BOARD OF WATER SUPPLY
COUNTY OF MAUI
REGULAR MEETING


 
Taken at the HGEA Conference Room, David K. Trask, Jr. Office
Building, 2145 Kaohu Street, Room 207, Wailuku, Maui, Hawaii,
commencing at 9:00 a.m., on June 28, 2001.
 
REPORTED BY:  JEANNETTE W. IWADO, RPR/CSR #135
IWADO COURT REPORTERS, INC.
 
A T T E N D A N C E
CHAIRPERSON:                   
PETER RICE
 
BOARD MEMBERS:                 
ADOLPH HELM
MICHAEL NOBRIGA
JONATHAN STARR
ORLANDO TAGORDA
 
DIRECTOR                       
DAVID CRADDICK
 
DEPUTY DIRECTOR                
GEORGE TENGAN
 
DEPUTY CORPORATION COUNSEL:    
HOWARD FUKUSHIMA
 
BOARD SECRETARY:               
FRAN NAGO
 
FISCAL OFFICER:                
MICHAEL QUINN
 
ENGINEERING:                   
HERBERT KOGASAKA
ALAN MURATA

STAFF:                         
ELLEN KRAFTSOW
HOLLY PERDIDO
 
IWADO COURT REPORTERS, INC.
 
TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
BOARD OF WATER SUPPLY
REGULAR MEETING
JUNE 28, 2001, 9:00 A.M.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Welcome, everyone.  The meeting of
the Board of Water Supply, June 28, 2001 is called to order.
David Trask Building, room 207.  Present Director, Board
members Mike Nobriga, Jonathan Starr, Adolph Helm, Orlando
Tagordo, myself, Peter Rice, Corp Counsel Howard Fukushima, and
staff.  Let the record reflect that the staff is present and
the members of the public who are present.
 Welcome, everyone.  The fourth of July weekend and
the holiday is almost upon us, so have fun, be safe, and we
will get you out of here quickly so that you can start your
holiday, hopefully.
 The first item on the agenda is the approval of
minutes.  We have copies of April 26, May 17, and May 24.  Have
the Board members had a chance to take a look at those?
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  Mr. Chair, I move that we receive the
minutes of April 26, May 17 and May 24 subject to the 30 day
review, at which time if there are no additions, corrections,
or deletions, they shall stand filed.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  There's a motion on the table.  Is there a second?
 
MR. TAGORDA:  I second.  Point of clarification,
Mr. Chair.  Did he mention the minutes on the 4/26/01?
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Yes.  There's a motion that the
minutes be accepted and filed for further review, and if there
are no comments that they be received after 30 days.  Is there
any discussion on that motion?  All in favor say "aye."
(A chorus of ayes).
Opposed say "nay."
(None).
The motion is carried.  Is there testimony from the
public at this time?  Or if you choose to testify at the time
that an issue is brought up, we can do it that way.  Very good,
we will move along on the agenda.  Director's Report 01-22,
request approval and acceptance of the deed for the Piilani 2.0
million gallon water tank lot and the right of entry.
 Members of the Board, this item is general
housekeeping, it's been ongoing to quite awhile. Rather than
refer this to committee and further delay it, I would request
that the Board approve it subject to the final review by Corp
Counsel.  Mr. Starr?
 
MR. STARR:  I second.  I'd also like to make sure
that the Chair review it to its satisfaction as well.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Okay.  Mr. Quinn?
 
MR. QUINN:  Mr. Chair, there is in the Director's
Report a dollar item of $8,910, and upon Board approval that
will come out of the facilities portion of the CIP budget for
land acquisition.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Thank you, Mr. Quinn.  Okay, there's
a motion and a second that the request be approved subject to
review by Corp Counsel and the Chairman.  Is there any
discussion on this?  All in favor say "aye."
(A chorus of ayes).
Opposed say "nay."
(None).
Motion carried.  So moved.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  The next 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Director's
Reports relate to the budget, and I will, unless there is
objection by one of the Board members, refer those to
discussion under the budget portion of this meeting.  Is there
any objection to that?  Very good, so ordered.
 We are down to Communications, 01-21, request from
Hans Michel for completion of the agreement from June 3, 1994.
Is Mr. Michel present?  He's not.  I would refer that to the
Finance Committee, unless there's some objection.  So ordered.
 Communication 01-22, request from -- it's really
from Tom Welch on behalf of John Elder for a waiver of fire
protection requirements.  Is anyone here, John Elder, Tom
Welch?  No?  I refer that to the Oversight Committee.  Is there
any objection?  So ordered.
 
MR. CRADDICK:  Peter, if I could interrupt for one
second?  On Hans Michel's I'm not quite sure what the financial
ramifications are on this thing here.  I don't think there's
any financial implications on these.  There's an agreement that we --
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  He's asking for some things to be
done, is he not?
 
MR. CRADDICK:  Yes, he is.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Well, we can leave it there for now.
 
MR. CRADDICK:  Okay.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  I don't hear any objections at this
time.  Okay, we have Communication 01-23 from Michele and Chris
Reed regarding ownership of a water meter.  Is anyone here?  No
one from that.  We are going to refer that to Oversight also.
If there's no objection, so ordered.
 Okay, we have committee reports, Capital Programs
Committee.  The report is in your packet from Capital Committee
Chair Howard Nakamura, and that committee -- Howard is on
vacation.  That committee is dealing with two Director reports,
01-14.  I believe the Board might want to take these up
separately, the recommendations of the Capital Improvements
Committee.
 01-14 is request approval of funds for the
construction of Kapaakea Waterline replacement, Molokai, and
the committee is recommending approval of an appropriation to
be funded from the pipeline replacement.  And then should the
funds not be encumbered, the committee recommends that the
project be included in fiscal year 2002.
 
MR. TAGORDA:  Mr. Chair, I move that we approve the
committee recommendation on Director's Report 01-14.
 
MR. HELM:  Second.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Any discussion, gentlemen?  All in
favor say "aye."
(A chorus of ayes).
Opposed say "nay."
(None).
 Approved.  Director's 01-18, request for decision on
service options for the Ulupalakua line.  The committee is
recommending that a consultant be retained to prepare a
preliminary engineering plan.
 
MR. TAGORDA:  Mr. Chair, I would like that this
Board defer this item until Mr. Nakamura can attend, because I
have a lot of questions about his recommendation.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Any other comments, Board members?
 
MR. STARR:  Yes, I also feel that the Board should
provide a little bit more direction if we're going to send it
off to a consultant.  I think we should give a little more
direction on that because the consultant can go and replace a
2-inch or put in a 12-inch or whatever.  I think we should give
a little more --
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Okay, then we will defer the action
on this until the next meeting when Mr. Nakamura is present.
If there's no objection, then so ordered.
 
MR. TAGORDA:  Thank you, Mr. Chair.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Oversight Committee.  Mike?
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Communication 01-16 and Communication 01-17 were heard by the
Oversight Committee.  The Applicant's two communications were
asking for the department's assistance in setting up
requirements in order to consolidate lots.  The committee felt
that the department would best determine what the appropriate
requirements were for these two proposed subdivisions, and
after receiving these requirements if the Applicant wishes to
waive them at that time it would be appropriate for him to come
before the Board to the request waivers of some sort.  So there
is no action required on Communication 01-16 or 01-17.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Okay.  Counsel is recommending that
there be a motion to file.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  So moved, to file these Communications.
 
MR. TAGORDA:  I second.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Discussion?  All in favor say "aye."
(A chorus of ayes).
Opposed say "nay."
(None).
Okay, Mike.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  Mr. Chairman, Communication 01-19,
request from Paul Horikawa on behalf of Mr and Mrs. Robert
Fevella.  The Department has withdrawn the requirements, and no
action was required.  Move that Communication 01-19 be filed.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Is there a second?
 
MR. TAGORDA:  Second.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Discussion?  All in favor say "aye."
(A chorus of ayes).
Opposed say "nay."
(None).
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  Communication 01-18, Request from
Deborah A. Von Tempsky. The Applicant wishes to defer this item
until the next meeting.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  So ordered, deferred.  Go ahead, Mike.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  Communication 01-11, request from a
Katie Romanchuk.  The committee deferred action on this matter,
because we felt that there was no action required of the Board
at this time.  The Applicant has not actively initiated
anything, and there is nothing that we can do for her at this
time.  So we respectfully move that Communication 01-11 be filed.
 
MR. TAGORDA:  Second.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Discussion?  All in favor say "aye."
(A chorus of ayes).
Opposed say "nay."
(None).
Motion carried, filed.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  Communication 01-05, request from an
Anthony Amaral, Sr., for a water meter for agricultural land.
The committee felt that the request was for irrigation and
livestock, and Mr. Amaral would like to proceed with the
request to Waiakoa Road Homestead Association, which is a
quasi-public-private system.  The Waiakoa Road Homestead
Association is limited by the department on adding additional
users.
 Your committee requests a legal opinion to be
written concerning the department's jurisdiction with limiting
use of a water meter.  Since the department does not limit
other users in this area on maximum thresholds for their
meters, how could it be that the department discriminated
against this case?  This matter is deferred until there is time
to discuss this with legal counsel.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Okay, any objection from the members
of the Board?  It's deferred.  Okay, we are going to move on to
the Finance Report.  First, Director's Report 01-13, request
approval to write off uncollectable accounts.  The committee
recommends approval, and it should be noted that the
uncollectable accounts were substantially less than last year,
which was already low.  And I would just pass on the kudos to
the department for their collection procedures.  Mike?
 
MR. QUINN:  Just to note that the dollar amount was
$9,644.72, for the record.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  Mr. Chairman, I move to accept
approval of the request to write off uncollectables.
 
MR. STARR:  Second.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Moved and seconded.  Discussion?
All in favor say "aye."
(A chorus of ayes)
Opposed say "nay."
(None).
Motion carries.  Directors 01-15, request for fiscal
year budget amendments for electricity expense.  The department
is requesting a budget increase of $700,000, which represents
13 percent over the current budget.  The principle reason for
the increase is the increase in fuel cost and pumping costs,
and the committee recommends approval.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  Mr. Chairman, I move that the Board
approve the recommendation to increase the budget to reflect
this $700,000.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Is there a second?
 
MR. TAGORDA:  I second.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Discussion?  All in favor say "aye."
(A chorus of ayes).
Opposed say "nay."
(None).
 The next one is Directors Request 01-16 was to
acquire an outside recruitment service for the position of
Engineering Program Manager.  The committee thinks there's
other alternatives, and refers this back to the Director's
office.
 01-17, request authorization to provide leak
insurance as a customer service to customers.  The committee
said there's definite interest in this, there was no action
needed, and informed the department to move ahead to prepare
information for the Board's review.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  Mr. Chairman, I would like to move
that we file Director's Report 01-16 and Director's Report
01-17.
 
MR. STARR:  Second.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Motion and a second to file those
two Director's Reports.  Any discussion?  All in favor say
"aye."
(A chorus of ayes).
Opposed say "nay."
(None).
 Motion carried.  Next page, Director's 01-19,
request approval of the Memorandum of Understanding for the
Lanai Forest and Watershed Partnership and for the Board to
agree to join the partnership.  The committee discussed this.
It does not commit the Department or the Board financially.  We
think it's important to continue to protect our watershed and
be part of these organizations.  We recommend approval.
 Coincidentally with that is the request to accept
$50,000 as a pass-through grant from the State Department of
Health for the Lanai Watershed Restoration Project, and again
for the same reasons, the committee is recommending approval of
both.
 
MR. STARR:  Mr. Chair, I move for approval of
Director's Reports 19 and 20.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  Second that motion, Mr. Chairman.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  There's a motion and a second to
approve Directors 01-19 and 01-20.  Any discussion?  All in
favor signify by saying "aye."
(A chorus of ayes).
Opposed say "nay."
(None).
 Motion carried.  Communication 01-14, request from
Dale Merritt on behalf of Kea Lani Hotel for a billing
adjustment.  It appears that this has been resolved internally
by the Department, or will continue to be discussed
internally.  No action is needed.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  Mr. Chair, move to file Communication 01-14.
 
MR. TAGORDA:  Second.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Moved and seconded.  All in favor say "aye."
(A chorus of ayes).
All opposed say "nay."
 Motion carried.  Request from David Meyer for a
water bill adjustment.  Is Mr. Meyer here?  The committee
reviewed Mr. Meyer's letter and spoke to staff and the
Director.  We checked for accuracy in the billing, meter
problems, Scada problems, and it appears that there is no
compelling reason for the water bill adjustment.  The committee
recommends denial of the request.
 
MR. STARR:  Mr. Chair, I move to deny Communication 01-20.
 
MR. TAGORDA:  Second.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  There's a motion to deny the request
for a water bill adjustment, duly seconded.  Any discussion?
All in favor signify by saying "aye."
(A chorus of ayes).
All opposed say "nay."
(None).
 Mr. Patel's request for ag rates, Communication
01-10, was deferred by the committee due to Mr. Patel being out
of town, so it will continue to be in committee.  We are going
to move on to Operations Review Committee.  Mr. Starr?
 
MR. STARR:  I guess there are two items relating to
the Water Use and Development Plan.  The first relates to the
facilitation and related services contract.
 (Addressing Ellen Kraftsow)  Is that why you're
here?  Can you refresh our memory about these two contracts?
 
MS. KRAFTSOW:  There are two items that we brought.
One was the facilitation contract, which is both through the
facilitation services as we had been using them, and also for
the increased public process requirements.  Under the state IRP
framework, there's some large process requirements.  This would
not only be --
 
MS. NAGO:  Ellen, would you come up and sit here, please?
 
(Brief interruption in the proceedings).
 
MS. KRAFTSOW:  Okay, the first contract is a
facilitation contract for helping to run the meetings as well
as for helping to define and write up the public process to
meet the requirements under the statewide framework.  The
second contract is also the subject of another request to the
Board.  They were expanded specs to improve and facilitate and
expedite the Water Use and Development Plan.
 So I guess the item that we are on is the first
contract for facilitation, which would be facilitation services
but also includes, as I said, write-up of the public process.
 
MR. STARR:  What's the status of it?
 
MS. KRAFTSOW:  The contract has been reviewed by
Corporation Counsel, and it's before you for approval.
 
MR. STARR:  So we are being asked to approve the
contract.  Now, is Corp Counsel satisfied with it?
 
MR. CRADDICK:  Are we talking about item A or B?
There is no contract with item A, that's just --
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Item B.
 
MR. CRADDICK:  That's Director's Report 01-26.

MR. STARR:  Yes, item B.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  That's the facilitation related
services contract.
 
MR. CRADDICK:  Which is Director's Report 01-26.
 
MR. STARR:  01-26.
 
MR. CRADDICK:  For $36,000.
 
MR. STARR:  So we don't have that here in our
packet, in today's packet?

CHAIRMAN RICE:  We do.
 
MS. KRAFTSOW:  It's item D(1), and it's also
Director's Report 01-26 on page 33.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  And the agreement is for a sum not
to exceed $36,000, and the funds would be appropriated from --
 
MS. KRAFTSOW:  Professional services from the line item.
 
MR. STARR:  Mr. Chair, I move for approval of this contract.
 
MR. TAGORDA:  Second.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Okay, it's been moved and seconded
that the contract that you have in your packet starting at page
33 for facilitation and related services for the update of the
Water Use and Development Plan be approved.  Is there any
discussion?
 
MR. HELM:  Yes, I'm just curious.  The contract to
hire a facilitator for this, I think part of what I read in
here is it's his job to appointment a Water Advisory
Committee?
 
MS. KRAFTSOW:  No, we have one.
 
MR. HELM:  It's already existing.
 
MS. KRAFTSOW:  He's supposed to work with them.
 
MR. HELM:  Thank you.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Any other questions?  All in favor
signify by saying "aye."
(A chorus of ayes).
Opposed say "nay."
(None).
The motion is carried.  Okay, go ahead.
 
MR. STARR:  Ellen, the second item, what's the status of it?
 
MS. KRAFTSOW:  The second item the bid opening was
postponed to the 15th because there was additional interest in
bidding, so the bid opened on the 15th.  We received three
proposals from two consultants, and we reviewed each of the
consultants and each of the proposals separately and came up
with a recommended proposal, but we're still negotiating with
the contractor to come up with a recommended contract.
 And the recommended proposal actually is a proof our
original budget, so there's another request before the Board to
move the remaining funds under the professional services item
from 2001 into the 2002 budget and augment it.  So our request
is actually just to make an allocation in the fiscal year 2002
budgets, and we'd like to bring the contract to you in the July
meeting, hopefully.
 
MR. CRADDICK:  That's item Director's Report 01-24,
and that can be handled under the budget.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  I think so.
 
MR. STARR:  So we don't need a motion.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  No, we will deal with it under the budget.
 
MR. STARR:  That's fine.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Okay, thank you, Jonathan.  Thank
you, Ellen.
 We had Other Business, and the first item is the
budget.  Actually, if there are no objections from the Board
members, let's take a few of the other items and finish with
the budget.  There may be some substantial discussion.
Mr. Nobriga?
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  Mr. Chair, the agenda is noted to say
fiscal year 2001.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  2, yes.
 
MR. QUINN:  It should be 2002.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  Sounds like a plan, thanks.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Okay.  The legislative report is
attached for your review.  My comment, David, would be that the
report be segmented so that it would be a little bit easier to
understand.  There is a bunch of proposed bills that were
referred back to the next year's legislative session, and it's
all mixed up with those that were approved.  I think what's
important for the Board is to see a recap of the legislation
that was approved and sent to the Governor for signing, and
ultimately at this point, if any have been signed, and that the
information that we get about other bills as referred to next
year be kept in a separate report.
 That would be my recommendation for the future,
because it's a lot of information here, and you really want to
I think focus on those bills that have been passed.

MR. TAGORDA:  Mr. Chair, in addition to what you
just said, in this legislative report if the department or the
Director does want to give a written testimony on these
legislative items, if we can, I'd like to request a copy of
those written testimonies.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Sure.
 
MR. TAGORDA:  Thank you.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Absolutely.  Yes, David?
 
MR. CRADDICK:  Does that affect future legislation,
or are you talking about the ones on this past one?
 
MR. TAGORDA:  Those that you provided testimony on
this legislative item.  I don't think you did all of these
items.  You provided testimony -- only those legislative items
that you provided, I need a copy.
 
MR. CRADDICK:  Okay.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  I think that's probably a good
practice, that as we provide testimony that the copies be sent
to the Board members, just in case they are approached by
legislators, or in any other capacity, they have an opportunity
to discuss something.  It might be good to be aware.
 
MR. CRADDICK:  I guess what's been happening, we
were working with Clark because he was the legislative liaison,
and what he did with the information, we didn't go on from
there.  But we basically worked with Clark.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Okay, anything else on the
legislative report?  Possible amendments to the County
Charter.  On page 100 there's a draft of a letter that was
prepared by David.  Following that draft is the request from
Terryl Vencl, who is the Chair of the Charter Commission of
Maui County, asking for the Board's comments with regard to the
Charter review.  I felt that it was important that the Board
have a chance to review this letter and to have any other
comments be made.  Are there any comments about this?  Mr. Starr?
 
MR. STARR:  Yes, Mr. Chair and members.  I have very
strong feelings on this point, and I understand that there's a
strong possibility that my own feelings are those of a
minority, possibly only one member.  But I actually feel that
the way the Board is structured now is not a good way of doing
business.  I feel that the responsibility has grown so large,
because in a sense what we're doing is almost controlling all
of the future growth and development on the island, even though
we don't want to be doing that.  But the ramifications do cause
that to happen, yet we don't have the authority to be able to
go and do what we need to do to be able to afford to build the
systems and maintain the systems in the shape that we want.
 And frankly, we are amateurs at doing this.  We're
volunteers, and a lot of us are putting in quite a bit of
time.  And there's certainly a lot of smart people and
dedicated people on the Board putting in time.  But I really
feel that we're doing -- we tend to be doing jobs that are
maybe best left for the people who are professional in nature.
 And so my own real feeling is that the Board should
-- either one of two things should happen.  Either it should
be under the administration so it's handled as an
administrative department, with the Board there more for
oversight and for advisory capacity the way other boards and
commissions are, but there's still the accountability chain up
through the administration, or else it should be made a
separate say like a government corporation model.
 At the recent convention, I was at several seminars
where they discussed several models, and there were
overnmental corporations where it's handled as a corporation,
even though it's still government owned, and there were
professional directors and they have almost complete say over
their budget.  And they get, you know, they're paid for their
time and they're responsible directly for their actions.  And
they would be able to set rates under PUC control, as would a
department under the administration.
 But as I say, you know, I don't know if this is any
other -- if any other members share this belief or not, but
those are my own feelings on this matter.
 
MR. TAGORDA:  Mr. Chairman, I would be talking as a
Board Member.  When I too make my recommendation to the Charter
Commission I will talk individually, because I think there's a
need for this department to be, like I say, to serve as a
public utility.  My experience as a Board Member for four years
now, I believe the structure should be changed.  My thinking is
that I would like to recommend that this department doesn't go
under the Mayor, but it does go under our elected officials,
like the Councilmembers and the Mayor, in equal footing,
thereby there's more accountability.
 I'm not trying to say that the Board members should
not be created, it should be created to share decision making
with the Councilmembers.  And I am not through yet with this
concept.  But as soon as I get to that structure I will share
my idea with my colleagues, Mr. Chair.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Thank you, Orlando.  Do you want to
say something, David?
 
MR. CRADDICK:  Well, there's a number of points
here, and I think the points that Jonathan brought up and
Orlando are really covered in here.  I don't think we're taking
any position one way or the other, we're just saying that,
first of all, it needs to be clarified when it says the water
department is in charge of all water in the County, it needs to
be clarified what "all water" means, because we've got
wastewater, storm water, the parks running their system.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Let's take them one at a time.  Does
anybody have any problem with that?  Okay, then the next
paragraph, David, Charter.
 
MR. CRADDICK:  This one goes into the revenue and
how you get that approved, and the suggestion is also in there
that you could have PUC approval of it, but it would require a
change of state law to do that.  So just by putting it in the
Charter I am not certain you could change state law.  So you
would have to change the state law along with it.

CHAIRMAN RICE:  Does anyone have a problem with that?
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  Yes. I don't believe the PUC is a
nonpolitical group.  I think even we as a board and body are in
some way connected to politics.  Politics is just a way of life
already.  Right now the revenue structure of the department
under the current situation, any fees we level still has to go
back to the Mayor and to the County Council, being
semi-autonomous.  To be really effective as a utility we would
need to be the sole decision makers.  I would recommend looking
at an autonomous system.  That's one possibility.  It's a good
discussion.
 
MR. CRADDICK:  I think this covers that also.  It's
covered either way, saying that these are just the things that
need to be looked at.  We are not actually advocating any
position in these comments here, we are just saying that these
policy issues need to be discussed.
 
MR. STARR:  I don't like this letter, I feel it's
vague and kind of meandering.
 
MR. CRADDICK:  It is vague, it's meant to be vague.
 
MR. STARR:  It doesn't really serve any purpose.  I
think if we do put in comments they should be decisive
comments, and whether we can come to a decisive direction, you
know, I'm not sure.  But I don't like to just throw something
in their lap that's just going to kind of wiggle around and
not, you know, really say anything.
 As far as the paragraph one though, I do feel that
the department should be in charge of wastewater, and in most
municipalities, most places around the US and the world it's
one department that handles water and wastewater.  And as
technology improves and as water becomes scarcer, the two
systems are showing a trend of actually growing closer together.
 I do feel that we would be in a much better position
to market wastewater and to integrate it into the use of the
system, and maybe at some point even be involved with the
agricultural water systems, you know, and the ditch water and
so on throughout the County.  So you know, if we did have
something like this paragraph one, I would go for a strong
statement that the Department of Water Supply should be the
entity that is responsible for all different varieties and
qualities of water treatment and supply, and that includes
wastewater treatment and wastewater distribution as well.
 
MR. CRADDICK:  How about the storm water?
 
MR. STARR:  I haven't really thought about it, but
that's a good point, because it is a source of water that other
municipalities do tap and use.  Water is going to get a lot
scarcer and, you know, those alternative ways of collecting
storm water might be something we might want to do at some point.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Okay, does everyone agree with
that?  Back to paragraph one, we change to be more assertive in
terms of --
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  I think each one of us has the
opportunity and the responsibility to communicate directly with
the Charter Commission.  I think as a board and as an entity
our own house is not totally in order.  So unless we can
straighten our own house, we should be very careful of how much
stones we throw at the other glass house across the way, huh?
We have enough stuff for us to worry about.  Our rules are
antiquated, we're unable to deliver water to customers now.  We
have serious demand capacities in the Central area, yet most of
our attention on drought has been focused on the Upcountry
area, and we have actually more water Upcountry than we have in
Central to give out.  So we have a whole mess of stuff that we
have to take care of ourselves.  So I'll be very reluctant in
making this draft from the department too specific.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Okay.  Mr. Starr?
 
MR. STARR:  I think there's a lot of validity in
what was just said and perhaps, you know, the best thing for us
to do is, I know I certainly am going to go and put my comments
in as a private individual, you know.  And if they take it that
I have some expertise in this matter, or maybe that I don't,
that's up to them.  But I know I'm certainly going to put my
two cents in, and it sounds like some other Board members are
going to as well.
 Perhaps the best thing would be for us to simply
send a letter saying that the Board members will be commenting
as individuals, rather than taking a joint position.  I think
that may make more sense.
 
MR. TAGORDA:  I agree.  I think it's futile,
Mr. Chair, especially I just told you that I am not going to
advocate anything as a Board member.  I will put my two cents
on the Charter Commission as an individual.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Mr. Craddick?
 
MR. CRADDICK:  This letter that's in here is a
request directly to me to respond to the Charter Commission,
not from the Board.  I know the Board got a separate letter on
their own, and if that's the Board's decision, if they can come
to any decision here today.  I know it would be much more
powerful to go as a group with some recommendation, but I still
need to respond to this letter from the Charter Commission
myself.
 That's specifically why I made my letter a little
bit more nebulous.  I didn't really want to take a position, if
the Board took some other position.  I'm just saying these are
the items that need to be clarified in the Charter, and I don't
say one way or the other, up or down, I just say they need to
be clarified.
 
MR. HELM:  Chairman Rice, what's the timeline in
this, are we required to --
 
MR. CRADDICK:  Monday.
 
MR. STARR:  Mr. Chair, I certainly think that Mr.
Craddick should be welcome to submit his own personal views on
the matter, as the rest of us will, but I think he should make
them clear that they're his personal views as one individual,
and not representing the Board or this entity as a whole.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Okay, I seem to be hearing some
consensus as to the right to express individual opinions on
this, and we will not be writing a letter from the Board.  Is
that right?  Do we need any motion to that effect, David?
 
MR. STARR:  I think we should out of courtesy write
a letter saying that we're not writing a letter.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Of course, that we expect
individuals to testify or communicate individually.
 
MS. KRAFTSOW:  Yesterday I was in Molokai at the
Planning Commission, and the Deputy Director of Planning
mentioned that the Planning Commission was also invited to
submit their comments, and the Molokai Planning Commission, and
he mentioned that he thought the deadline was going to be
extended.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Well, that is somewhat irrelevant if
we're going to testify individually.  Mr. Craddick?
 
MR. CRADDICK:  I think this is an important enough
item to where the Board should as a whole take some position,
whether they supply that July 2nd or not.  I mean I would hope
maybe you could carry it on or refer it to one of the
committees or something for more discussion.  But I really
think that it's not going to go over very well if you have got
the Board all scattered.
 I think there should be some discussion, maybe in
the Committee of the Whole with the Board on this item.  And
the items that you can't come to a consensus on, just don't
come to a consensus.  But if there are any that you can come to
a consensus on, I think you would do well by the Charter
Commission if you could come to a consensus on anything.
Because if they see disarray, then what Mike is talking about
is probably correct.  If they see some consensus that comes out
of the Board, then I think that has a very substantial affect
on them.
 
MR. STARR:  Well, I will comment that I don't think
there's that much disarray.  I think that a lot of our feelings
are running in the same direction, but I think that, you know,
I for one would prefer to have the ability to express it in my
own voice, which I then can do in a way that, you know, is
stronger and unfettered, and I don't have to worry about
stepping on anyone else's toes.  I'd like to continue in the
direction we discussed.  And do we need a motion on that?
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  No, I don't think so.  What do the
rest of the Board members think?
 
MR. TAGORDA:  Well, I'd like to go individual,
Mr. Chair, not as a Board Member.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  I think it's important that if the
members of the Board testify, they're testifying as
individuals.  And I mean actually I agree with David in some
respects.  If we had some agreement on issues, it would not be
bad to communicate those as a body, and there could be a
discussion in the future with a committee.  We are not going to
have any discussion or a committee meeting before July 2nd.  So
to the extent that comments, the deadline for comments is
extended, then possibly that could happen.
 
MR. CRADDICK:  Mr. Chair, I understand the process
to be that if they have sent these out to the various County
departments, once they've got that, they're going to go to the
community input to whatever was put in.  So again, whether the
July 2nd deadline is really that, or you got them in when you
could, it still wouldn't preclude any individual Board member
to go talk as an individual.  But if there's anything that you
can come to a consensus on, I think it would help.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  At this point we are going to leave
this issue with, the Board members will be making testimony as
they determine is appropriate for themselves as citizens, and
that we will consider another meeting to talk about issues that
we might be able to agree on as a whole.  Okay?  No objection?
So ordered.
 Okay, the Iao Aquifer data for the quarter ending
March 31, 2001 is included in your packet.  I think there's a
lot we just got for people to read.  Is there any interest --
let me say one thing.  Unless there's an objection by the
members of the Board here, Jacky, I would like for you to
present at the next Board meeting no longer than 10 minutes on
what we have done and what we plan to do countywide in regards
to water conservation for the Board's review and imput.
 
MR. CRADDICK:  That's not with Jacky, that's with
our planning section, and Ellen has a very substantial report
on that.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Well, whomever.
 
MR. STARR:  I would prefer that Jacky made the
presentation, she's really good at it.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  It's a matter of getting it from the
appropriate staff so we know what the conservation plan is for
Maui County and we have a chance to give our input and direct
it or redirect it as we feel is appropriate, because I am not
sure I know what's going on personally.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  I, too.  If I know Ellen is more
versed on the subject, then I would rather hear it from the
horse's mouth than from second in command.
 
MR. STARR:  Okay.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Okay, we will see that at the next
meeting, and at that point if you have questions about the data
that's presented today, we will raise those questions then.
Everybody in agreement?
 Okay, discussion, action regarding Upcountry water.
Mr. Starr?
 
MR. STARR:  Yes, Mr. Chair.  I have a few items
regarding Upcountry water.  One is that we're still in a
drought emergency, and I have tried to go out of drought
emergency several times and I know I've lost the vote on that.
But I do feel that we should only be in drought emergency when
we're kind of in extremist.  I believe that there has been
enough water to keep the ditches full.  So if the ditches are,
you know, averaging 60 to 100 million gallons a day, you know,
and the treatment plants are operating, it's hard for me to
understand that we should be in drought emergency, since you
know if we need to go into drought emergency at any time we can
call it, you can call a special meeting and we can do it on a
couple of days' notice.  So I don't know if I have any other
support on the Board, but I would prefer not to remain in
drought emergency.  Does anyone else see it that way?
 
MR. TAGORDA:  Jonathan, I do monitor the ditch once
in awhile, and I chuckle sometimes because it was my amendment
to that drought declaration that when the ditch is about 55
million gallons, that H'Poko well is down.  So that's what the
department is doing.  And because of that Wailoa Ditch being up
and down, I think it's just prudent for us to be on a drought
emergency, especially we have some report that we get one more
year of really drought conditions.
 
MR. STARR:  Let me ask a question operationally.  Do
we need to be in drought emergency and use Hamakuapoko or can
we -- or have we been in a position where we can operate
successfully without it for the last few months?
 
MR. CRADDICK:  I believe we've started it up once in
the last month, and last week the ditch went down to 44 million
one day.  So within this last week the ditch has gone down to
that level one time, and two more days of that we will have
started up Hamakuapoko.
 
MR. STARR:  So in other words, we have been kind of
close to where we would really need it?
 
MR. CRADDICK:  We have been.  It's been relatively
dry, I would say.  The El Nino Southern Occilation quarterly
report is again still forecasting for dry weather for another
year.
 
MR. STARR:  I know I feel concern about that, and
perhaps we should stay in emergency then, if we're that close
to needing Hamakuapoko.  But I do want to remind us all that
Hamakuapoko is a borrowed source, and that ultimately when the
legal challenges are settled out, it will be going into the
central system.  Under the way we're operating now, there's no
mechanism for it to be put into long term Upcountry use.  So
since we're borrowing it, it means that we have, you know, our
Upcountry system is deficient and if we didn't have it, you
know, as would be the case once we put it into the central
system, then the Upcountry system will not be able to cope.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Well, I think, Jonathan, I think
that you're probably right on that, and that issue begs the
question of dealing with the Upcountry situation.  I do think,
however, that everything we see indicates that we have drought
conditions continue, and they're going to continue, and I think
our current practice is the prudent one.  I'm hearing from the
other Board members.
 
MR. STARR:  I'm willing to go along with that.
Where I do want to keep moving though is in finding a permanent
solution in terms of the Upcountry well.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  I agree.
 
MR. STARR:  You know what I'd really like to see is,
is there a way that we can move ahead with an Upcountry well?
I know I'm sounding like a broken record.  I think 24 meetings
in a row I've brought this up, you know.  You know that in my
opinion, Pookela tank would be an ideal location for it.  I
don't know, what is the status of our Upcountry well program,
David?  Is it okay if I ask that?
 
MR. CRADDICK:  I think we've asked for or we've had
reports with the consultant, and I think we've had a selection
of one and we're currently negotiating.
 
MR. KOGASAKA:  We're requesting proposals for the
end of the month.
 
MR. STARR:  We're requesting proposals from --
 
MR. KOGASAKA:  The consultants.
 
MR. STARR:  From the consultants.
 
MR. CRADDICK:  Yes.
 
MR. STARR:  What are the proposals, what's the scope
of the proposals?
 
MR. CRADDICK:  To make a study and make a
recommendation where to put a well.
 
MR. STARR:  What will that time frame be on that?
 
MR. CRADDICK:  Herb?
 
MR. KOGASAKA:  We haven't seen the proposals yet.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  I think we need to have it updated
at the next meeting, a concrete update on where we're at with
the situation, from the Director.
 
MR. STARR:  I want to move this forward as fast as
we possibly can.  I feel we're still foot dragging here.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Okay.
 
MS. BLACK:  Mr. Chairman, may I address this?
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Do you want to talk about Upcountry water?
 
MS. BLACK:  Yes.  I just want to address something that came up.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Your name?
 
MS. BLACK:  My name is Audrey Antone Black, I live
Upcountry, and I'm on the waiting list for water meters.  My
family has been Upcountry for 50 years, and we're patiently
waiting for water meters.  Something came up at the last
committee meeting that I thought needed to be addressed in full
committee.  It was brought up that when Mr. Dowling's 500 names
is removed from the waiting list, then there will only be 500
people left on the waiting list.  And I was quite shocked that
that was an understanding of the Board, because it is my
understanding that Mr. Dowling is not on the waiting list that
is in the department's office, and I'd like to clarify that for
all the Board members and everyone here.
 If that is misinformation that somebody has, please
be corrected that there is 1,000 names on the waiting list,
some of which, like myself, are requesting two water meters.
So you can quite easily double the requests.  I would say that
there are probably 3,000 water meters that people are waiting
for, like myself, to simply subdivide family property so that
my 24 year old daughter when they comes home, as she calls me
very often and says, "Mom, is there water meters available?
Will you be able to subdivide the property?  Can I look at
coming home in the next two or three years or do I not come
home?  Do I find work elsewhere, do I live elsewhere?"
 And this, you know, I come to all these meetings and
I come over and over and over, and I appreciate some of the
humor, I do.  I appreciate, you know, the scope of your work
here.  But I have said this, and I will say this, and I will
come to every meeting.  I will come as a testimony to the
people waiting, that this is a serious, serious matter.
Peoples' lives depend on this water meter situation.
 People don't have houses to live in because you
can't get a building permit without a water meter.  And I don't
know if you, if the people serving on this Board really
understand that.  I really question that.  I really question
whether you really understand that.  You can't build a house
without a water meter.  And if you sit on land that you have
owned for 50 years while your parents slaved in the pineapple
fields and the pineapple cannery to get that land, and you
can't do a thing with it except dedicate it to agriculture and
put a horse on it, that is disgusting.  Thank you.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Thank you, Miss black.  I'm not sure
who talked about Mr. Dowling having 500 meters.
 
MS. BLACK:  It was a misconception.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Excuse me.  You said you attended a
committee meeting, and it was represented that Mr. Dowling had
50 names and --
 
MS. BLACK:  500.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  500, and if they were removed there
would be 500 names on the list.  I am not aware of that
committee meeting, but that's my question.
 
(Addressing Mr. Nobriga)  Was it your meeting?
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  Yes.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Maybe you can enlighten us.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  We were speaking about Jonathan's
motion some meetings ago about alloting meters to fulfill I
think it was 250,000 gallons?
 
MR. STARR:  We were going to issue meters off of the
list to the tune of 200,000 gallons.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  At which point Corporation Counsel
proposed a rule which basically deleted the current rules that
we have.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Yes, all right, I understand all
that.  My question is, what's with the 500 names of Everett
Dowling, that's my question.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  It was the feeling that either the
Director or my personal assumption that the 250,000 gallons
that Mr. Starr had proposed would satisfy about 90 to 95
percent of the people waiting on the list.  If that be so, then
a lot of the large developments, like Kulamalu and those other
large tracks that were originally on the list, I mean
mathematically you know --
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Well, wait a second.  I'm trying to
answer this lady's question.  The large developments were or
were not on the list?
 
MR. CRADDICK:  They are on the list, but they're
listed as one request on there.  Hawaiian Homes for 400,000
gallons is one request, Dowling is one request for his
subdivision, which he subsequently supplied his own water.
Both those names probably should be deleted from the list.  But
as I said before, we are not deleting anything until some
decision is made that we're going to go through it, so we know
how many are on the list.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  So this ladies impression of the
list being reduced by 500 is not correct?
 
MS. BLACK:  That was not my perception, it was your
perception.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  But you represented that, okay.  To
answer your question, it's not correct.
 
 MS. BLACK:  Right, thank you.
 
MR. CRADDICK:  One thing she is correct about is if
you take those I think it's around 800 names on the list, Herb,
something over 800, that could translate to around 3,000
meters, like she says.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  That's a different issue.  If
someone is on the list who wants five meters, we haven't
decided, first of all, to go to the list, and we haven't
decided if that means somebody gets five meters or somebody
gets one meter.  So there are 800 names on the list that may
represent more than one meter each.  That's clear.  The fact
that some number of those people on the list representing
Mr. Dowling are 500 is not true.
 
MR. STARR:  There may be a request for several
hundred meters by Mr. Dowling, and I'm sure that that was a
request that he put in before he drilled his own well.
Remember, the list goes back some time.  So there are some very
large entities on the list, along with people who have been
looking for a single five-eighths meter for their own
homestead, so the list is a mixed bag.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  So making a blanket statement about
the list is inaccurate and misleading, okay.  And we are not
making any statement about the list because it's just come to
light that there are different situations.  There may be only
800 people, that may be representing 3,000 meters.
 
MS. BLACK:  Can I say one more thing?  This is my
biggest concern, what you have just said, "It has just come to
light."  People have been waiting ten years.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Don't take words out of context.  It
just came to light to me, okay.
 
MS. BLACK:  That is what is so perplexing to me,
that you're the Chairman.  You need to be aware.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  We are not issuing meters
Upcountry.  At the point where we decide that that's something
that this Board will do, then --
 
MS. BLACK:  But how can you make decisions if you
don't know how many people are waiting?
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  We can make a decision based on
water availability right now.
 
MS. BLACK:  Don't you think if you knew that that
many people were waiting you would take Mr. Starr's advice and
start making some concrete decisions?
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  We appreciate your comments, thank you.
 
MR. STARR:  I'd just like to comment that I know
everyone on the Board takes this very, very seriously, you
know.  I think you think there's some levity or lack of will on
the Board.  The Board is trying to find a way to legally issue
some meters and also a way to make our system adequate, and
everyone, you know, I know for sure everyone sitting here is
equally committed to this.  So, you know, it's not something we
take lightly.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Thank you, Mr. Starr.  Anything else
on the Upcountry water?
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  Mr. Chairman, the department is
issuing meters Upcountry, as displayed in writing in our
report.  The department has issued 57 meters Upcountry, and it
has not actuated anybody on the list, that alleged list, and
that's what is frustrating.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Mr. Craddick?
 
MR. CRADDICK:  May I add to that?
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Yes, please.
 
MR. CRADDICK:  Jonathan's committee meeting that he
held Upcountry about this water meter issuance, I had said
there's existing family subdivisions where we have agreements
with people where if they put the improvements in they get
meters for them.  And those agreements were taken under the
Kula rule.  So we can't go and comply with what we told them to
comply with and say, "Sorry, you are not going to get any
meters."
 The other ones are things, like I'll use the example
of Pukalani itself.  There are very many empty lots in Pukalani
that have never been built on, but they put in all the
improvements, storage, things like that.  I believe it's Corp
Counsel's position that if all those requirements were put in,
that we cannot now deny them a meter if the system is adequate,
it's adjacent to their property.
 The last issue is just in quotes an empty lot by
itself, no subdivision involved.  As long as the line is
adequate and adjacent to the property, we are giving meters for
those types of properties also.  And the only reason we do that
is because we have been doing it -- since the Water Department
was started we have been doing that.  Even when the Kula rule
was in place, that was going on.  Now, it did get limited to a
five-eighths inch meter, and we are still going along with
that.
 And I suppose if somebody challenges us on that we
would even have a difficult time on that, saying why they could
be limited to a five-eighths inch meter, because there are no
rules, but that's what we do.  Those three classes of people
are still getting meters.  They're ones that have done things
and are relying on being able to get a meter, and they're doing
it prior to the shortage situation arising.
 
MR. STARR:  I don't want to say anything further
than that I've long had a problem with this policy.  I think it
should be anyone or no one.  I don't really want to say much
more about it today.  I do know people who have been getting
meters, and I feel for those people who haven't been, and we
have been looking for a solution for awhile.
 
MR. HELM:  Just a comment respectfully to Audrey,
and I respect your opinion and your concerns, and my compassion
goes out to you and your family.  But I think each Board member
here, when we came on board a lot of what we came to we
inherited, and we are trying our best to try to take care of
all of those things that is necessary to make the system better
Upcountry.  I'd just like to say we're doing our best.
 
MS. BLACK:  I'll be watching.
 
MR. STARR:  I'd like to know where we're at with the
rule making, because I believe that if we can get that through,
that will be somewhat of an equitable, partial solution.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  We are going to have the Rules
Committee, which Orlando has agreed to serve as co-chair on,
and I'll make those announcements at the next meeting.  I want
an agenda first so that it's clear.
 
MR. STARR:  Does it have to wait for a full rule
meeting or can we proceed without one?
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  We will see what they come up with.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  In respect to the motion that we
approve as a board, I do not believe a rule is necessary,
because our current rules currently state that we can provide
meters, and the rule that we currently have before us negates
our current rules.  Once we look at our rule, yeah, the rule
got to come through us, through the Mayor, through the County
Council.  I mean we will be at this another three or four years
by the time we put another rule through.  I mean that's just
frustrating.
 
MR. STARR:  That was my feeling at the time we did
it as well, and then Corp Counsel came back to us and said we
need a rule and we said okay.  But the rule that I saw come
back didn't do what we were trying to do.  You know, it did
some other things that I, along with Mr. Nobriga had some
concern about.  So I don't know if this is a venue for
discussion on it, but how can we move on?
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  I think the Chair would be
interested in hearing a recommendation from that committee.  If
the committee has a need to propose something or it goes along
with it, that's fine.  I do think though the process whereby
all the rules are reviewed is also a valid one, and whatever
time frame it needs to take, it needs to take, okay.  But if in
the meantime the committee thinks there's a way to deal with
some of the issues, I'm sure this Board will be happy to take
up those recommendations.
 
MR. STARR:  Mr. Chairman, my committee was
responsible for that, and I'd be happy to reconvene it and come
back with another recommendation.  And I certainly invite all
the Board members to join in that meeting, and we will try to
schedule it as soon as we can.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Now, that was with regard to your
suggestion?
 
MR. STARR:  Yes, regarding --
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Well, we have Rules Committee in
existence.
 
MR. STARR:  I'd be happy if Rules Committee were
there.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  If these guys have no objection,
Mike, to participate?
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  I have no objection.  I think we need
to notice the creation of committees at the next meeting so we
can do that.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  We are.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  Sounds good.
 
MR. STARR:  I mean can we have some kind of meeting
between this and the next?
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Sure.
 
MR. STARR:  I don't care whose committee it is or
what it is.  Let's do a Committee of the Whole.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Well, you had that in your committee
then.  You can go ahead and keep it and come back and make a
recommendation.  Do you want to do that?  Include Mike and
Orlando.
 
MR. STARR:  And hopefully some other Board members
as well.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Sure.  Okay, anything else?  Update
on water issues at public meetings.  We had a hearing on the
budget; testimony was received from Maui Meadows Homeowners
Association, Kula Community Association, Elliot Crash, who was
Kuulina Association, Michael Walker with regard to Maui
invasive species and Miconia, and the honorable Miss Johnson
from the Maui County Council speaking about Miconia, and the
water treatment plant improvements for West Maui.
 Let's move on to the Operating Budget, CIP budget.
Jonathan?
 
MR. STARR:  Just a public meeting, I wanted to give
a couple of comments.  Probably Mike and Orlando have some
stuff too.  I'll do it at the very end.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  We will take a five minute break
before we start on the budget, number 10.
 
(Whereupon a brief recess was had).
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Back in order.  We are taking up the
budget, the proposed budget CIP and operating for 2001 and 2002
fiscal.  They're referring to the Director's Reports 01-23, 24,
25.  We dealt with 26, facilitation is already done, and 27.
Those are amendments being requested to the budget that relate
to modifications to the Lahaina Water Treatment Facility,
appropriating funds for the Water Use and Development Plan, an
additional $100,000 for Miconia control, and an increase in the
appropriation for main line extensions from $350,000 to
$450,000.  We've had a public hearing, we've had a work
session.
 Before we go any further, are there any other
questions of Board members to the Director or staff regarding
the proposed budget and CIP?  Mr. Starr?
 
MR. STARR:  Yes.  First of all, I want to complement
the staff and also the committee on creating what I feel is a
good, rational budget and improving the process.  When we had
discussions before in committee meetings recently, though Mr.
Quinn wasn't available for some questions that I had, and I
wanted to be able to ask him about one item, and especially in
relation to whether we're handling it in the best way and with
generally accepted accounting practice, and that regards the
transfer to Capital Replacement Fund item.
 And you know, just correct me if I am wrong, but my
understanding is that we have knowledge based on the Brown and
Caldwell model, which I personally believe to be a very good
model, that we should be putting aside and spending
approximately $8 million dollars, or $8.2 million dollars a
year to replace pipeline and other infrastructure.  Only if we
do that will we be able to maintain solvency, and at the same
time keep all of our pipelines from degrading.  If we put less
aside, the quality of our system will degrade.  We will have
more and more pipeline breakage as the years and decades go
on.
 However, we don't have the $8.2 million dollars to
put in there so, you know, I personally felt that we should
actually put $8 million dollars in there and show a deficit of
$4 million dollars for the year, but I understand that that's
not -- that may not be the best or the proper way of doing it.
And what we've done is put $4 million dollars in there, which
is approximately half, and then we have a footnote that says,
"Based on a consultant's system for placement study, the
current funding level is inadequate for future replacement
needs."
 You know, I can't express strong enough my feeling
that somehow we have to find a way to get the funds to maintain
the system properly, otherwise we are not doing our job.  And I
think we have taken a first step in acknowledging it, doing the
study and putting it forward.  But I'd like to open this to Mr.
Quinn to explain the legal and accounting ramifications of that
consideration, and then just putting a footnote like this.
 
MR. QUINN:  I think, Board Member Starr, with
respect to this budget, which is essentially a cash budget,
that's what it reflects, cash that we have available to us and
how we are going to spend it.  That footnote is appropriate.
In the current financials that this department produces, if you
look on your monthly financial statement or your year end
audited financial statement on the income statement, that's
where depreciation comes into play, and our depreciation levels
now are on the order of a little over $8 million dollars.  And
it has a dramatic affect on our income statement when you look
at that.
 In addition, I think I mentioned this to the Board
before, but there's a new ruling that was promulgated by the
Government Accounting Standards Bureau, and it's called Gatsby
34 (phonetic), which is going to require in this upcoming
fiscal year 2002 of both us and the County, and us being
considered a component of the County, to address in a
tremendous amount of detail our infrastructure assets, and what
those assets are worth, and whether we are properly funding for
replacement of those assets, and that's where the Brown and
Caldwell study is going to help us a lot.
 So I share your concerns.  In fact, the only thing
that saved us is the five year increase that we negotiated
several years ago, and now we are going into our fifth year,
and my concern would be not so much for this coming fiscal year
2002, but 2003.  I think we are going to be faced with some
very real challenges, and I am not at all sure that we will be
able to transfer even $4 million dollars into the CIP reserve
fund.
 So the answer to your question is it is reflected in
the income statement, but it is very much of a concern.  And I
think as we develop the financials for this upcoming fiscal
year you are going to be addressing that issue very seriously.
And in addition to not only reporting, we have to have in the
management discussion portion of the annual report a very
forthright presentation of how well we are positioned to not
only handle our infrastructure replacements, we will also be
required to make comments regarding the budget, which we have
not yet -- have not had to do prior to this in the annual
report.  So we will be working with our auditors, our outside
auditors very closely on this.  It's perhaps the biggest change
that's taken place in government accounting history.
 I attended a conference in Philadelphia, a
Government Finance Officers Association Conference, and that
was probably a topic that involved 50 percent of the seminars.
There's tremendous concern about it.  We're in pretty good
shape to handle that since we have been depreciating our assets
all along.  There are many governments that have not, and they
don't even know what their infrastructure is.  So I think the
Brown and Caldwell study has helped us a long way towards that
goal, and I hope that answers some of your questions.
 
MR. STARR:  My concern is that, you know, by only
putting 4 in this year, are we getting behind the eight ball?
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  We don't have more than that.  I
think we agreed, Mike, that we would have a workshop with the
Brown and Caldwell study again with the model, again for the
Board members, so that's something we can do maybe in the next
month, and talk about how we're going to work through the
problem.
 
MR. QUINN:  The Gatsby 34 is a monumental change
that all governments, including this county, are spending an
awful lot of time and energy on trying to prepare for, and we
will be required to conform to that, as I said, in fiscal year
2002.
 
MR. STARR:  I have just one other question, which is
I am not, I'm really not familiar with, you know, governmental
finances, you know, but I know in business if you have
investors and so on and if you have a balance sheet and you
show a footnote like this, and then you take it to your
auditors, a giant red flag goes up and you get all kinds of
strange phone calls and it's a big problem.  I'm just wondering
is this going to be any -- what's going to be the ramifications
of having a footnote like this when it goes to our auditors?
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  I think that's what Mike is saying
Gatsby is going to be a footnote anyway.
 
MR. STARR:  No, I mean for this year.
 
MR. CRADDICK:  It applies to this year, Jonathan.
 
MR. STARR:  As far as Gatsby goes, it's better that
we're recognizing it, perhaps.
 
MR. QUINN:  It's a little nebulous for future
replacement.  If you look at the Brown and Caldwell study, $4
million dollars is adequate for this upcoming fiscal year.  If
you remember those graphs, four years of $4 million, and then
we have a fairly steep increase to somewhere approaching the $8
million dollar figure that you are talking about.  So future
needs may be -- it's true, just how you define future needs.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  I think that's why we wanted to have
the workshop.  Any questions, any other budget questions, Board
members?
 Okay, I just want to point out, Mike, that we agreed
that we would segregate payroll as it related to the unfilled
positions, and I don't see that in this budget, but I'm sure
that's something that you can do in terms of reporting.
 
MR. QUINN:  For the purposes of this report we
didn't do that, but we will track that separately for the Board
and perhaps monthly give you a status report.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  I want to make sure we have that
understanding.  I also want to make sure that we have an
understanding that we are adding, and with no objection from
the Board members, that we are adding to the CIP the Lahaina
Water Treatment Facility adjustment, and it is understood in
the CIP that we will again be recommending a lump sum pipeline
replacement.  That the staff will come back to the CIP
committee, as we did this year, as projects come up.  That we
will lapse projects that are not moving forward, right?
 CIP, Mike, you had a copy of Howard's memo with
regard to CIP?
 
MR. QUINN:  Yes.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Okay. That the budget will reflect
the funds for the Water Use and Development Plan, but that any
expenditure of that money needs to be approved by the Board,
and at this point this is not a Carte Blanche for any plan or
any consultant at this point.  And we're adding the $100,000
for Miconia so that we will be contributing $200,000 as
requested, and we are going to adjust the main line extension
budget.  Does everybody understand and agree with those
amendments?
 
MR. STARR:  Procedurally, would you like a motion to
add these items?
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Okay, let's do it that way, and then
we can have a motion to approve the budget.
 
MR. STARR:  Okay, I will move that to the existing
budget document be added approval of items 22, 23, 24, 25, 26,
and 27, as shown on page 2 of our handout.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  22 we did.  26 we did.  So the
others, 23, 24, 25 and 27.
 
MR. STARR:  Yes, okay, I'd like to change that to
23, 24, 25 and 27.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Is there a second?
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  Second?
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  The motion as made and seconded is
to add to the budget Director's Report 23, which is Lahaina
water treatment facility, 24, which is the Water Use and
Development Plan, 25, which is $100,000 for Miconia, and 27,
which is the increase in main line extension from 350 to 450.
Discussion?  Mike.
 
MR. QUINN:  Mr. Chair, the request for additional,
to appropriate additional funds for the Water Use and
Development Plan, I am assuming that will be the $328,000 will
be appropriated subject to further approval by the Board?
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  That's correct.  Mr. Craddick?
 
MR. CRADDICK:  The Miconia also is assuming it's
subject to matching funds.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  We already had 100 in there which
was subject to matching funds.  We're just increasing it to
200.  Orlando?
 
MR. TAGORDA:  Mr. Chairman, thank you.  I would like
to have a better understanding on that request of construction
edification to the Lahaina Water Treatment Facility, Mr.
Craddick, for $1 million dollars.  It says right here there's a
changed proposal attached.  I do't see it attached.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Sorry, Orlando.  We had several
presentations on this, and we have a problem with the Lahaina
Treatment Facility as it relates to algae, and it's kind of an
essential thing.  It's not a change order, it's a plan
modification.
 
MR. TAGORDA:  Would this plan modification, the
original contract was not included in this, Mr. Craddick?
 
MR. CRADDICK:  I don't think we realized how much of
a problem it is.  The sun is pretty hot over there.  The water
comes out pretty clean from the watershed.  There's not I guess
a lot of activity back there where that water comes in, so it
comes in very clean.  So when the sun hits it, the algae starts
growing.  So we are putting a roof over it.  That's not the big
cost, the big cost is we are adding one more tank.
 
MR. TAGORDA:  And your current practice to prevent this problem?
 
MR. CRADDICK:  We just have to clean out the tanks a
lot, and we are having problems doing that because when you
clean them out a lot there's only so much space we have on our
sedimentation base.
 
MR. TAGORDA:  So you need $1 million dollars to
solve that problem from occurring now?
 
MR. CRADDICK:  Yes, and add more capacity to the
pre-sedimentation tanks.  That's the bulk of the cost, is the
adding of that tank.  You have been up there and you can see
how those tanks are.  On one end of it you see these knobs
sticking out, and what it is, it's just concrete wrapped around
rebar, and it was planned that way, the plant was planned that
way so that you could add on more to it fairly easily, and
that's what we're doing, is adding on to it.
 
MR. TAGORDA:  And how is this problem now of having
to flush that sedimentation basin will affect the stream?
Where is this area located at?
 
MR. CRADDICK:  When Pioneer Mill was in operation
the water would go down their ditch system.  They're not in
operation, the ditch is closed, and the water goes into the
stream.  Our NPDS permit doesn't allow that dumping directly
into the stream.  There's still a little investigation going on
over that with the EPA.  But we're now doing what our NPDS
permit required, but if we have to start dumping that tank all
the time our sedimentation or our -- what do you call it, Herb,
our percolation little pond there cannot handle that much
water, it can only handle so much water.  So we need to stop
the algae from growing, and our feeling is if you cut the sun
off you are going to stop it from growing.
 
MR. TAGORDA:  I would like to see for myself that
change proposal, although you said to the Mr. Chairman you said
that you folks have entertained this item already.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Orlando, I think what we're saying
is we are going to apply these monies to the budget, and they
will have to come back to the Board when we get project
approval and initiate the contract.  So you will have a chance
to look at the whole scope of work beforehand.  We are not
giving a Carte Blanche to go ahead and do any of this stuff.
 
MR. STARR:  I just want to comment that I have been
out there and walked through this and, you know, I have no
problem when it was built that they tried to save money by not
putting the roof and additional basins on, but made the
provision so we could add them later, and operated it for a
number years and found that it's necessary.  Maybe we're
pushing the plant a little bit harder than it was originally
envisioned, too.  I believe it's necessary and I don't want to,
you know, we shouldn't have the feeling that it's a defect, you
know, because they didn't put it in initially.  It's something
that they left provisions so it could be added if it's needed,
and they tried to save some money up front.  So I do feel it's
a good project.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  We have got a motion on the table
and a second to add these items to the budget.  All in favor
say "aye."
(A chorus of ayes).
Opposed say "nay."
(None).
We have a motion then to approve the budget.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  I'd like to entertain the Board's
indulgence in adding to this budget provisions to obtain a
general obligation bond to increase source capacity and
transmission in the Upcountry area to include all the areas of
Awailoa, Waikamoi, Pookela and Akapao (phonetic).
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Don't we have them in the CIP budget
for source development Upcountry?
 
MR. STARR:  There's a million bucks in there.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Is that not acceptable?
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  No.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  You want to do what?
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  I want to give the people water.
 
MR. STARR:  Me too.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  But we have the appropriation
capital.  If it's not enough money --
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  I would like to see this Board take
affirmative action and settle something that has been brewing
for longer than any of us has been on the Board.  It's just a
very emotional situation, and it's a very sticky wicket.  I
think everyone is appreciative of Miss Antone Black's comments
today.  It's not something that we're surprised about, it's
just we've never taken any action on it for ten years.  There's
people on the list that have already died and they're still
waiting for their water meter.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  May I suggest that the committee
that you are on with Jonathan with regard to that issue can
make a report at the next meeting and we can handle it within
the budget.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  I don't think the budget is sufficient
to handle the proposal, I just don't.  And I hate to go another
year and continue not to do anything about it.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  David?
 
MR. CRADDICK:  The Board can already do something
about it.  They're just deferring action on it trying to get
this rule passed.  There's already sufficient water Upcountry
to give out additional water to people.  So until the Board
takes action on that item that I sent to the Board January 2000
saying that we had sufficient capacity to give out more meters,
we are not giving out, we are not going through that list.
 Now, subsequent to that time the Board said they
wanted to restructure how we go through that list, which I
guess is the Board's prerogative, but that's the only thing
that's holding up giving out additional water Upcountry.

CHAIRMAN RICE:  That discussion doesn't relate to
the budget.  We are talking about the budget right now, and
Mike's request is to add additional funds to deal with the
source development, okay.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  It is not a motion, it is not a motion.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  It's a request, I said.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  It's a request.

CHAIRMAN RICE:  But we need to define it.  And what
I'm suggesting, Mike, is that there is adequate funds and that
the action that you require is in your hands with the committee
that we pointed earlier, and that action can be taken at the
next meeting.  That's my suggestion.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Are you going to be happy with that?
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  Yes.
 
MR. TAGORDA:  For water Upcountry, Mr. Chair, I will
support Mike's contention.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  What I had said to Mike is that
there needs to be unity on the Board, and if in their committee
discussions, and it's also your committee, the Board wants to
take that action and the committee can have a recommendation on
the agenda for the next meeting, then we will do it at the next
meeting.  Mr. Starr?
 
MR. STARR:  Mr. Chair, I just want to comment that
I'm also absolutely committed to solving that in the next year
with action within the next month or so.  And there is a
million dollars there.  If that's not enough, I would certainly
be there to help allocate whatever else is needed.  I believe
that a million will get us an Upcountry well, though.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Mike, are you happy with that?
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  I move that we approve the amended
fiscal year 2002 budget.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Is there a second?
 
MR. STARR:  I second.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  Okay, any other discussion?  All in
favor signify by saying "aye."
(A chorus of ayes).
Opposed say "nay."
(None).
Very good.  If there's no other business -- David?

MR. CRADDICK:  The organizational chart.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  We have got a motion on the floor to approve.
 
MR. TAGORDA:  Move to approve.
 
MR. NOBRIGA:  Second.
 
CHAIRMAN RICE:  All in favor say "aye."
(A chorus of ayes).
Opposed say "nay."
(None).
Okay, approved.  The meeting is adjourned.
 
(The proceedings were concluded at 10:45 a.m.)
 
IWADO COURT REPORTERS, INC.