BOARD OF WATER SUPPLY
COUNTY OF MAUI
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING


Taken at the County Building, 200 South High Street,
7th Floor, Wailuku, Maui, Hawaii, commencing at 1:00
p.m. on March 6th, 2001.
 
Reported By:  Rachelle Primeaux, CSR #370
 
ATTENDANCE:
 
Members Present:
Orlando Tagorda, Chair
Howard Nakamura
Clark Hashimoto
Jonathan Starr
Mike Nobriga
 
Staff Present:
Herbert Chang, Engineering
Herbert Kogasaka, Engineering
David Craddick, Director
Howard Fukushima, Corporation Counsel
Fran Nago, Secretary
George Tengan, Deputy Director
 
Others Present:
Paul Horikawa
James and Antoinette Amaral
Sheila Fujikawa
Peter Stolle
Mr. And Mrs. Cabrinha
Ms. Robello
Trish Fernandez
Phil Christopher
Gerald Hokoana
 
IWADO COURT REPORTERS, INC.
 
                 *  *  *
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Maui County Board of Water
Supply Committee of the Whole Meeting, may we please
come to order.  It's Tuesday, March 6th, 2001.  It's
1:03, and the meeting place is at Committee Conference
Room, County Building, 7th Floor, 200 South High
Street, Wailuku, Maui, Hawaii.  Ms. Nago, would you
please call attendance.
 
MS. NAGO:  We have Chair Orlando Tagorda, Clark
Hashimoto, Michael Nobriga, Jonathan Starr, Howard
Nakamura.  We have staff member David Craddick.  We
have James and Antoinette Amaral, Paul Horikawa,
Sheila Fujikawa, Trish Fernandez, Peter Stolle,
Mr. and Mrs. Cabrinha and Ms. Robello.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Thank you.  We have minutes of
August 9th, 2000.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  Mr. Chairman, I move that we
receive the minutes pursuant to 30 days review in
which case if there are no corrections, the minutes
shall be filed.
 
MR. STARR:  Mr. Chair, I second the motion.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  You heard the motion.  It's been
seconded.  The minutes will be filed subject to 30
days review.  The Chair is now ready to receive oral
testimony from the public, but those persons who have
request for action will be permitted to testify when
that request is taken up.  Any members of the public
who wants to give oral testimony?  Seeing none, agenda
on Roman Numeral 5, Committee Discussion
Recommendation Item A, Communication 00-38, Request
from Paul Horikawa on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. James
Amaral for a water meter for Lilikoi Farm Lots in
exchange for water meter under service number
934-01000.
 
MR. HORIKAWA:  Hi, good morning, Chairman
Tagorda.  My name is Paul Horikawa and also present
today is Mr. and Mrs. Amaral.  Do you mind if we sit
at the table?
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Go ahead.
 
MR. HORIKAWA:  My voice is often times not as
loud as I would like it to be.  If I'm closer to the
mike, I understand that the court reporter has some
assistance by being able to hear me, which I think
would greatly help our request.
 We've appeared -- we submitted our letter in
early August requesting there be an exchange of the
water meters.  My clients -- by way of history, my
clients are in the process of subdividing a piece of
land out in Haiku.  It's designated as TMK
2-7-022-005.  It's approximately 6.87 acres.
 And what they plan to do is create three lots on
the subdivision and for the purpose of conveying the
land to their children after the subdivision is
completed.  We have the report that was filed with the
Rules Committee back in October of last year when we
met before the Rules Committee.  And I haven't seen
any other report that has been circulated, so
basically, what I'm going to do is just comment from
what I understand to be the last submittal to the
Board as well as to the Committee.
 And on page, I believe it was Page 3 of the
report, there are, you know, numerous requirements
that were imposed by, you know, various entities as a
result of the subdivision.  You know, one of the
things that my clients had to do is install fire
protection along Lilikoi.  Road that's approximately a
thousand linear fear.  They're going to upgrade the
line from an existing 4-inch line to a 6-inch line.
They're going to also install some improvements along
the private driveway along Lot 004 of the proposed
subdivision.
 The construction plans have been approved.  They
were submitted to the County, to the Water
Department.  They were approved, and they indicate
they anticipate spending approximately $200,000 for
these improvements.  So there is one structure on the
property right now, and what they would like to do by
way of reviewing that with the request before the
Board is give up a meter on another parcel of land and
have another water meter issued so that it could be
assigned to one of the lots that would result from the
subdivision.
 In their own minds, you know, the Amarals
applied for water meters back in 1997 for this, and
they've pretty much gone up and down on the list.
Whenever they've checked the numbers, they've
advanced, or for whatever reasons, they go back.
Nevertheless, they've been waiting for the water
meters, and it's a little difficult for them to commit
to spending what I would consider a significant amount
of money, $200,000, without any assurances that they
will get the water meters in the future.
 So this is one of the things that we had
proposed so they could proceed with at least some
assurances that they would be -- their sons would be
able to develop their property.  They have two sons,
Craig and Sean, and Craig is in the process of getting
married next month.  So maybe it's fortuitous, but one
of the things that they would like to do is to have --
well, they're not going to kick Craig out of the
house, but they would like Craig to have his own place
so they could -- they would give Craig the property
and he is anticipating on building his own home.
 One of the things that by way of history is the
Amarals, they have leased a property right by the
Marine Base Camp for approximately 40 years now.  And
this came up during the last Committee meeting.  I
think Jonathan and Mr. Nakamura were there, and there
was a letter submitted from A&B, and they've raised
cattle on the property.  And as the report indicates,
when the Marine Park was built, the meters were
inadvertently removed.
 The Amarals have continued to go pay the fees
associated with the meter for the past few years and
one of the -- what they would like to do, and there's
a letter from A&B in which A&B went along with the
request, is to basically just give up the meter that
serves the other parcel on the lot with service number
-- I don't have the service number.  But it is TMK
2-7-02-04.  And as I mentioned earlier, they have a
meter issued to the other property.
 You know, conceptually, this is not a totally
new idea.  In previous instances, what the Board has
done is people have come up with water saving devices
where they retrofit, you know, areas, and as a result
of the water savings of the system, what the Board has
done is given water meters to the various
individuals.  And we would submit that giving up the
meter that serves the property by the Marine Camp,
which is now a park or actually adjacent to the park,
there is this potential water savings to the Board.
 And we would like in turn for giving up that
meter is to have a new meter issued to the subdivision
the Amarals are going through.  With respect to the --
to the report, I just have a few comments that I would
like to make only because when I spoke to Mr. Amaral,
he wanted to clarify matters relating to -- there are
two reports, one dated October 16th and another report
that was dated February 3rd, 1998.
 The Amarals have previously requested it, and I
guess they being new to the system, they were kind of
intimidated by the whole process and eventually they
withdrew their request, and I got retained.  But what
they wanted to clarify is that, one, there's a
suggestion in the report that Mr. Amaral was going to
truck water from his home over to where his cattle are
grazing by the Marine Park.  That is not a correct
statement.  One of the reasons why the Department
recommended denial in the past was that there was
going to be this violation of trucking water from one
location to the another, but that is not going to be
the case.
 Mr. Amaral has made arrangements with an
adjoining land owner to have -- to use the stream that
runs to the property for the purpose of water for his
cows.  There is a suggestion in the report that the
request is based upon the finding of the shortage that
went into effect in March, March 16, 1993, in which
water meters were denied because of the shortage of
water source capacity in the Upcountry areas.
 Well, as the Board knows, that that particular,
let's call it legislation or rule or whatever you want
to call that, was ruled unlawful by Judge McConnell
and affirmed by the Hawai`i Supreme Court.  We would
note that in its earlier report in 1998, this is
approximately three years ago, the staff had
recommended under option one, it stated that the --
what the Amarals are requesting may not comply with
the water system development fee rule.  It kind of
expanded on that during the last meeting.  It said
that well -- at first it was May, and then it turned
into the water system development rule does not allow
for the relocation of the water meters.
 I went through the rules yesterday as well as
today, and I can't find in the prohibition that the
Department is suggesting exists.  You know, I just
can't find what they're suggesting, and, you know,
because the basis for the -- their justification for
denial is nonexistent.  We would suggest that the
Board adopt option two, which is to grant the water
meters on certain conditions that are set forth in the
staff report.
 And I've gone over the conditions with my
client, and they're agreeable to those conditions.
Mr. and Mrs. Amaral are present.  They're available to
answer any questions you may have regarding this.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  The presence of Corporation
Counsel Howard Fukushima is noted.  Any discussion,
Members, questions?
 
MR. STARR:  I have a couple of questions.  As I
understand it, how many lots are being subdivided?
 
MR. HORIKAWA:  Three.  Actually, 4 lots, but one
is a roadway lot.
 
MR. STARR:  And one water meter exists on the
property?
 
MR. HORIKAWA:  Yes.
 
MR. STARR:  And what they're looking to do is to
give up a water meter that used to exist but doesn't
currently exist on another property and gain a new
meter, a new five-eighths meter on one of the new
subdivided parcels?
 
MR. HORIKAWA:  Yes, that's correct.
 
MR. STARR:  What's the use of the land from
where the water meter is being taken, is that a very
large lot?
 
MR. AMARAL:  It's a lot that I lease from A&B
and I graze cattle.  It has a stream underneath it.
 
MR. STARR:  Is there any other water meter on
that lot?
 
MR. AMARAL:  No.  I have a letter from A&B
saying that it's okay for me to do that.
 
MR. STARR:  It would be A&B giving up a water
meter for you to get one actually?
 
MR. AMARAL:  Actually, no.  That water meter was
put there by her father who has since died.
 
MR. STARR:  Whose name is that water meter under?
 
MR. CRADDICK:  It's theirs, but it serves A&B's
property.  Now, they have a letter also from A&B
saying, "Hey, we don't care if you take the meter
away," so maybe that issue is moot.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  What about the other subdivided lots?
 
MR. HORIKAWA:  Well, we're just going to have to
wait until the meters are issued.  They did attend the
meeting chaired by Mr. Starr a few weeks ago, and
under these circumstances, that's all they can do.
They would like the meter, but they signed an
agreement.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Excuse me, go ahead, Mr. Nakamura.
 
MR. NAKAMURA:  Just to clarify, so the meter is
in Mr. Amaral's name and Mr. Amaral is the person who
has been paying water bills as well as the meter fees
or whatever else?
 
MR. HORIKAWA:  The old meter.
 
MR. NAKAMURA:  The old meter?
 
MR. HORIKAWA:  Yes.
 
MR. NAKAMURA:  And secondly, I believe that
the -- at one point, the Amarals had come in for
approval of the subdivision based on a deferral of the
improvements.
 
MR. HORIKAWA:  Yes.
 
MR. NAKAMURA:  And at this point, the Amarals
are prepared to proceed with the construction of those
improvements as required by the Department; is that
correct?
 
MR. HORIKAWA:  Yes.
 
MR. NAKAMURA:  Okay, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Thank you.  Anymore questions?
 
MR. CRADDICK:  Wait, wait, are you sure about
that?  Because that's what you're saying you don't
want to do here.
 
MR. NAKAMURA:  No, I don't think so, not at all.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Anymore questions?
 
MR. HASHIMOTO:  So the six acres will be what,
ag zoned?
 
MR. AMARAL:  Yes.
 
MR. HASHIMOTO:  So it will be three lots plus yours?
 
MR. AMARAL:  Three lots plus the roadway.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  Move to approve.
 
MR. STARR:  I second.  I think we move to
recommend approval.
 
MR. NAKAMURA:  With the conditions.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  With the conditions.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  It's been moved to approve with
the conditions.
 
MR. STARR:  To recommend approval.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Further discussion, Members?
 
MR. NAKAMURA:  You know, when this request first
came in, I was very skeptical and actually was
prepared to vote to deny it; however, subsequently,
the information that they're willing to put in the
improvements as required and the fact that there is an
existing meter in their name, I believe is, in my
mind, now justifies the approval of the request.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Okay.
 
MR. HORIKAWA:  Just by clarification, the
conditions would be the conditions set forth in Page 4
of Exhibit 7 attached to the staff report to the Rules
Committee dated October, 16th, 2000?
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Where are you at now?
 
MR. HORIKAWA:  This one here, Page 4.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Page 4.
 
MR. HORIKAWA:  I don't have mine numbered.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  I got the agreement on Page 4.
 
MR. HORIKAWA:  Exhibit 7, 25, number 25.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Okay.
 
MR. HORIKAWA:  One more.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  There you go.  The question I
have is for the Corporation Counsel, that meter that
was inadvertently taken from that Marine Park, it sits
under his name, but this is assigned to the tax map
key, that plot, can you relocate that one to another
tax map key?
 
MR. FUKUSHIMA:  Well, the Board has done it in
the past is one response I can give.  We don't
particularly see any prohibition against it.
Generally, meters do run with the land.  But in this
case where the land owner has consented to the removal
of the meter and if the Board believes that the giving
up the right to a meter, even though that meter isn't
there now, sufficiently or is sufficient to allow them
to install an operating meter, that's, you know,
that's a question that has to be answered by the
Board, whether they believe the trade-off is a fair
trade-off.
 And again, not wishing to comment on the
fairness of it, if the Board believes it's fair and it
satisfies the purpose of relieving the system of some
water use to be replaced by other water use, I don't
see a problem.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Anymore discussion?  Seeing
none, ready for the vote?
 
VOICES:  Uh-huh.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Those in favor of approving this
request, say aye.
 
VOICES:  Aye.
 
MR. FUKUSHIMA:  It's recommended.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Recommending approval, I'm
sorry, say aye.
 
VOICES:  Aye.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Opposed?
 
(No response.)
 
MR. HORIKAWA:  Thank you, Mr. Chairman and
Members of the Committee.
 
MRS. AMARAL:  Thank you.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Item B, the same agenda,
Communication 00-44 request for Mr. Edward T. Esty for
approval to temporarily use an existing water meter to
fill a tank to be used as the domestic water supply,
TMK 2-3-03:171, Omaopio Homesteads Subdivision.
 
MS. NAGO:  Mr. Christopher, could you sit right
here next to the court steno.  She would appreciate
it.  Thank you.
 
MR. CHRISTOPHER:  Especially with my soft voice.
Good afternoon, gentlemen.  I'm Phil Christopher.  I
represent Mr. and Mrs. Esty, the subdividers.  It's
been since October since we met with you originally on
the Rules Committee agenda and now transferred to the
Committee of the Whole.  I understand that there has
been some misunderstanding in what we're trying to
do.  I would like to give you a brief overview of what
this is all about.
 The Estys are in the process of subdividing 71
acres of land into 9 large lots.  This is under 3
LUCA.  They're in the process of close to being
approved.  It's currently being processed as a private
water system.  There is no water line.  This is on
Omaopio Road.  There's no water line on Omaopio Road
fronting the property.  It ends about 3,100 feet above
the road, and, of course, there are no meters
available, so they opted to put in a private water
system.
 But the system is designed so it can be
connected to County water should a water line become
available on Omaopio Road.  They've extended a
six-inch ductal line to Omaopio Road and internal
piping so it can be operated, if the owners so choose,
as a dual system.  Right now the private water system
will take care of domestic fire flow and irrigation
needs.
 It's designed that if the six-inch line is
connected to the County, that would take care of
domestic and fire flow.  And then the well would then
be used only for irrigation water, which I think is
kind of the best of both worlds.
 When we went to get approval to begin
construction, we needed the signature of the State
Department of Health.  We discovered at that time that
we were the first ones to come under a new federally
mandated law that requires that any subdivision that
serves at least 25 people be considered a public water
system by the definition of the State, and we have
gone through a long process of approval before we
could even begin construction.  So the subdividers
agreed to operate not as a public water system, an
unregulated private water system.  And we have a
covenant that says that the population can't be more
than 24 people, so, you know, in nine lots, this is
going to greatly limit the use of the property.  And
the subdivider was planning on a second phase of six
more lots.
 So we're looking at two things.  One is to
proceed after subdivision approval to become a public
water system in the eyes of the State, go through that
process, and then have these restrictions removed.  Or
in the alternative, to say to offer to the County to
improve the water system, extend the water line 3,100
feet down the road at the subdivider's expense.  And
if someday we could get the eight additional meters
we're waiting for now, because we have one meter, and
operate as a dual system on County water for the homes
and hydrants and well water for the irrigation system.
 And if this is acceptable to you folks, what
we're proposing is that we be allowed to use the
existing meter to fill one of the tanks.  There's a
two-tank system.  We can split those two tanks.  And
if we can fill the one tank with the existing meter
and start operating right from the beginning as a dual
system, County water for the homes and well water for
the irrigation.
 My understanding talking to Mr. Craddick is that
-- we have two lines in the road now, one that
supplies water to the tank and one from the tank, and
those two lines are a foot apart.  If it's a dual
system, he would want those two lines to be three feet
apart because it's potable and nonpotable water.  We
would agree to continue to chlorinate the irrigation
of this so it would be potable water.  This is within
one foot of the potable line.
 So this is our request today.  And I did submit
a second, like additional request.  Two of our lots
front Omaopio Road, and it's our understanding that
there are a couple of small lines running right down
in front of the property, an inch-and-a-half line that
Mr. Cravalho mentioned, and someone told me there's a
four-inch line there.
 And if we could be allowed to at least connect
the two lots in the front right directly to Omaopio
Road, it would take those two lines off the system for
now.  And this restriction of 24 people would become a
lot less onerous as an alternative.  You didn't allow
us to fill the tank and put them all on with County
water.
 Let's at least get two of them on County water,
and now we have only six lots, four people per lot.
It kind of makes sense if they have 24 people.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Are you done, sir?
 
MR. CHRISTOPHER:  Yeah.  I would like to add one
more thing.  I read recently where a developer in
South Maui was given special consideration by the
Planning Department because he showed sensitivity to
the will of the community in doing something.  And I
really want to tell you that these folks are that kind
of people.
 They got a subdivision with a preliminary
approval in '97 before the current ag zoning ordinance
took effect, so they could have put in a bunch of
two-acre lots.  But they knew that that was not what
the will of the people in the community was at that
time, and they felt sensitive to that and agreed to
just bring in -- let's just make this a few, nice, big
lots and consistent with what ultimately is going
to -- it turns out it's actually one lot below the
density that's now allowed by the sliding scale on ag
zoning, so I really think these folks deserve some
kind of special consideration.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Members, questions?
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  What would be the average selling
price of one of the lots?
 
MR. CHRISTOPHER:  At this point, they're
thinking about building homes on them, but one lot is
listed at $420,000 for a 5.6 acre lot.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  Thank you.
 
MR. CHRISTOPHER:  Just to give you an idea.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Anymore questions?  Mr. Nakamura.
 
MR. NAKAMURA:  I'm still a little confused about
the request.  Maybe I can take it one step at a time.
So you're seeking to have the subdivision approved
using a private water system that is capable of
meeting domestic fire flow and irrigation needs?
 
MR. CHRISTOPHER:  That's where we're going.
That's the direction we're going in right now.
 
MR. NAKAMURA:  So that is the first step?
 
MR. CHRISTOPHER:  But it has a limitation of the
24 people.
 
MR. NAKAMURA:  And presumably to do that, you
would not need the approval of this Board, is that
right, David?
 
MR. CRADDICK:  I think it depends how that
Richmond case comes out with the Board because they've
got an existing meter that will serve one lot.
 
MR. NAKAMURA:  An existing meter to serve one
lot, okay.  So then secondly, you're proposing to
ultimately put in all of the required on-site and
off-site improvements at the time that you can
actually get meters?
 
MR. CHRISTOPHER:  Uh-huh.
 
MR. NAKAMURA:  And in the meantime, you want to
hook up the storage system to the existing
five-eighths-inch meter to serve -- to provide
domestic water to all of the lots?

MR. CHRISTOPHER:  Uh-huh.
 
MR. CRADDICK:  What happened to the
inch-and-a-half meter you had?
 
MR. CHRISTOPHER:  That's the neighboring lot
that they sold.
 
MR. CRADDICK:  The goat cheese.
 
MR. CHRISTOPHER:  The goat cheese, yeah.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Anymore discussion?
 
MR. CHRISTOPHER:  I would like to correct one
thing.  The five-eighths meter, they're not trying to
use that for one of the lots.  We're trying to use
that to irrigate the roadway lot, the plantings along
the roadway lot.  That won't be used for domestic.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Yes, Mr. Starr.
 
MR. STARR:  I have a motion.  I move to
recommend denial.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  Second.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  It's been moved by Mr. Starr to
recommend denial and been seconded by Mr. Nobriga.
Further discussion, Members?
 
MR. HASHIMOTO:  Mr. Chair, this comes out to
Pulehu Road?
 
MR. CHRISTOPHER:  No, this is Omaopio Road.
 
MR. HASHIMOTO:  There's another one on Pulehu Road.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Members, anymore discussion?
 
(No response.)
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Seeing none, ready for the
vote.  Those who are in favor of the motion to deny --
to recommend to deny the request, say aye.
 
VOICES:  Aye.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  And opposed?
 
(No response.)
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  It's denied, sir.  Recommend
denial to the full Board.
 
MR. CHRISTOPHER:  Thank you.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Next item on the agenda,
Communication 00-45, Request from Andrew and Sheila
Fujikawa for a water meter TMK 2-2-3-13:86, Kula
Haleakala Acres.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  Hi, good afternoon.
 
MS. FUJIKAWA:  My husband and I are requesting --
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Please state your name for the record.
 
MS. FUJIKAWA:  I'm sorry, Sheila Fujikawa.
We're requesting a water meter for some property that
my father gave to us.  There is water service on the
property, but there's only one water meter.  There's
two lots.  One is owned by my sister, and one is owned
by my husband and I.  And we would like to separate
the service or the water -- well, yeah, the water.
 
MS. FERNANDEZ:  I'm a friend of Sheila's, Trish
Fernandez, and I've been trying to help her go through
the process of getting a water meter.  We did some
research and got a hold of Alan in the Water
Department and he had said that Sheila's father had
deferred the subdivision improvements because of the
hardship, and he just wanted to subdivide the
properties for both daughters.
 We found that out later, and so the
recommendation from the Water Department was to
improve the existing system, which we went to water
engineers and they said it was a minimum of $200,000.
So the two options that were given; one was to go
ahead and use, I guess there's a water storage on the
top side of Haleakala Acres on Crater Road, and that
to increase the size of the pipes that fed down to the
property; and then the second option was to get a
lateral in and run it from the lower part if they
could find a connection.
 Based on the engineer's quotations, that was a
minimum of $200,000.  The other thing was, like Mrs.
Fujikawa had said, there is water service on the
property for both pieces that have been subdivided.
The water meter is only on her sister's parcel and
then there are two water pipes on her parcel.  We
looked even further and we found that the neighbor,
the Morrisons, who live a stone's throw away, had made
the same request at the time, before Mr. Morrison had
passed on, that he, as my memory serves, you can
correct me, had the same problem.
 He had one water meter.  He had children.  He
wanted to subdivide, and he wanted to just get water
meters to separate the service because the other homes
had been served by that one water meter.  And I think
he was selling one of them.  I don't remember exactly,
but I believe you have that as part of your information.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  I forgot to grab that when I left
my office early this morning, late last night.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Questions, Members?
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  Apparently, this was a family
subdivision Under Rule 2 -- what was 18?
 
MR. CRADDICK:  Sixteen.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  Sixteen.  And now you guys got huhu?
 
MS. FUJIKAWA:  You mean my sister and I?
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  Yeah.
 
MS. FUJIKAWA:  Well, yeah.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  Thanks, yeah.  That's why the
thing was all deferred because there is a provision in
our rules that allow for a family subdivision when
you've got two lots and you can borrow.
 
MS. FERNANDEZ:  In light of the cost, there's no way.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  So it's $2,000 for option one and
$2,000 for option two?
 
MS. FERNANDEZ:  No, $200,000 minimum.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  $200,000 for option two.
 
MS. FERNANDEZ:  Either way he said about
$200,000, and that didn't include the labor.  And then
they said, "Well, you know, you can go ahead and go
and get a five-year reimbursement plan for the monies
that you put in," but, you know, the Fujikawas aren't
subdivision people, you know.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  You not Hawaiian, Hawaiian blood, DHHA?
 
MS. FUJIKAWA:  No Hawaiian.
 
MR. HASHIMOTO:  So what are they required to do
to, I mean as far as another six-inch line?
 
MR. CRADDICK:  I was looking at this thing, and
again, you know, there's lots of ways to skin the cat
there.  But if you look on Exhibit 6, Page 84, it's
the -- I don't know who made that suggestion with the
dotted line, but that's one suggestion.  I would
venture to say it's better to keep from other people's
back yards.
 So I guess the other option is coming from where
it says repaired water system improvements and go
along the road to that lot because the line is tied
into the same tank.  It's just that I guess way up at
the top on the three-and-a-half-inch line there.
 
MR. CHANG:  I'm not following your direction.
 
MR. CRADDICK:  Coming off of the pump line down
below along the road over to their property.
 
MR. CHANG:  That's actually the pump line.
 
MR. CRADDICK:  Taking the T off the pump line
and following the road to their property.
 
MS. FERNANDEZ:  Is that the 321 or 394?
 
MR. HASHIMOTO:  394.
 
MR. CRADDICK:  Well, I don't know.  There are
two options, and I've seen only one drawn on here.
 
MS. FERNANDEZ:  We have it in writing, and you
should have received that in your communications from
us, you know.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Mr. Nakamura.
 
MR. NAKAMURA:  Mr. Chairman, I might suggest
that the Applicant might want to consider withdrawing
the request and working with the Director since the
Director has indicated that there may be ways of
complying in some fashion.  You know, very honestly, I
would have a really hard time voting in favor of this.
 You know, you've had a situation just previously
where people had exactly the same situation where they
entered into family subdivisions to defer
improvements, and they are spending $200,000 to create
three lots.  And so, you know, for me to support that
today would be just -- I mean I just would find it
extremely difficult to do that.  And as I say, my
suggestion is perhaps you might want to withdraw it or
defer it and work with the Director to see if there's
some reasonable way in which you can make the
improvements to comply with the agreement that was
entered into by your father.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Would you like to do that?
 
MS. FERNANDEZ:  I guess I have a question.
Well, I mean that's an option, but I guess my question
is for the same situation on the same parcel of land
under the same sort of water restrictions, the water
meter was granted to the neighbor, you know, the
Morrison tract, which is right next door to her
property under the same water restrictions and under
the same, you know, and they established that there
were restrictions.  They were going to give them the
water meter, you know, for the same kind of thing.
 
MR. CRADDICK:  Under the condominium theory that
you don't use any extra water just because you have an
extra meter.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Well, like I said, it's either
you withdraw, or we're going to decide on your case,
so you've got those options.
 
MS. FERNANDEZ:  That's clear.  I'm glad somebody
kind of helped me out.  What do you want to do, you
want to try and --
 
MS. FUJIKAWA:  Yeah.
 
MS. FERNANDEZ:  Okay.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  You don't know what year that
Morrison -- it wasn't during our tenure, huh, we was
here?
 
MR. CRADDICK:  No.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Okay.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  That's all right.
 
MS. FERNANDEZ:  Okay.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  Try that.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Communication 00-45.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  Come back, and see what else we
can do.  Hopefully things change.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Talk with the staff.  Maybe they
can help you guys out.
 
MS. FERNANDEZ:  Okay, thank you.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  Thanks, Mr. Tagorda.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Item D, Communication 00-47, I
think there was already resolved with the staff,
Fran?  I gave you that letter.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  We have a letter.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Go on to the next Item E, Review
and possible action regarding the Memorandum of
Understanding with Gerald Hokoana.
 
MR. HOKOANA:  My name is Gerald Hokoana, and I
own property in Maliko, Haiku, Maliko Gulch, and I've
been living there for 20 years.  I have my residence
there.  I've been raising taro for 20 years.  I have a
well on my property.  And back when Rae Shikuma was
the Director, you guys decided that -- the Water
Department decided they were going to put in the two
Hamakua Poko wells, and at that time, I expressed to
the Director that I had no problems with the
development of that well as long as I was not affected
because -- and, you know, as far as the quality of the
water that's at my property, you know, it's potable.
It's adequate for use without actually any kind of
filtering system.
 And since then, that's how long I've been
working and trying to get an agreement with the
Department of Water Supply that when the Hamakua Poko
wells come on line, if there's any impact to me, then
the Department would look to, you know, addressing any
problems as far as the quality of my water or also the
ability of my well to, you know, to draw water.
 And so anyway, this thing has been going on for
a long time.  And the Department and I have gone back
and forth through numerous Memorandums of
Understanding.  And as I've stated from the beginning,
I don't have any problems, you know, with the
development of those wells, and, you know, whatever
the Department decides it ultimately wants to draw.
 The only thing is I'm downgradient from those
two wells, and they, the Department has hired its own
consultants, Nance.  I've talked to Mr. Meyer who used
to be the USGS Director.  And, you know, there's no
real way of knowing my impact until those wells come
on line.  And I just want to be protected.  I don't
want to be in a situation where all of the sudden I'm
sucking up brackish water and then I've got to go and
initiate some kind of a legal action to, you know, get
some kind of relief as far as, you know, my domestic
water situation.  So what I'm trying to do is get
something in place beforehand.
 And I've read the I guess the recommendation of
the staff with regard to, you know, my request.  It
says here, "The Memorandum of Understanding should
recognize then Hokoana will be responsible for
protection of his well with provision against pumping
over current averages."  Now, for 20 years I've been
responsible in making sure obviously that I'm not
going to screw up my well.  I mean so for me now just
because I got one Agreement of, you know, of
Understanding with the Board of Water Supply, I'm
going to do something to, you know, jeopardize that?
I mean that don't make sense.
 And, you know, in the previous agreement, all of
the sudden, in one of the provisions, there was a
limitation that I cannot go over 10 percent of my
current pumping average, yet I've never told the
Department of Water Supply that, you know, I would
want to set any kind of limitation.  So, you know, I'm
trying to deal in good faith here.
 And what I think -- what I would like to do is
get together with the staff, the Corp Counsel, myself
and hammer out an agreement that is fair and equitable
for everybody.  Because if anybody here was in my
situation, you would be doing the same thing.  The
County of -- the Water Department does not serve the
Maliko Gulch area, so we have no alternative.
 And so anyway, as far as the staff concerned
that I'm going to be all of the sudden irresponsible
after 20 years, I mean, I don't know where that came
from, but that's really not the case.  Because
actually, to be quite frank, you know, I don't really
want the County water.  I'm just fine the way I am.
But I can't stop the development of these two wells.
And I can see the need for it, you know, the use of
that water.
 But, you know, I think, you know, you've just
got to be fair in that if a situation should arise,
then, you know, you guys have to address those
problems.  Now, David has brought up the situation
with other users within that aquifer.  Well, there's
only three right now.  There's the two wells in
Hamakua Poko.  The HC&S well in the gulch, which has
been there since 1890's, it pumps 6.5 million gallons
a day, and I've been there 20 years.  And there has
been no significant change in the chloride level.
That's a horrendous volume of water.
 
MR. CRADDICK:  What's the third one?
 
THE WITNESS:  Well, the third one is myself.
 
MR. CRADDICK:  But that guy, Blue Skylark or
whatever his name is.
 
MR. HOKOANA:  Well, he's on the other side of
the gulch up on the cliff.  If you're bringing up that
issue, that's something not only the Department and
myself have to look at, that's something we've got to
take to the State Water Commission.  Because I mean
effective right now, he's on the other side of the
gulch, and there's the Maliko Stream running down the
middle.  Now, I'm up what, 300 feet maybe, from the
ocean, and he's on the other side.  I mean, anybody
that -- I live there.  You know, so there's a lot of
water coming off of the banks.  If you go around that
point, there's a lot of water that just seeps right
out.  And that's, quite frankly, what I'm using.  I've
been raising taro for 20 years.
 So I mean I don't know how that can, you know,
that can impact me considering that he's on the point
and he's taking from something that's, you know, under
the streambed and on the other side of the gulch.  I
mean I guess that would be possible, but I think it's
unlikely.  And he's like 50 feet from the ocean.  He's
vertical.  So I mean there's no doubt, I can see the
concerns about, okay, if there's other players in the
area.  And that's something that not only the
Department has to monitor but I have to monitor as well.
 But as long as we remain the, so to speak,
players in that area, then I mean if -- I'm not sure
initially what you guys are going to pump out of that
two wells.  But, you know, I cannot -- and I already
know what -- well, I shouldn't say I already know,
because that's what HC&S is telling the State Water
Commission they're pumping.  Whether they go over
that, there's no way of knowing.
 I know I've been there 20 years, and there's
been no significant impact of chloride levels to me.
And here is the other thing.  I've been allowing the
Department in the past to monitor my well, so they
know pretty much and they've come and done
measurements at high tide, low tide, every which way
circumstances you can think of, and there hasn't been
a significant impact.
 But what I -- you know, like I said, actually,
I'm kind of tired of all of this.  And all I want to
do is establish an agreement that's fair and equitable
with the Board, so, you know, we can put this thing to
rest.  And I'm not -- you know, it's not something
that's going on for the next year and the next year
after.  I have no problems, like I said, on what you
guys draw to -- I don't care what you do at Hamakua
Poko as long as I'm not affected.  That's the bottom
line.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Any questions?  Mr. Starr.
 
MR. STARR:  You know, I'll tell you, I know
about that well, that HC&S well over there, and it's a
pretty big -- it's a pretty big shaft and well.  And I
see that it's drawing, you know, according to these
documents, 6.5.  I've heard that in the past it drew a
lot more, and I don't know.  I don't think any of us
know if over time there has been a reduction in water
levels or the -- a change in the transition zone over
by Maliko.  Where is the nearest test well, David?
 
MR. CRADDICK:  I would say there really is none
in the area.  When you say test well, you're talking
about something to monitor the salt water interface?
 
MR. STARR:  Yeah, transition zone, or how about head?
 
MR. CRADDICK:  The Hamakua Poko wells, we can
measure the head in them.
 
MR. STARR:  Has there been a tracking of the
head there?  They were drilled quite a while ago.
 
MR. CRADDICK:  We have a level monitoring right now.
 
MR. CHANG:  It's not working right now.  The
contractor is still installing that portion.
 
MR. STARR:  Do we know what the heads were when
they were drilled?
 
MR. CRADDICK:  It was about 5 feet.
 
MR. STARR:  And what are they now?
 
MR. CRADDICK:  Five feet.
 
MR. STARR:  So, in other words, over the last
ten years or so?
 
MR. CRADDICK:  We haven't really done any
pumping in the last year.
 
MR. STARR:  I'm not saying from us.  I was
curious to know if there was a general downward trend
there without us.
 
MR. CRADDICK:  I don't know about that, but I
know the fifth "whereas" there, we've been sampling
his well since 1991.  His was one of the wells that we
sampled in the area to see if there was DBCP in the
area before we drilled those wells, and there wasn't.
 
MR. HASHIMOTO:  So your property is above the
old Maeda property?
 
MR. HOKOANA:  Actually, at one time, my property
was the oceanfront property.  And then they built the
belt highway and I came mauka of the road.  Makai of
the road is the roping arena and the road that goes
down to the boat ramp.  And I have a well.  My
neighbors rely on a spring that's been there also
probably before the 1900's.  And that spring water
actually serves my neighbors.  That's their drinking
water.
 
MR. HASHIMOTO:  That's Mau?
 
MR. HOKOANA:  Godfrey Mau and the Awais and also
the Mitchell family.
 
MR. STARR:  Can we get a clarification exactly,
you know, what's being asked of us.  This is the first
time I've seen this matter.
 
MR. CRADDICK:  Good question.  Basically, what
we're doing is we're guaranteeing him his well won't
go bad.  If it does go bad, we'll give him domestic
service from our system.  And I guess, I don't know if
you're going to ask the next question, but if you
don't mind, I'll say why are we doing this?
 Well, I think more particularly to keep him out
of the EIS process, if you will.  I mean obviously, if
he was a partner in that EIS case, they would
definitely have some standing in the Maliko Gulch
area.
 
MR. HOKOANA:  Let me also say this.  I have also
been approached by those people to participate in the
East Maui Coalition or whatever they have it's called,
but I don't know -- in simple terms, I just want an
agreement in place that should I -- and these are
things that have to be monitored between the parties
that have the wells in the area that in the event
something, you know, there's a problem, either I can't
draw any water because the water level is dropped, or
the salinity level, it's never gone over 100 mgl, that
that triggers, you know, testing on a more -- I think
initially, it's what, monthly?  Then it goes to -- if
there's a change, then it goes to weekly.
 And then the process involves the Department and
myself to investigate why, you know, there's this
occurrence.  And the Water Department, the agreement
as it's written up will provide me with their pumping
records.  All my pumping records go to the State Water
Commission, which they have access to or I can give it
to them.  Obviously, if I double what I'm drawing,
then more than likely, I'm the guy whose probably the
culprit, okay.
 On the other hand, the Department is going to
initially say, "Okay, we're going to pump X amount --
a million gallons or whatever."  Then it goes up to 2
million, 3 million, maybe nothing happens.  Then it
goes to 5 million, and then all of the sudden, you
know, my chloride level starts to rise.
 Well, then we've got to look at that information
and say, "Okay, well, who has been drawing more water
out of this aquifer?"  At the same time, we've both
got to look at what HC&S is drawing and come to some
kind of a reasonable assumption as to what is it that
is causing this problem.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Mr. Nobriga, you had something to say?
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  Upon review of the document and
listening to Mr. Hokoana, it seems a very reasonable
document to enter into.  I would ask, of course, that
it be reviewed by Corporation Counsel to make sure
that we're not doing something that we're not supposed
to do just to protect the rights of the innocent, and
I would tend to support this.
 
MR. FUKUSHIMA:  If I may, Mr. Chairman.  We have
had the opportunity to review it.  We've had
conversations with the Department to make sure that
the Department could comply as far as the Department's
requirements under this agreement, that they could
comply and fulfill all the terms of the agreement that
they were responsible for, and it boiled down to a
matter of policy for the Board.
 We believe, and we would sign off as to legality
of this document, but it remains a question for the
Board as to whether, taking all the facts and
circumstances into consideration, whether there was an
appropriate agreement to enter into.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Mr. Craddick.
 
MR. CRADDICK:  One other thing.  We basically,
when we got our well permit from the Water Commission,
it basically says that if we affect anybody else's
water use, their remedy is to cut back consumption of
our well.  And that's why I recommend this to the
Board because if the Water Commission said cut back,
you know, would it be simply for us to give him a
service or cut back our consumption?  Obviously, it
would be simply for us to give him a service if that's
the case.  It has complicated things a little bit with
the other guy drilling the well, but his usage I think
is on the order of magnitude of Mr. Hokoana's.
 
MR. STARR:  What's the use, how much are you using?
 
MR. HOKOANA:  What I'm using, about 15,000
gallons a month.
 
MR. STARR:  I wouldn't have any problem with this.
 
MR. FUKUSHIMA:  That's his irrigation needs.
 
MR. HOKOANA:  Yeah, I mean, but, you know,
that's why.  I mean look at what I'm using and what
you guys going to take, fifty million gallons.  And
see, the very first meeting that I had with Dave, he
told me, you know, that, "Okay, I don't know why
you're here because there is case law which says that
if you are downstream and you're affected, then we
have to stop pumping."
 The problem with that is that I have to be
affected before I can take an action.  Meanwhile,
I'm -- my house, we got salt water until I go get an
attorney and then fight the Department and then maybe
get some relief six months, a year down the road.  You
know, what I want is an agreement in place beforehand
so that, you know, I'm not in a situation where I'm
affected and then I suffer through the interim period
of going through all the expense and everything else
of having to fight the Department.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Mr. Nakamura.
 
MR. NAKAMURA:  Mr. Chairman, I'm still a little
confused.  So this agreement, this is an agreement
that was submitted by Mr. Hokoana that is asking --
and the Department does not quite agree with, or is it
an agreement that is mutually agreeable to both parties?
 
MR. HOKOANA:  This agreement actually
came through many years of discussions.  Then they
came to us with a Memorandum of Understanding, gave it
to me.  I did my stuff.  I gave it back to the staff.
They did their thing, went to Corp Counsel, went
everywhere else and then came back to me.
 
MR. CRADDICK:  Ten years later.
 
MR. NAKAMURA:  So everybody, you and the
Department are happy with it, and you want the Board
to sign off on it?
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Is that what you want?  Is it
okay with you, this agreement with you?
 
MR. HOKOANA:  Yeah, I mean that's why I said if
there's some fine tuning that needs to be done here,
well, let's get it done.  Because it's been years
already in dealing with this.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Mr. Hokoana, so you also have an
agreement with HC&S because I believe their well is
closer to your well that it might be affected?
 
MR. HOKOANA:  That's why it's kind of amazing,
and probably, I don't know, they have Tom Nance who is
hydrologist or whatever he is, he called me.  He went
up there and he told me when that pump comes on, it
goes from fresh water to salt water almost
instantaneously.  That's the volume.
 
MR. STARR:  That water is brackish.
 
MR. HOKOANA:  Yeah.  But now that's been in
operation from before 1900.  I've been there 20
years.  They have the records on my chloride level.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  My question is you monitor your
chloride level and give it to the Commission of Water
Resource Management?
 
MR. HOKOANA:  Yeah, the pumpage, and I assume
HC&S does the same.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  But you don't have any question
as to if you do increase your water use, the
Department might --
 
MR. HOKOANA:  Well, the Department came back in
one of these drafts that they wanted to limit me to 10
percent.  I said, well, I'm not limiting the
Department.  Why they going to limit me to 10
percent?  If you both want to agree to a limitation,
that's fine with me.  But I'm not telling them that,
"Hey, you know, you've got to pump only a certain
amount and that's it."  I mean, you know, I think this
thing to me is fair and equitable.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  Mr. Chairman, I make a motion to
recommend me to the Board that we accept the
Memorandum of Understanding to Mr. Hokoana.
 
MR. STARR:  Second.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  It's been moved to recommend to
the full Board that there is some MOU will be
approved, and it's been seconded by Mr. Starr.  Any
further discussion, Members?
 
(No response.)
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Seeing none --
 
MR. HOKOANA:  Thank you very much.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  We have to make a vote.  Those
in favor of the motion, say aye.
 
VOICES:  Aye.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Opposed?
 
(No response.)
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Carried.
 
MR. NAKAMURA:  Mr. Hokoana, after this I would
like to talk to you a little bit because my
grandparents used to live in Maliko Gulch across from
the old chicken farm.
 
MR. HOKOANA:  Actually, your grandparents
probably lived on the property that is now the
Mitchell's property.
 
MR. NAKAMURA:  They were on the Paia side of the river.
 
MR. HOKOANA:  Spring.  Because A&B, apparently
they had done an exchange.  This I got from my
neighbor who passed away, Tony Mitchell, Anthony
Mitchell.  And he told me that he had acquired the fee
in that by giving up some land further out in Haiku
that was in alignment of one of the ditches that EMI
wanted to put in.
 
MR. NAKAMURA:  Anyway.
 
MR. HOKOANA:  Yeah, so anyway.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Good luck.
 
MR. HOKOANA:  Thank you.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Next item on the agenda, Item F,
Board of Water Supply's Rules and Regulation for
review, comment and amendments determined by the
Board.  What's the pleasure of the Members of the
Committee?
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  Rewrite the whole thing and
putting all our little nuances involved in today's
world, change family subdivision from two to three
lots.
 
MR. CRADDICK:  It is three lots right now.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  Family subdivision?  Rule 2-12,
2-16, my daddy's one?
 
MR. CRADDICK:  Yeah.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  From one to three lots?  No, one
to two, huh?
 
MR. CRADDICK:  One to three.
 
MR. STARR:  Mr. Chair, I think we do need to
create a mechanism for a complete and total rewrite of
the rules.  And, you know, the question is whether we
need to, you know, do anything immediately as it
relates to the form of the present rules because I
know there has been some question over whether they
were initially adopted or not some years back.
 And it might actually behoove us to actually
adopt the current rules and just start working on a
review of them because I have some information to the
fact that the current rules may have never been
properly adopted.  So maybe a fresh start might be to
make sure that the current rules are at least intact
and then just start to work on a rewrite of them.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Anymore discussion on these rules?
 
MR. CRADDICK:  Do you understand what he's --
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  I did understand.  It's a whole
revamp of all the rules and regulations that we have.
 
MR. CRADDICK:  No.  What happened was the rules
were approved by the Board in 1977.  It went under the
County.  They were approved as ordinances under the
County.  It went out from under the County.  The
County took it out of the ordinances.  Are these rules
that were approved in 1977 currently rules approved
through the Charter approved processes of approving them?
 Now, Corp Counsel has gone through this thing
from the get-go.  I think their recommendation to us
is they are valid because it even cites our rules in
the County Code, Maui County Code.
 
MR. STARR:  Can I -- I would like to ask for a
written opinion from Corporation Counsel on whether
our rules are in fact intact.
 
MR. FUKUSHIMA:  Send the request up, and I'll comply.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Anymore discussion, Members?
 
MR. STARR:  Yeah, we need to create a mechanism
to rewrite the rules.  We might want to bring the next
Chair into this, how to create a mechanism for -- you
know, I would be willing to spend a little time, I
know Mr. Nobriga has put a lot of time into it, and we
should certainly piggyback on the work he's already done.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Mr. Nakamura.
 
MR. NAKAMURA:  Perhaps the Committee should
recommend to the Board, you know, that the Board
review how best to undertake a review of the rules and
regulations, rules and regs.  Perhaps as Jonathan has
suggested, have the new Chairman become involved in
what that process should be.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Mr. Nobriga.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  I found extreme value and
workability in the process that was introduced to us
by Howard Nakamura on developing strategic planning.
I feel a process similar to that may be the best way
for us to locate this whole area of rules and
regulations by formulating one workshop, first of all,
understanding what we have now.
 Because I think a lot of us don't really
understand what we already have.  There is a lot of
ambiguity in place.  If you can just brainstorm and
work through a process where it's not on the last part
of the agenda of a long day, but start fresh.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  That's good.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  I would appreciate it.  Thanks.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Anymore discussion?
 
(No response.)
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Okay.  So recommendation of this
Committee would be to do a workshop, something like that.
 
MR. STARR:  I think it's --
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  And include the new Chairman.
 
MR. STARR:  I think it would be that the Board
create a process to do a complete review of the rules
and that it be done with a working group's
workshop-type setting and, you know, as we go through
the process.
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  We don't need a motion for
that.  Okay.  Anymore discussion?
 
(No response.)
 
CHAIR TAGORDA:  Seeing none, this meeting is adjourned.
 
(The meeting concluded at 2:30 p.m.)
 
IWADO COURT REPORTERS, INC.