said that you need to sell the meters
in order to get the money to develop the sources.
That's what that money is used for - is that?

MR. TENGAN: The water system development fee
covers three basic areas.  One is for the
development of sources, another one is for
transmission, and the third is for storage.

MS. LONG:  So that if we stopped development
and stopped issuing meters, you wouldn't have
any money to do the kind of development and
system improvements that you're doing.

MR. TENGAN: As long as nobody signs up for
any new meters, we won't.

MS. LONG: So there's a Catch 22 so that we
have to - in order to catch up with the
needs that we have, we have to get money
from new development that will buy meters
and provide the funds.

MR. TENGAN: Right.  

MS. LONG: That's interesting.  It's kind of
like a rat race.  Why can't you use money
from another source to develop sources and
put in transmission lines and improve your...

MR. TENGAN: This other source that you're
thinking about, could you be a little more
specific?

MS. LONG: I don't know.  I'm not in the business.

MR. TENGAN: That's one of the reasons why when
a major development comes in and we're not ready
to provide him with water, we'll tell the
developer that you'll have to go and provide
us with the source of water and that would
include drilling of wells.  

MS. LONG: So it seems to me that one way
to - okay.  Thank you.  I'll deal with it.
This relates to what the Planning Commission
needs, what information the Planning Commissioners
should have in order to make wise decisions.  And
we don't have a heck of a lot of time either, so
let's see if we can figure this one out.  If we get
an application for development, and we get the
standard letter from the Water Department saying we
can't guarantee that there'll be water allocation
when you come in for your meter.  What should the
Commissioners ask for?  If that development is
going to use so many million gallons a day of water
that exceeds some specific thing, then the developer
should pay for it, or who else should pay for it, or
it should be denied flatly?  Could we please have
some input on this to help the Commission until we
have some decent long-range planning in this county
to deal with this water issue.  Anybody?  Help us
out.  What do we need to know?

MR. TENGAN: I think knowing the timing of the
development would be very important.  Then we
could give you a more positive response as to
whether the water would be available.  If we
knew everybody's schedule, then we could do
the planning properly.  But as you know, an
application might be approved today and might
take 10 years for the project to be built out.

MS. LONG: That's true.

MR. TENGAN: In that part we have to say at this
certain time we do have the water, however, when
you're ready to take the water, we may not be
able to guarantee you the water at that time.

MS. LONG: But in your long-range planning, what
criteria do you have as far as how much development
your plans will account for?

MR. TENGAN: I think, as you recall Mr. Cravalho
saying that we're here to implement the plans.
We can only project...

MS. LONG: You're suppose to have a plan.

MR. TENGAN: Yes, we have a plan.

MS. LONG: Okay, you're implementing your plan.
Does your plan say that in five years, we will
have the capacity to supply 50 million gallons
Upcountry or whatever?

MR. TENGAN: I think one important point that
the Planning Commission has to take is that
it doesn't make sense for the Water Department,
for the Water Board, to go and plan for additional
sources in West Maui and improvements are being
done on East Maui.  We have to kind of follow your
actions and where the development is really taking
place.

MS. LONG: But are actions are based on the
community plans, and when the CAC's were putting
the community plans together, Mr. Craddick says
you guys were there saying that our capacity in
the next 10 years is going to be here, here, and
here.  Would you do that'  Cause if that's the
case, then you should be on line with your plan
and all these developments should have adequate
water.

MR. TENGAN: We can not put money where it's not
needed.  We don't have that financial capability.
If we were to put in all the improvements that
are needed to take care of the existing community
plans, as Mr. Takitani was saying, we'd be bankrupt.
We wouldn't have revenues coming in for expenditures
made on our CIP.

MS. LONG: So your expenditures follow the approvals
and the building permits.

MR. TENGAN: And that's why we tell developers that
if we're not ready to take you on, you have to provide
the facilities which could include the source,
transmission mains, and even the storage tanks.

MS. LONG: Well that's fine for a developer.  What
about somebody who wants to do a family subdivision?
What about somebody like 700 people on the Upcountry
list?  Okay.

MR. STARR: I think that unless someone is actually
going to develop source for their project or pay a
meter allocation fee, it would be unfair to earmark
water futures for any entity whether it's large or
small because obviously, anyone who has the possibility
of doing the project would want us lock up their water.
And that would mean that if someone else came along, they
wouldn't be able to get it because it would be locked up
for someone who's project might get delayed for 10 or 20
years.  And so our rule making currently is that if there's
water available, whoever comes or is ready to use it by
reserving a meter, and then they have a certain period of
time to obtain that meter after they've paid for it.  They
get to have that allocation of water.  But if we were to
take big chunks of allocation and lock them up, a) we would
be bankrupt, but b) it would also create an inequity for
the - primarily it would create an inequity for the small
person who wanted to go get a meter for their house, and we
would say no, we can't because this water is locked up for
that subdivision.

MR. EDLAO: You know, I'm thinking, and maybe, Barbara, you
can correct me, that it's not so much asking the Department
to lock up funds.  We're just asking, based on the community
plan, is it realistic?  Will you guys be up in that area?
And if it's not in a priority area, then those comments
should go to the CAC which would eventually get to the
Planning Commission and to the Council, and decisions can
be made based on that.  It's not saying that they want you
to say well earmark 'X' amount of dollars for this area in
five years based on the community plan.  No, we don't want
you to do that.  Yes, you will be bankrupt.  But that's not
what we're asking.  We're just asking is something on paper,
a projection.  Getting back to my question, what is this
strategic plan?  

MS. LONG: Thank you, I was wondering about that.

MR. EDLAO: Somebody tell me what is the strategic plan?

MR. STARR: There's a strategic planning process which the
Board has begun undertaking under the leadership of Board
Member Howard Nakamura.  And so far, it's gone through about
three stages, and it's becoming a very inclusive and
voluminous document.  I know at some point, it will be
going out for public input, and I really hope that the
Planning Commission is one of the entities that gives us
back some input.  And there's a lot of wording in there
about plans, and following the community plans, and input
to the community plans.  I think this would be the proper
venue to actually to create a mechanism for interaction,
and this will be coming to you soon.

MR. EDLAO: That's all we needed.  I mean that's basically
what it sounds like what we needed.  And I'm glad to hear
that this is in the process.

MR. LONG: The time to do the general plan is this year.
Its time is up.  Then I assume, unless there's a radical
change, that we'll go through the same rigamarole with the
community plans.  And I heard something else - water use
and development plans.  What are the chapters?  What do
they do?  How do you get on them?  Who are they?

MR. CRADDICK: Chapters?  You mean the advisory committees?

MS. LONG: Jacky mentioned something called chapters.
There's a Lahaina chapter - what is this?

MS. KRAFTSOW: The Water Use and Development Plan is
required by the State Water Code and is drafted by the
Department, approved by the Board, then goes to the
Council.  The Water Use and Development Plan process is
in progress now.  Since the last community plan
go-round, there was a 1990 Water Use and Development
Plan and a 1992 Water Use and Development Plan draft.
So we waited to do this go round until a lot of the
community plan (INAUDIBLE).   The Water Use and
Development Plan has many sections state wide. 
There's an ag plan, and a water quality plan, and
so forth.  But each county is required to address
certain areas, and the chapters that we're breaking
it down is we have water districts.  They don't
exactly match the community plan districts because
in some cases, our systems don't match the community
plan (INAUDIBLE).  But we do have a similar process to 
what was done at the CAC.  We call an advisory committee
together, and try to look at community plans and analyze
what community plans will apply if they built out
(INAUDIBLE).  Also, I'm sorry to go backwards, but
in answer to your questions, yes, when the CAC's were
in progress, yes, we did review them.  Yes, we gave
testimony to the effect that if you build this out,
this is how much water we anticipate it will use. Yes,
we even said with regards to the Kihei/Makena,
Kahului/Wailuku plans to Council that this is tripling
of water use and that we won't have the funds to do it
in 15 years.  So it's not that we don't say these
things.  Actually, they did cut back a lot since that
testimony was given.  Anyway, back to the Water Use
and Development Plan, there are chapters for each district
and then we also set aside a chapter for resolving
interdistrict issues.  So for instance, where Kihei/Makena,
Kahului/Wailuku community plans call for huge amounts
of ---INAUDIBLE---, in the Haiku community plan, it said
don't take water out of the area unless you've served us
first, etcetera, etcetera.  Obviously, we need to get those
two groups together and talk about it.  So that's another
portion of what happens with the Water Use and Development
Plan.  Where we are with the Water Use and Development
Plans, we started with Lanai even though that community
plan was not done because the State requested it.  The
State was considering designation of Lanai.  And we are
essentially finished with Lanai with a few public hearings
to go based on one of the major priorities which was a
water shed plan needed to be drafted and we need some
public input before you can plan these.  Lahaina is
just commencing.  Actually, it's the first meeting in
February.  There were several agencies that attended.
Planning is not one of them because there was an agenda
mixup.  It went to about 45 people but missed the Planning
Department.  But we talked about it and you'll get it for
the next meeting.

MS. LONG: Who generally do you get from Planning?

MS. KRAFTSOW: Whoever the Planning Department assigns to us.

MS. LONG: We don't have a water specialist?

MS. KRAFTSOW: You would have to ask the Planning Department
that.

MS. LONG: Clayton is here, and I understand that Bill
Medeiros has been shifted.  He would have been the
logical one since he worked on the community plans.
I'd like to hear from Planning Department on their
participation in this process.

MR. MIN: I can't say specifically who from the
Department would be involved in this, but we will
participate.  

MS. LONG: The last time this was done was 1992.
Does anybody remember how that was?  Was there
a planner there do you remember?

MR. CRADDICK: Yes.

MS. LONG: There was a planner?

MR. CRADDICK: Yes.

MS. LONG: Okay.  Could I ask that the Planning
Commission be kept in this loop?  It has a great
deal to do with planning and with the community
plan updates, and I'm sure we'd very much like
to know who is on these advisory committees,
when they meet - you know, just sort of general
stuff.  How do you select people for these
committees?

MR. CRADDICK: I'm going again refer to Ellen.
Because the Molokai, it just kind of happened         
(INAUDIBLE, SEVERAL PEOPLE SPEAKING AT ONCE)
involved with the water got on the Molokai
working group, and I think the same thing
happened on Lanai.  I think Ellen's efforts
in Lahaina are mainly her own efforts, so I'll
let her explain.

MS. LONG: Because this is the first I've
known of this, and it's a wonderful opportunity,
I think, for the public to be involved from
square one.  You always hear the public screaming
out there, so let's tell them what's happening,
let's get them involved, let's have some community
based planning.  How do you do it.

MS. KRAFTSOW: Well the Commission has certain
requirements under their hierarchy goals.  Actually,
I can't call them requirements yet - they're a
statement of guidelines.  Right now, they're giving
them to us in draft.  But our Water Use and Development
contract was actually negotiated with the Commission
some years ago and received their approval.  One of
the requirements of that was that we establish a balance
in the presentation of the community which does include
all the major developers and purveyors because,
obviously, we only have a small portion of the systems
in some areas.  Molokai we're one of the smaller systems,
and Lahaina we're about half.  So all the major developers
and purveyors in that community interest groups supposed
to be balanced so we tried to bring in small business,
resource management concerns.  There's civic interests
and medical people.  I actually  (INAUDIBLE?) too many
people requesting input for the committee so that to
the Commission make a list who would be representing...

UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Commission?

MS. KRAFTSOW: The State Commission on Water Resource
Management, I'm sorry.  To see if it was adequately
balanced.  And if you do have additional suggestions,
I can forward you.

MR. STARR: I have just one quick question for some
of the Commission Members, something I've been
thinking about lately.  Looking at the presentation
before, you see a lot of new facilities that have
been cropping up, and they really will help us
provide better service, but as far as the way some
of them have visual impacts, I for one feel that maybe
we could do a little bit of a better job without
spending much or sometimes any more money, and I'm
wondering if any of the Commission members if that's
really your expertise could make some comments on that.

MR. CARROLL: I'm sure Commissioner Long would love to.

MS. LONG: I'd love to.  My real gripe is the one that
the Hawaiian Homelands guys put in out on Kula Highway.
That is an abomination.  Could you please consult the
Urban Design Review Board with this question?  They are
the appropriate agency to deal with the visual impact
of million gallon tanks and pump stations and lord knows
what all.  And I'm sure they could give you some standard
comments on fencing, lighting, heaven knows what.  But
is that something you could do?  

MR. STARR: Thank you.

MS. LONG: I'd appreciate it.  Thanks for your question,
Jonathan.

MR. CARROLL: Alright, is there any further questions
from...  Commissioner Edlao?

MR. EDLAO: One more.  Jacky, you mentioned the CIP
fund, that 18.35.  As you went through the projects,
you made a comment that some of the costs you said was
covered by carryover.  In that 18.35, is there a carryover
considered in that or is that additional to the 18.35?

MS. CARROLL: The 18.35 would have been fiscal year 99's
budget, and the things that were carried over from
previous years would have been separate from that.

MR. EDLAO: Separate from this?

MS. CARROLL: A lot of the building of tanks and stuff
take up a whole year's, or even just the design sometimes
takes more than a year.  That's why a lot of them, the
dollars for that particular year may not match up.

MR. EDLAO: One last question.

MS. CARROLL: Oh, and then, sorry, but I forgot to mention
that our CIP like we said is not from our rates.  It's from
the water system development fee, and like for the treatment
plants, we did have to issue bonds.  But the water bills that
we all pay every two months, that's for our system
maintenance and operations, and replacement of what we
already have, separate from new things.  Forgot to mention
that.

MR. EDLAO: Quick question, I guess to David.  How much to
drill a well?  What am I looking at in terms of cost?

MR. CRADDICK: It depends where and how much you want to
get.

MR. CARROLL: The higher the elevation, the higher the
cost.

MR. EDLAO: So there's a lot of things you look at in
terms of ...

MR. CRADDICK: Generally, in Maui here, there are no
high level water areas where you get any kind of high
level production.  It's mainly basal water which is
water that's floating on the sea level, so wherever
you are, you got to go to sea level.  And the closer
you are to the ocean, the saltier the water is that
you're going to get.  So again, going inland, you have
these steep mountains.  So the further inland you go,
the higher that well gets.  And then it's a function of
what capacity you want.  The more capacity you want,
the bigger the hole has to be.  So for instance, in
Mokuhau or the Joint Venture Wells, the casing size
is about 20 inch.  The Haiku Wells are about 14 inch
size of casing.  And I believe the Kapakalua Well is
18 inch.  So the cost can vary considerably depending
on how much water you're after.

MR. EDLAO: I just asked because, you know, some of the
comments (INAUDIBLE).  So I just wanted to get some
perspective.

MR. CRADDICK: Keep in mind, if it was just the cost,
I don't believe there's any developer who would think
for a second of going and drilling the well.  The
problem is what's the quality of that water going to
be, and you can also get a dry hole.  Keep in mind, out
at Waikapu right below the well that we just drilled,
there were two wells that were drilled by the State.
One is essentially a dry hole.  There's almost no water
in it because it never penetrated the cap rock.  The next
well does have water in it but the minute you start the
pump, it draws way down so there's no water.  So putting
a well in, there's an element of risk involved.  Over on
Molokai, we want to do a well over on Molokai.  But what
we're doing, we're sitting and we're waiting for Molokai
Ranch to do their well because out side of Kualapuu,
there really are no deep, high production wells so we
want to see that somebody can get a good well.  Same
way we did out here with Kapakalua - Dowling, I mean,
for a guy to put out $3 million to get a well is a
relatively high risk venture.  But now that that well
is drilled up at that high elevation, we know what the
permeability is and the flow of the water up there.  It's
not that high a risk for us to go and put one nearby
somewhere where as before, the general theory was up
there it's in a rift zone, there's not going to be any
water.  

MS. RICHARDSON: David, your Department is ex-officio to
the Planning Commission.  I'd like to request that you
send out a representative from your Department to come
to our meetings when we have our meetings.  Somebody that
is able to answer questions and give us answers.

MR. CRAVALHO: Mr. Chairman, the opposite is also
true - an ex-officio member from the Planning Department
attend our Board meetings.  I haven't seen hide nor hair
of any of them.

MR. CARROLL: I never realized.

MR. CRAVALHO: And the same thing is true with respect
to the Department of Public Works.

MR. CRADDICK: Thank you for saying that.  I didn't want
to be the one saying that.

MR. CARROLL: Does anybody have anything else they would
like to bring out at this time?

MS. LONG: I just want to say thank you.  This has been
very productive.  I am very, very grateful to all of
you.  Thank you.

MR. STARR: Let's continue this.  This is a good start.

MS. KAIRNS: Bob, have you taken any public testimony to
see if there's any members from the public to testify?

MR. CARROLL: Oh, I thought that this was a workshop.

MS. KAIRNS: You still need to check.

MR. CARROLL: Alright, even though this is not a public
hearing, at this time I will accept public testimony.
Time for public testimony is now open.  Anyone wishing
to testify, please come forward.  You have three
minutes.  Please give your name.

MS. AMARAL: Aloha Chairperson. Good afternoon my
friends.  My name is Zandra Amaral, and I'm here
simply to learn as a citizen, as a grandmother,
and as a mother.  But first, I'd like to thank
all of you for collaboratively coming here for
the betterment and interest of the people.  And
I did want to comment on - Mr. Edlao, you had made
a comment which kind of disturbed me, and I believe
what you had said or the gist of what you had said
was that things coming to you from the Water
Department and you guys act on it and there was
some verifications put in there.  But I as a citizen
sitting there as a mother and a grandmother, and a
native to the Territory of Hawaii took that to mean
that you depend somewhat on the Water Department to
do your job for you.  Now I might be wrong, but this
is what I felt as a citizen.  And as Commissioners,
I respect all of you, and as Board Members, I respect
all of you and appreciate the time that you volunteer.
As one of you very eloquently pointed out, you are
volunteers.  But it's a fiduciary responsibility that
is entrusted in you because our Mayor and those that
appointed you knew that you could do the job, and I
think that you can.  As Commissioner, however, I'd
like to ask in my Manao (phonetic) is that as
appointed individuals entrusted with such a duty should
not only for myself but also my two kopuna kanes
(phonetic), my grandsons, who are generations to come,
if there is something coming before you as a Commission,
as a Board Member on both sides, as administrators, I
humbly ask that you go forward to the respective
committee, board or commission member that might be
able to answer your questions.  I think this is a great
start.

However, what would disturb me is if you made decisions
simply because a piece of paper should happen to come
before you and it was expeditious just to get it done.
And I know that's not what you do and I know you all
work very, very hard so don't get me wrong there.  But
I would like to humbly submit that your point was heard.
The warrant and the claim and the support that you offered
was heard by me.  I took it to heart, and from what I got
from what you said, I'm going to ask that if there is
anything at the time of prior to executing and making
happen, remember now, that's something you don't need to
be reminded of I'm sure, you are very much in control of
the destiny of the growth of Maui County.  What you do
affects how much we become built.  I can remember coming
from Territory days into today, Kihei itself, I was speaking
to Mr. Cravalho, I remember when my father was invited to
purchase land in Kihei, and he thought that wasn't a good
investment.  But I would like to close in leaving you guys
with this thought.  Remember historically, over building can
not be undone.  Building needs to be done efficiently so that
we can balance our lives for our children and ourselves
economically by, in turn, still keeping in mind our lifestyles
but not sacrificing one for the other.  And if you've got
questions, you've got the resources.  Take the time.  Our
children, our moopunas (phonetic) deserve that.  Thank you
all for your time and effort.  I love you all and I appreciate
all that you've done.  Mahalo.

MR. CARROLL: Anyone else wishing to give testimony at this
time?

MR. RAPACZ: Thank you, Mr. Chair.  Good afternoon Board
Members and Commissioners.  My name is John Rapacz.  As
usual, many very complicated issues have been raised, and
I have to keep my comments to three minutes.  So I'll
just use some phrases that may stick in your minds.
Urban growth boundaries - this is something the Director
raised as a reason why it's difficult for the Water
Department to plan where they should be providing water.
If the community plans simply encompass entire regions,
how do they know where to focus their water development
and transmission.  Part of urban boundaries or part of
that concept is what's called infill.  The point of
having the boundary is that you don't approve other
developments outside of it until you have filled in
the boundary.  Once again, infrastructure can be planned.
If you go outside of the boundary before you completely
fill in, infrastructure is difficult.  They're simple
concepts.  With those improvements, the land use planning
through the community planning update process, the Water
Department will be able to focus better.  On the other hand,
the Water Department also needs to tell the Planning
Commission, the CAC's, the County Council throughout the
entire process, not just at the beginning, but every meeting,
every step of the way.  They need to tell if you approve
development in these areas, it will take us 20 years to
provide the water, or 30, or however many it is.  Or we
have no plans to provide water there at any time, so don't
hold your breath.  So it has to go in both directions.
The planning has to be limited to the areas that you
allegedly are planning for.  And the Water Department
has to be able to provide the information about when
the infrastructure can be available.  This is true for
all infrastructure, not just for water.  The last part
of this system is that there has to be policy on
infrastructure concurrency.

It's fine to say we're going to do our community planning
for this area.  Part of that planning should be if the
Water Department says that the infrastructure won't be
available in this area, we won't approve it.  We won't
plan for it.  It's not planning if you approve it knowing
the infrastructure won't be available.  So it's got to
come from both sides.  The Planning process has to be
solidified, clarified, to the point where there won't
be planning done for areas where infrastructure won't
be available.  In order to know that, the Water Department
has to tell you what their capabilities are if they are
given a direction.  If they're not given a direction,
how can they tell you what they can do.  So there's a
little bit of chicken in the egg going on, but it's not
impossible to do it.

MR. CARROLL: Three minutes.

MR. RAPACZ:  Thank you.

MS. LONG: Thank you, John.

MR. CARROLL: Anyone else wish to give testimony at this
time?  Hearing none, this meeting is closed.

MR. EDLAO: I would like to respond to Zandra's.  First
of all, if I offended you, I apologize.  If anybody I
wanted to offend was the director.  To offend the
director in a sense of what John had just said.
We need this stuff.  We don't need a piece of paper
to plant cactus and we're going to give you if there
is water.  We want solid information so I can make
good decisions.  Sometimes I feel like, you know how
they say computers.  Computers are only good with what
information is put into it.  We're the same thing here.
We get lousy information, excuse me, David, but I don't
want to make lousy decisions.  I have to be accountable
to people like you.

MS. AMARAL: But Mr. Edlao, now remember, he did say
it goes both ways.

MR. EDLAO: Yes, it does, but then what we're trying here
and I think we did resolve, we're on the right track
now.  I think we all know what's on the table, and I got
another year on this Commission and I'm going to remember
this meeting here, and I'm going to hold David
accountable to some of the things that were said here.
And we're going to make sure that number one, to have
a representative down here.  And I'm hoping that the
Planning Department would have a representative on the
Commission meeting as well.  But I apologize to you,
Zandra, but my intention is that if anybody was going
to get offended, I was hoping he would.

MR. CARROLL: Commissioners and Board Members, it's
almost three o'clock.  I would like to call this
meeting to a close.  I would like to thank the
Department and Ms. Carroll for the excellent
presentation they gave to us and for everybody for
attending - the Planning Commission, the Water Board,
the Planning Department and the Board of Water Supply.
We all learned things here today that it seems we did
not know before.  Also, we now know that there's
information that we need to receive, and there's also
information that we need to find a way to process
to get out to others.  I would hope that all these
four entities can go back and work together and we
can come back the next time we meet and say that this
meeting now we are going to get you this or these are
the things when we discussed at our level, and these
are the things that we need from you further than what
we had to day.  I hope that this is an ongoing process,
and that we can get together - as far as I know, this
is the first time this has ever happened.  The only
one who could enlighten us more is probably Mr.
Cravalho who has been around the longest.  But I
think we did something good, and it can be just as
good as we make it.  We can make the system better
if we want to do it, and I hope that we all do.
Saying that, this meeting is adjourned.

(THERE BEING NO OTHER BUSINESS TO DISCUSS,
THE WORKSHOP WAS ADJOURNED.)

Respectfully submitted by:
Frances L. Nago
Secretary for the Board of Water Supply