BOARD OF WATER SUPPLY
COUNTY OF MAUI
REGULAR BOARD MEETING
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 23, 2004
Held at the Kahului Shopping Center, 65 West Kaahumanu Ave.,
Unit 29, Kahului, Maui, Hawaii, commencing at 11:40 a.m. on
June 23, 2004.
REPORTED BY: GLORIA T. BEDIAMOL, CSR/RMR #262
A P P E A R A N C E S
CHAIRPERSON: MICHAEL VICTORINO
VICE CHAIRPERSON: KENNETH OKAMURA
MEMBERS: MICHELLE MC LEAN
STACY HELM CRIVELLO
GINNY PARSONS
DOROTHY PYLE
SALLY RAISBECK
RALPH JOHANSEN
STAFF:
ED KUSHI, CORPORATION COUNSEL
GEORGE TENGAN, DIRECTOR
CATHY HOWARD, SECRETARY
JACKY TAKAKURA, ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER
HOLLY PERDIDO, FISCAL OFFICER
ALVA NAKAMURA, ENGINEERING
ARNOLD ABE, ENGINEERING
TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
* * *
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: I would like to get this
meeting of the Board of Water Supply, June 23, 2004, meeting
to order. In attendance we have Mr. Johanson, Sally
Raisbeck, Dorothy Pyle, Ginny Parsons, Mr. Okamura, and
Mr. Victorino in attendance.
At this time I will call on someone to approve the
minutes from the May 27, 2004 regular meeting.
MS. RAISBECK: Mr. Chair, I move to approve the
minutes subject to our usual 30-day correction policy.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Second?
MR. OKAMURA: Second.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Moved and seconded that our
minutes from May 27, 2004 be approved subject to our 30-day
review. Sensing no discussion, all those in favor say
"aye."
(A chorus of ayes.)
Opposed?
(No response.)
Minutes have been approved.
We have one testifier that would like to go on
now, and then we'll go into our harassment policy, sexual
harassment policy part of the meeting. So to give this
gentleman the opportunity -- everybody a chance, is
Mr. William Garvin. And he would like to talk about
administrative management of the flow chart that he has
brought to us.
Is Mr. Garvin in attendance? Okay, Mr. Garvin?
MR. GARVIN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As you
said, I'm Will Garvin. And I was asked by Sally to come and
let you folks know what's available in the community, is the
way I would say it. Apparently, it's on your agenda
relative to rules later on. Apparently, that's the case.
Pardon me for my ignorance, I haven't been before the board
in ten years, so I'm not quite aware of your flow and what
you're into.
However, it's been my experience to have done what
I call a flow chart. Here is one from Maui Electric
Company, an energy conservation program. This is about
three or four years old. There may have been changes since
then. I'm not sure.
But you can come look at this at your convenience
and get a feel for taking a book of regulations and putting
it onto a form; so that if you're an administrator you know,
oh, reading the regulations, maybe I would want to do this
item first, but I can see from the organization of it, that
actually the fifth item in this reading is the first thing I
should be doing. It's hard to get that from the
regulations. From reading the regulations.
Another thing you can find from a chart is
something like, oh, I see, rather than do this whole thing,
if I fall into a certain situation, I can skip all the way
down to here and get into it. Another thing is from reading
the regulations, in this case of Maui Electric Company, it
may not readily be obvious from reading the book that air
conditioning is broken into two full sections, so it depends
on what type of air conditioning you're in.
Now, the same thing can apply to these regulations
for your department. And it can be done, cooperative
process, however. I'm not trying to say that someone like
me can take your regulations, draw out a nice diagram, and
boom, there it is, present it, and you go back and forth.
In my own history, I've done the Air Quality
Bureau for Montana permitting regulation. That was the
largest flow chart I ever did. 3 feet high, 21 feet long.
It was horrendous. It scared everybody to death. I also
did the surface water treatment rule for Montana, drinking
water. The total E. coli form procedures for analysis and
reporting for Montana.
I did the damn Hazard Safety Act Regulations for
Montana. And there's another one I did, I can't seem to
remember right now. Oh, yeah, the National Asbestos Hazard
Emergency Response Act. That was done for the Montana
School Board Association, so they could have their members
understand what was going on.
I don't know if I need to say anything more, I
just want you to know that I'm here, I'm available, and
willing to help. And my thoughts are that you look at this
and decide, let me know, I would be happy to come back next
month and make a more meaningful presentation if you have an
interest.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Any questions?
MS. RAISBECK: If I may comment, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you very much, Will. I was talking to Will about how
I found our present regulations confusing. He said, Well,
do you want a flow chart? And being a computer programmer
from a long time, I know how valuable flow charts are to
organize your thinking; structure your thinking.
So I asked him if he would be willing to come and
show us this one that he did for Maui Electric. And I hope
he -- he's agreed to leave it there during the meeting, so
at the break, maybe people would want to look at it. And
I'll take it home. Thank you very much for coming, Will.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. The record will show
that Ms. McLean is also present at the meeting.
Thank you, Will.
Moving right along, we'll move into our board
training and we have both new member orientation and we have
the County of Maui Sexual Harassment Prevention Policy
training. Jacky, you're going to do both back to back?
Okay, let's get started, please.
MS. TAKAKURA: Good morning, everyone. I'm Jacky
Takakura. I'm an administrative officer, and I will be
giving you an overview of the Department of Water Supply and
what we do. Can everyone see the screen?
The people of Maui have been supplied with potable
water by the government here on Maui since the days of the
Hawaiian Kingdom. According to our first annual report,
which was printed back in 1953, David T. Fleming, who was
the president of the Maui County Waterworks Board, remembers
back then when there was a 2-inch line that was run from
Wailuku to Kahului to supply the needs of what was then
called Port Town. Today there is more than a two-inch line,
there are several lines from Wailuku to Kahului, and they're
more likely to be in the 12- to 18-inch size in diameter.
The Maui County Waterworks Board was established
under the Legislature of the Territory of Hawaii, Act 289,
approved in 1949. Prior to this, the development of the
water systems in Maui County was supervised by the Board of
Supervisors, or what you would call the county council
today. With each system functioning somewhat independently
under its own overseer and doing its own billing and
collecting, under the direction of the county engineer.
Through the creation of the Waterworks Board, the
development of the water systems and sources could meet the
growth of Maui and Molokai, and the demands for a steady
supply of fresh water for commercial use.
According to the 2003 county charter, the
Department of Water Supply shall manage and operate all
water systems owned by the county.
What I want to do is show you some of the things
that we do to manage and operate the water systems for the
people of Maui and Molokai. It should take about a half an
hour, then we can answer questions after that.
First, a brief review of where the water comes
from. We don't actually make the water, it comes from
Mother Nature. It starts from the Pacific Ocean, the sun --
you can't really see up here -- you have evaporation,
clouds, and the trade winds bring the clouds to Haleakala
and the West Maui mountains. And we have rain. The rain
falls, we have two things: we have what we call surface
water and groundwater. Groundwater is the water that flows
down into the ocean.
I'm going to turn the projector off and on again
to see if it will help the color be better. It was fine
when I came along. Just a second.
Two types of water, surface water and groundwater
are really important here on Maui because we use both of
them as our source. On the other islands, like, for
example, Kauai, they are almost entirely groundwater. They
don't use so much surface water, but they will be using that
in the future.
With the surface water, though, most of it flows
back into the ocean and that cycle continues as you saw with
the arrows in that slide. I just want to see if you can see
the colors a little bit better in the presentation so we can
see what it is I'm talking about.
As you know, we occasionally have droughts. The
droughts affect the surface water supplies fairly quickly.
That makes sense, if you think about a pool of water, it's
going to run out a lot quicker when there's no rain filling
it up versus water in the aquifer.
The groundwater, as I mentioned, is less resistant
or less prone to drought because it takes so long for that
water to settle down and percolate down into the aquifer.
This cutout drawing is from the Honolulu Board of
Water Supply. This is supposed to -- it's pretty similar
for all the islands. You can see that underneath the island
is the zone of fresh water, and underneath that is salt
water. So we have wells to tap into that freshwater source.
That's our drinking water supply. So we want to make sure
that we don't pull too much of that fresh water out because
the salt water takes it's place, then that water would no
longer be the quality we need. So it's really important for
us to maintain that balance.
The next two maps answer the question, Just how
much water is there? These two maps are from the Hawaii
State Commission on Water Resource Management. They show
the aquifer boundaries and the amount of water that they
consider the aquifers can provide, or what they call the
sustainable yield. You can see that the areas that receive
more rain, for example, the windward areas such as the Haiku
area have a higher MG.
I don't know if you can see that; but, for
example, the Haiku aquifer, up here, 31 million gallons a
day versus, you can see down here, which is much bigger but
has a smaller yield of only 11 million gallons a day. That
makes sense because there's no rainfall -- or less rainfall
over there. Of course, that's not necessarily where the
people are that want meters out over there, but that's where
the water is.
The total available supply that they consider for
the island of Maui is 476 million gallons per day. For the
island of Molokai, the developable yield is 38 million
gallons a day. These two maps are only for groundwater.
This does not include the surface water from the streams and
ditches.
Lanai has its own private water system. Even back
in 1949 they were on their own private water system, run by
Lanai Company. We do provide some work for them regarding
watershed protection and the water use and development plan.
Also Kaanapali and Kapalua have the private water systems,
and some other ones, especially past Haiku.
The mission statement of the Department of Water
Supply is to provide clean water efficiently, and you will
probably see this mission statement over and over again.
This is our goal. It's about as simple as you can get. In
some areas we have met this goal, and in some areas we are
still striving for it, but this is what guides us in our
work.
As I mentioned, we were created back in 1949 by
the legislature for the Territory of Hawaii. You can see
that we're very small, $1.8 million in assets. As of last
fiscal year, we had 300 and -- almost $303 million in
assets. Those are things like the pipes, tanks, reservoirs,
treatment plants. And so it's very big.
And in your presentation, I just had last year's
number, so you might want to write in these updated numbers.
You can see our service area has really grown from a little
over 5,000 meters to almost 32,000 meters. That's how we
count our services, by meters.
Consumption was 12.7 gallons last fiscal year,
which averages to about 35 million gallons a day. Remember
I said that we had plant assets of about $2 million back in
1952? We have significantly grown, our revenues and
expenses are more in the range of $30 million per year.
For a while, back in 1997 to 1999, our expenses
were actually greater than our revenues. In the year 2000,
our revenues were equal to expenses. Only in the last two
years have our revenues been a little bit more than
expenses, and this includes depreciation.
Where does the money come from? These revenues?
Our main source is the water bills that our customers pay
every two months, and those water bills are based on fiscal
year 2002 rates. We are working on a water rate study, as
you probably know, there may be an increase in the near
future.
We also have the water system development fee
which is for new meters. Government grants or loans and
also bonds. Those last two items, the government grants and
bonds are usually for specific projects. They are earmarked
for something in particular. And the money goes to
operations and maintenance, taking care of that water system
and replacing it when it's needed. Also system expansion,
which is paid for by the water system development fee,
protecting our water resources and also repayment of debt.
For the first two, operations and maintenance and
system replacement, those come from the water bills. Then,
as I mentioned, the expansions, from the water system
development fee.
Our next topic is our operations. You can see
from this map that on the island of Molokai -- excuse me,
Maui, we have four separate water systems. Lahaina, Central
Maui, Upcountry, and East Maui. They are not linked.
Lahaina uses a mix of surface and groundwater and it's a
balance of about two-thirds surface, one-third groundwater.
Central Maui, which uses about 25 million gallons a day, is
almost entirely groundwater. But there's about a million
and a half gallons of surface water in there.
Upcountry is mainly surface water, with a little
bit of groundwater. And East Maui on the Hana side is
entirely groundwater. Molokai, which I don't have on the
map, we have about 1500 services, and that's entirely
groundwater. In total, we have 750 miles of pipe that you
are seeing here. You can see, like, for Central, even
though we call it Central, it includes South Maui and it
includes Paia all the way out to Hookipa.
The basic functions of the water department, of
any water department, is source, transmission, storage and
treatment. Getting the water, making it safe and clean,
storing it so that whenever customers need it, it will be
there, getting it out to them. First, I'm going to cover
water source. This includes our wells, surface water
sources, like you see in the upper left-hand corner, the
Waikamoe watershed, Kualapuu well, which is on Molokai, the
North Waihe'e well, which is the lower right-hand corner,
and also the Honokahua, which is in Lahaina. So that's the
source.
Okay, treatment, and that's basically an issue for
surface water. So it was mainly an issue for the Upcountry
area and the Lahaina area. Surface water must be filtered
and treated to comply with the EPA's Safe Drinking Water Act
rules. So we have six water treatment facilities in total
on Maui. We don't have any on Molokai because it's all
groundwater over there.
We have three Upcountry, two in West Maui, and one
at the Iao tank in Wailuku. We use different kinds of
technology, we use microfiltration, which we use in Olinda,
which you see in the upper right-hand corner, and also at
the Lahaina treatment plant at Kapolei, which is in
Haliimaile, and we use a different kind of technology at
Mahinahina and Piiholo, which is in Makawao.
For Mahinahina, we have direct filtration. Once
the water is brought to the surface and treated, we need to
store it so it's always there for our customers. We have
143 tanks of various sizes, ranging from, say, 10,000
gallons to 3 million gallons, for a grand total of 290
million gallons of total storage. Our larger tanks, which
is like what you see up there, the Mokuhau tank in Wailuku,
that's 3 million gallons. It's the largest size we have.
This one here is the lower Kula tank, that's 2 million
gallons, and that one is relatively new. This is another
tank we have on Molokai, Kualapuu, it's a smaller tank.
Okay, so we got the water, it's clean, we got it
in the tanks. Next is getting it out to the customer. So
that is transmission and distribution. That's basically the
pipes. Transmission pipes are usually the bigger pipes
taking it out to the subdivision, such as the 36-inch pipe
taking the water out to Kihei. The distribution pipes would
be the smaller pipes where you have the service laterals or
meters coming off of. We have 750 miles of pipe, our field
operations personnel are on standby 24 hours a day, 7 days a
week, including holidays.
If there's a water break or someone hits a fire
hydrant, you can call our number, and our guys will be out
there to fix it. They have pagers. And they also have a
SCADA system, which I'll show you in a little while, which
they can use to figure out exactly what is going wrong with
the system before going out there to see it. We also do
flushing, particularly in the Upcountry area where we have
dead-end lines, to make sure the water stays fresh.
The other things we do, include engineering design
and construction for projects, such as capital improvement
projects. That includes things like building tanks,
drilling wells. There's another well that was just drilled
in North Waihe'e. Building a granule activated carbon
filtration facilities, or overseeing that. That's the
Napili A well site in Lahaina. Those are things our
engineers have done.
This is the SCADA system that I mentioned. SCADA
stands for supervisory control and data acquisition, and
it's a computer system that can monitor tank height, flows,
all kinds of information about what's going on. So if an
alarm does go off, you can call and see exactly where the
problem is before having to drive all the way out there.
Some of the things can actually be fixed via computer and
not having to go out to the tank site.
It's a very important system we have. This was
done all in-house. I heard that the Kauai Department of
Water has contracted to have a SCADA system put in and they
are probably paying about $4 million for theirs. Ours was
done in-house. It's a good thing we have that.
We have to make sure that the water is of high
quality to meet all state and federal standards. Our lab
takes about 16,000 samples a year. Sometimes you will see
them out there in our county trucks and they all have water
department shirts on. Some of you might participate in the
lead and copper sampling Upcountry. We do test a lot of
tests and a lot of things in-house because our lab is state
certified.
We want to protect our water sources for our
future generations, and watershed protection is something
that we participate in also. We provide funding for miconia
removal to preserve the native forest. We participate in
the watershed partnerships. The East Maui Watershed
Partnership, and also the West Maui Mountains Watershed
Partnership, and the East Molokai Watershed Partnership.
We also work with USGS to monitor the water
sources, the wells and the streams. We do have a wellhead
protection program, which we work with landowners to make
sure the area around the wells stays clean. So it's much
cheaper to prevent contamination than try to clean it up
later. We have other functions, as I mentioned, complying
with all the rules, billing, accounting, purchasing, and
reviewing permits. So those are the basic functions.
I'm going to go into a little more detail about
the different divisions that we have that actually do this
work. Let me get to that in a minute.
Some of the goals that we have, as I mentioned,
meeting the Safe Drinking Water Act requirements, and also
not just EPA's requirements, but the state's requirements,
because a lot of times the state makes the rules stricter
than what the federal government does. Developing new
sources to keep up with demand, reducing the Iao aquifer
draw by looking at other sources for Central Maui,
continuing replacing pipelines, protecting our resources and
reducing the effects of drought.
There's a lot of different regulations out there
and some of them even seem to conflict with each other, but
we do have to comply with all of them. The one that's
received a lot of attention lately is the Led and Copper
Rule. That states that what the department has to do is
check people's water coming out of people's taps in their
homes to make sure that led isn't getting into the water.
And if the lead is at a certain level, then the department
has to do something.
So as you know, we started using C-9 back in 2001.
We stopped using that in 2003 for Upcountry and are just
using phosphoric acid. We do have a plan to change that,
that's in the works but nothing is final yet, but we're
still working on that. All the while, we're trying to make
sure that our customers are not exposed to lead.
Other rules include surface water treatment rules.
That's why we have the treatment facilities that you saw on
the slides. That mainly affects Upcountry and Lahaina.
Groundwater disinfection rules, making sure that the water
is clean and safe. Getting our operators certified. They
have to take classes and pass exams to get their license.
Those were enforced by the Safe Drinking Water branch of the
Department of Health.
Things that we're working on include Pookela well
as a source for Upcountry. Expanding our Iao water
treatment facility for more source in Central Maui. I'm
working on a Lower Kula -- a large reservoir to hold
untreated water for the Piiholo facility in Lower Kula.
I'm working with the state on another monitoring
well in Waihe'e. Funding was approved for that, so that
should be getting started soon. And continuing with the
pipeline replacement, because we do have a lot of pipes that
are older than most of us in this room, that do need to be
changed. So that's an ongoing thing, because, you know,
like I mentioned, 750 miles of pipe is quite a bit.
So now, about the people that do all this work.
There are seven divisions, the director's office, which
provides community relations support, human resources, and
other kinds of support for the other divisions. Fiscal
division, engineering, water resources and planning, field
operations, plant operations, and water treatment plant
operations. I'm going to get into this a little bit about
each of these and who oversees each one.
This is the table of organization. I don't know
if you can see it. But the office of the director is up
there with seven staff, then there's the staff, then you
have the different divisions. Fiscal, which also takes care
of customer service, has about 30 employees; engineering
with 26; water resources and planning, 11 positions; field
operations at 69; plant operations at 31; and water
treatment plant operations at 24. Not all of them are
filled. We have about 166 personnel.
Starting first with the engineering division.
Some of the things that they do is review plans for things
like subdivisions or other projects, preparing plans and
specs for projects like CIP, the capital improvement
program, running that program. Coordinating contracts with
consultants, working on in-house projects that our
operations crew do, and inspection of facilities. We do
have a crew of inspectors to make sure that when we do have
a construction company doing work, that they are doing work
that they are supposed to be doing. This division is headed
by Alva Nakamura, who is the program manager.
Fiscal division, taking care of all the money.
They do the accounting, budget development and control, the
annual audit. We do have an annual report that's done by an
independent auditor. Long-range financial planning,
advising the board on fiscal matters.
Also customer service, so that's taken care of
people's meters, working out payment plans, when they are
overdue, other things like that, payroll, so that our
paychecks are on time. Purchasing and inventory, they take
care of the warehouse down at the baseyard. The fiscal
division is headed by Holly Perdido, the waterworks fiscal
officer. And also processing bills and payments.
Water resource and planning, this is headed by
Ellen Kraftsow. They review permits and other kinds of
things. It comes from the Department of Planning, and then
comes to us. Then it goes back out. They do other things
like planning of the Water Use and Development Plan, making
sure that all those regulations that I mentioned earlier are
complied with.
Water resource management, participating in things
like those partnerships, the wellhead protection
conservation ad, you see the ads in the paper. Planning
information systems is another thing to take care of. So
those three divisions that you just saw, engineering,
fiscal, and water resources are all on the fifth floor of
the county building in Wailuku.
The next two operations, field and plant
operations are at our baseyard near the airport in Kahului.
The field operations is by far the largest division. We
have almost 70 people in that division. They take care of
all the transmission and distribution lines. They respond
to customer complaints, like when somebody calls in the
middle of the night because there's a water break in front
of their house.
They install, maintain, and replace, and maintain
the storage tanks. They do the flushing, supporting our
vehicles, equipment, hydrants, reservoir sites, valves. Our
carpenter is part of that staff. And they recently finished
the installation of a radio -- an automated meter system.
And then they fix the meters, too, when there's problems.
The plant operations division takes care of all
the deep well pumps and other pumps in other locations.
They also have electricians on staff, licensed electricians.
They monitor the deep wells and do the readings, they do the
SCADA system that I mentioned earlier, they make sure that
the water is disinfected and safe.
And we also have our lab as part of this division.
So they are out taking samples, sending them off and making
sure we're in compliance. Then there's backflow and
cross-connection, so making sure that things don't get into
our pipes from other sources.
Now, this next division is not at our baseyard;
they're at the water treatment plants, water treatment
facilities. This is run by Paul Seitz. And I didn't
mention, the field operations is run by Bobby Vida, and
plant operations is currently run by Joe Mendosa.
The water treatment facilities takes care of
filtering and disinfecting the surface water. Upcountry we
have the Kamole, Piiholo, and Olinda water treatment
facilities. In Lahaina we have two, Mahinahina and Lahaina
treatment facilities. The Lahaina one you can see it, it's
above the high school. The Mahinahina one is near Kapalua
airport, in the pineapple fields.
Then we have the Iao facility, which is that dark
green Iao tank on the way to the old Wailuku Heights. They
make sure that surface water meets all those different
rules, like the surface water treatment rule and all those
other rules. And they make sure their staff is certified,
because they have to be certified too. So those are the
people in the different divisions.
Things that we're looking for in the future, this
is kind of a reiteration of the things I mentioned
previously, source development; protecting the watershed for
our future generations; improve our distribution system,
which is improving our pipes, pipeline replacement; and of
course, compliance with all the rules and to continue with
our mission to provide clean water efficiently.
So in a nutshell, that's basically what we do and
the things we're looking at ahead in the future.
If you have any questions, I can answer them now.
We have a lot of information on our website, Mauiwater.org.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Thank you, Jacky. I would
rather, and I don't like to impose, but if you have
questions, because we have the sexual harassment one to work
on, if we could hold them and you can direct them to Jacky a
little later, or we can bring it up at a later time. But
unless it's something real rigid in your mind, can we move
on to the next agenda item? Thank you, ladies and
gentlemen. Thank you, Jacky.
And then we can go ahead and start with the County
of Maui Sexual Harassment Policy, please.
MS. TAKAKURA: I just need about one minute to get
to this introduction.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: While you are doing that, I
failed to mention, also in attendance is our corp counsel,
Mr. Kushi, and our water director, Mr. Tengan. I did not
mean to leave you out when I introduced everybody.
While you are doing that, Jacky, Alva and Ellen
and Ms. Perdido, would you stand and introduce yourself so
maybe the board members who are new can know who you are.
We mentioned your names, but it was just real quick, and Mr.
Nakamura ran out the door. Go ahead.
MS. PERDIDO: I'm Holly Perdido, I'm the fiscal
officer.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: I thought Alva was here or
was it my imagination? And the guy that ran out the door is
Mr. Nakamura. He ran out the door because he knew I was
going to introduce him. Ready? Go ahead.
MS. TAKAKURA: The County of Maui requires sexual
harassment prevention training for all employees and board
members. The training is actually supposed to be every
year. So this is your training, it's required. This should
take a half hour or so.
MS. RAISBECK: I can't hear.
MS. TAKAKURA: Just a minute.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: While we have a technical
difficulty, if anyone needs a rest room break, I'll adjourn
for five minutes to do what you need to do. Go ahead,
Jacky. No rush. We'll adjourn for five minutes.
(A recess was taken.)
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Call the meeting back to
order. Please start on our sexual harassment policy.
(At which time a power point presentation was had.)
MS. TAKAKURA: Physical harassment can include
touching, holding, grabbing, hugging, accidental collision,
or physical assault. Verbal includes offensive jokes and
language, threats, comments, or suggestions of a sexual
nature. And nonverbal harassment can include staring,
leaning over someone, offensive gestures or motions,
circulating offensive letters or cartoons, or other sexually
oriented behavior.
MS. RAISBECK: I can't read that.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Me too.
MS. RAISBECK: Could you read it, Jacky?
MS. TAKAKURA: One of our customers likes to make
off-colored remarks to the receptionist and asks them to
spend weekends with them, is that sexual harassment?
MS. RAISBECK: Yes.
MS. TAKAKURA: Can I ask a coworker out on a date?
MS. RAISBECK: Yes. Is that sexual harassment?
MS. TAKAKURA: Just asking? No, not at that
point.
MS. RAISBECK: Can you read that, Jacky?
MS. TAKAKURA: Who can experience sexual
harassment? Intended targets and also bystanders and
witnesses.
MS. RAISBECK: Thanks.
MS. TAKAKURA: Now we have a quiz and if you get
them wrong, we have to start from the beginning.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay.
MS. TAKAKURA: Steve is a receptionist in an
office, he shares a work space with Marie. Marie frequently
brings in beefcake pinups and hangs them on the bulletin
board near Steve's desk. Steve has told Marie he finds the
pictures offensive. So in this case, no harassment exists
because men can't be victims of sexual harassment, Steve is
being oversensitive, visual displays of sexual photos may
constitute sexual harassment, or all of the above?
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: That's correct.
MS. TAKAKURA: Which action is considered sexual
harassment? Wearing very short skirts, unwelcome hugging or
kissing, offensive jokes, or both B and C?
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: B and C.
MS. RAISBECK: B and C.
MS. TAKAKURA: To determine whether an act
constitutes sexual harassment, the behavior must be
reasonably perceived as unwelcome and sexual in nature, or
explicit or physical, or all of the above?
MS. RAISBECK: A.
MS. TAKAKURA: It's A. It doesn't have to be
physical.
MS. TAKAKURA: An example. A female truck driver
has to listen to remarks about her physical characteristics
whenever she's in the garage, or a male office worker is
offended and embarrassed by a beefcake photo put up by the
female workers.
Another quiz. The definition of quid pro quo in
the context of sexual harassment involves a supervisor or
manager promising an employee a promotion in return for
sexual favors, a supervisor or manager threatening to fire
an employee if sexual favors are not granted, or placing
suggestive pictures on a wall, or both A and B.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: A and B.
MS. RAISBECK: A and B.
MS. TAKAKURA: Which of the following are examples
of quid pro quo sexual harassment? Offering raises or
promotions in exchange for sexual favors, transferring an
employee who rejects a supervisor's advances, making sexual
remarks or jokes, or both A and B?
A VOICE: A and B.
MS. TAKAKURA: An intimidating atmosphere,
questions or jokes relating to sexually oriented pictures,
leaning or touching are related to a -- workplace, a quid
pro quo -- or a hostile environment?
A VOICE: Hostile environment.
MS. TAKAKURA: According to a 1999 poll by the
Society of Human Resources, 97 percent of employees surveyed
have had a written policy on sexual harassment. 62 percent
of companies surveyed offered sexual harassment training
programs. F stands for familiarize, fully read the policy
and get clarification if needed, don't throw it away, keep
it for reference.
Immediately address every incident, it's essential
that all employees report incidents, and managers remain
open and sensitive to all complaints. And that would mean
all employees and officers. Employees must fully cooperate
with any investigation of a sexual harassment charge so that
every complaint can be quickly and appropriately resolved.
Managers, employees, and officers must work together to
insure that a thorough investigation takes place.
Protect the rights of all individuals involved,
thoroughly investigate a written complaint. A satisfactory
resolution for every affected employee must be reached.
Although charges of sexual harassment must be approached
with sensitivity and objectivity, they must also be
investigated and resolved with a swift, thorough and fair
hand.
This is the last one and then we'll be done. If
you feel you are the target of sexual harassment, you should
ignore it, retaliate by returning sexual insults, respond to
the problem by making your feelings absolutely clear, or
quit your job?
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Respond.
MS. TAKAKURA: Effective policy on sexual
harassment will inform employees of what is and what is not
acceptable workplace behavior, preserve employee
confidentiality whenever possible, be responsive to
complaints, or all of the above?
Employers and employees are responsible for the
work environment, employees should take action by addressing
instances of sexual harassment immediately, never
cooperating with an investigation of sexual harassment,
ignoring the entire issue, everyone is too sensitive, or all
of the above?
Okay, congratulations, we have successfully passed
the sexual harassment prevention.
In your packets, you have the county's policy,
it's required of all employees and officers of the county,
which include yourselves. Page 3 of the policy or page 11
of the packet has individual responsibilities. This is
Section 4. Individual responsibilities. These are things
you must refrain from. So don't do any of these.
No making unwelcome sexual advances or requests
for sexual favors, no making remarks of a sexual nature, no
using gender based or sexually abusive language or sexual
innuendos, no materials of a sexual nature, no physical
contact of a sexual nature or any other action. Those are
things to remember to please do not do.
Thank you very much, I will have the update next
year.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Thank you, Jacky. Nice job.
Do we have any questions before we move on?
MS. RAISBECK: I would like to ask if the
department has ever had a case of sexual harassment.
MS. TAKAKURA: Not in the last ten years. Not in
our memory.
MS. RAISBECK: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Thank you again. Moving
right along. Let's move on to No. 7, Communications. We'll
start off with Communications 04-04. Communication 04-04 is
a letter from Wayne Arakaki Engineering regarding the final
approval of Robert Fevella Subdivision. Is Mr. Arakaki
here?
MR. ARAKAKI: Good Afternoon. My name is Wayne
Arakaki. I've been working with Mr. Robert Fevella for many
years, I believe it was 1996, and we are trying to get his
subdivision approved. It's a three-lot subdivision.
There's two houses on it; he lives in one, and the other --
the daughter lives in the other house. There is only one
water meter, and it is a three-lot subdivision. The third
lot is vacant; there's nothing that's built on it.
We did have construction plan approval, and then
it was at Mr. Fevella's own risk that he installed the
double service lateral for the other two lots. And there
was a fire hydrant, so the fire protection system was
adequate for the subdivision. So we went through the
subdivision process, got approval from all the departments
except for water, because he has no water meter.
I guess the basic reason why we don't get final
approval is that he's on a waiting list to apply to get the
additional water meter so he can complete his subdivision.
In the meantime, you know, he's worried about how
things are changing on subdivisions. You know, would we
have to go back and upgrade the water service lateral or
even the waterlines, when the water meters are available, or
will it be grandfathered in, you know, because we don't have
the approval. Also, the planning department and the DSA
always have new rules and regulations. It seems like almost
on a monthly basis there is something new that pops up. So
we're getting kind of worried about not getting final
approval.
He has mentioned to me that he's on a waiting
list. If there's any way that we can have an agreement
signed and, you know, he won't be applying for any building
permit until he obtains his water meters. But some kind of
agreement that would let him have final subdivision approval
on his three lots.
He's not a developer. He is subdividing this
property. I'm sure you hear this all the time, but it is
for his family. That's about it, if there's any questions.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Any questions for
Mr. Arakaki? Ms. Parsons?
MS. PARSONS: This is a family subdivision; right?
MR. ARAKAKI: In a sense, it is a family
subdivision. But we went under the standard process of
doing a subdivision; so technically, it's not a family
subdivision.
MS. PARSONS: But it's only three lots?
MR. ARAKAKI: Yes, it's only three lots. And we
didn't ask for any special privileges under the family
subdivision. We did all the improvements, agreements, and
everything else based on the standard subdivision.
MR. OKAMURA: You're afraid that the subdivision
rules will be changing in regards to what, the waterline?
MR. ARAKAKI: Well, through my years of experience
working as a consultant, they say the law never changes; but
there are a few things that changes from time to time and
it's not necessarily only the water department, but planning
department, the DSA, road improvements, road widening. I
haven't seen the road getting smaller; it's always getting
bigger.
So several subdivisions, when we first started out
with 2 feet roadway dedications, now it's up to 10 feet.
Those are the things that constantly change. So if we leave
the subdivision out too long, they may ask for an upgrade on
requirements.
Water department, only thing I can think of is
upgrade on the new standards, you know, where a 6-inch line
may be adequate now, but what if they were to change it to
an 8-inch line. I mean, there's no way we could get final
subdivision approval because the cost is too high. And you
know, we're talking just a three-lot subdivision.
MR. OKAMURA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Any other questions for
Mr. Arakaki? Are there any questions for the director?
Ms. Parsons?
MS. PARSONS: We've taken the meter off the list
above and beyond the first 50?
MR. TENGAN: I believe we're up to a hundred, 110
or thereabouts. Anyway, we have gone through the 300,000
gallons that the board previously approved. About half of
it was issued to those properties that had prior rights or
meters --
MS. PARSONS: If we're looking at -- based on when
we're looking at Pookela well -- 2005, can we give him a
conditional approval based on the opening of Pookela, so he
can go back to the planning department to get his final
subdivision approval?
And we can use that caveat all the time, whether
or not the disclaimer is valid, I'm not sure. But we use
the disclaimer, if there's water, can we give him a
conditional based on the fact that he is on the list?
There's maybe 60, 70 people in front of him, but we'll have
enough water on that first phase of opening Pookela.
MR. TENGAN: Basically, the problem with the
subdivision is granting -- final approval based on
conditions on what's going to happen is that this one meter
that he has now will be serving two different parcels, which
is contrary to --
MS. PARSONS: I wasn't thinking to use the meter
for that purpose, I was saying he would not be able to have
water --
MR. TENGAN: Well -- servicing the homes.
MS. PARSONS: Oh, I see what you're saying, the
parcel -- that's not going to change our water usage. I'm
thinking --
MR. TENGAN: It doesn't change the water usage,
necessarily, but it does go contrary to the rules about one
meter serving a parcel.
MS. PARSONS: But if we do a waiver, a conditional
waiver, that is limited until such time as the other water
is on line, just so he can get through the subdivision
process. And he's right, the way things are changing in the
planning department, and when we meet with the planning
department you can see it's costing the homeowners -- we're
trying to do affordable housing and it costs the homeowners
so much money to wait.
And number two, to have to go back and redo
something that changes, you know, next week they decide
well, now you have to make this road wider, and then just
now put another maybe 10-, 20-, 30,000 on the cost of doing
the infrastructure.
So if we could find a way to give him a
conditional approval based on the fact that he's on the
list, that his water usage will have to go to his meters,
even if he pays for his meters in advance, that we get this
so that he can get through his planning process. And try to
be accommodating so that we don't cost the homeowners more
money. It's costing our local folks an awful lot of money
to have to jump through the hoops.
MR. TENGAN: Maybe Mel may have some comments.
MR. ARAKAKI: Mr. Chair, to decide on this, just
for your information, in checking into this thing, there are
approximately 248 subdivisions still waiting for approval
for the same situation. There are 31 subdivisions that have
been waiting longer than Mr. Fevella for approval. This is
also something I think you need to take into consideration
when you make a decision.
Obviously, I'm sure if this is granted, we'll get
a lot of other inquiries from others that have been on the
list as well.
MR. TENGAN: For clarification, I have all these
other subdivisions constructed -- required improvements.
MR. ARAKAKI: I don't have complete details
whether each one of them -- all I know is we do have a list
and we have that many waiting.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Ms. Crivello?
MS. CRIVELLO: George, I have to agree that
sometimes government can stagnate the people that we're
supposed to be serving, and having them continuously go into
debt. I can understand setting a precedent. But for eight
years he has been trying -- going through this process since
1996. I agree with Ginny, how -- or Mr. Kushi, how can we
arrange for some conditional agreement so that Mr. Fevella
can have this subdivision?
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Hang on. There's a question
on the floor. Mr. Kushi?
MR. KUSHI: Well, Mr. Chair, in response to the
question, and please be -- I premise it with the statement
that I have not talked with the director on this issue. We
have in the past on subdivisions allowed an exception.
I bring you the examples, some of you may know
this, the R&H Subdivision. Bill Crockett, Attorney Crockett
came before the board, and the board gave approval that
allowed the subdivision to go through and there are --
there's only one meter there. And that meter was serving
both lots, but allowed the subdivision to go through.
Entered into an agreement where no building permits or no
work will be done on the second dwelling, on the parcel,
without its own separate meter.
That came into -- fell into the place of the water
rules. I believe it's Section 2 -- whatever it is. It's in
the modification -- rules of subdivision. So the department
has done that in the past. That may provide a relief in
this case. But you still have an instance of where one
meter is serving two dwellings. And that is not in
conformance with the general subdivision rules.
But again, if the department is of the persuasion
to allow that, I don't see a problem. But the applicant
would have to understand that once the meter is available,
he has to get that meter; otherwise, I would recommend
pulling the existing meter.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: I think that's a fair
assumption. Ms. Pyle?
MS. PYLE: I guess my question is, is that we now
have two dwellings on one parcel and they are sharing one
meter. Why is this subdivision into three parcels? Is
there an intention down the road that there is going to be
an additional dwelling? And what's going on with that?
If truly what they want to do is subdivide so they
can share something or get another water meter for a second
dwelling that's already there and not use any more resources
than what they are using, I can understand, but why is the
subdivision in three parcels?
MR. ARAKAKI: I believe the last lot is for his
son.
MS. PYLE: Then will you be back again, or will
they be back again asking if they can have a third dwelling
on the same water meter because of hardship?
MR. ARAKAKI: No, they will wait until the water
meters are available.
MS. PYLE: I'm not in favor.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Mr. Kushi --
MR. KUSHI: Prior to subdivision, this is a rural
area, and based on the large lot, they could have two or
three dwellings on it. And based on the -- they could have
one meter serving two or three dwellings. So they are okay
now; but once they subdivide, then the rule says one meter
per subdivided parcel.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Ms. Raisbeck?
MS. RAISBECK: You know, I remember that time when
Bill Crockett came before us on behalf of someone in a
similar situation. And the board -- I never got a -- of the
agreement that had been worked out with the director by
Mr. Crockett. I would not want it to be true that citizens
have to go to Mr. Crockett or Mr. Luna or people who know
how to do these things in order to get that kind of
agreement.
So, I do feel that even if this means 238 other
people come in saying, Well, you did it for Mr. Fevella, you
got to do it for us. If it doesn't result in an increase in
water usage, I really don't see anything wrong with it. If
additional building permits are not issued on the basis of
the subdivision, that is something I don't know about.
But I would like to see the agreement that was
worked out by Mr. Crockett in the department on behalf of --
you said it was R&H Subdivision, so I would like to see that
approval so I can understand why it would work in that case
and not in this case.
MR. KUSHI: We have that agreement and it has been
recorded against the parties. The logistical -- maybe
practical problem with these things are that even though
it's recorded against the properties, the subdivided lots,
sometimes in government there is some miscommunication
between the water department and public works. We don't
handle building permits, and we don't have a system that
flags these properties that have these recorded agreements
on them. Sometimes public works processes building permits
without knowing what the deal is with the water department.
MS. RAISBECK: Are you saying they would process a
subdivision without noticing --
MR. KUSHI: They would process the -- the
subdivision would be granted. They would process a building
permit against the mandate of the agreement that says the
applicant will not even apply for a building permit.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay?
MS. RAISBECK: Okay, thank you. But I still would
like to see the agreement that was worked out by
Mr. Crockett.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: We can make that on our next
agenda. But in the meantime, Mr. Arakaki, you have
something else -- you have a copy of that?
MR. ARAKAKI: Yes.
MS. PARSONS: I make a motion that the department
consider the agreement that's been processed before and work
something -- work this out with Mr. Arakaki and Mr. Fevella.
MS. CRIVELLO: Second.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Moved and seconded. Any
discussion? Okay, Michelle first, then Ken.
MS. MC LEAN: I would just like to echo some of
the comments that Sally made, which is, looking at the
configurations, it's pretty clear that to create a
subdivision, that the houses would have to be situated on
separate lots. If the houses were, for example, located
closer to each other, they could be included on one lot.
That's not the case with the property. So in order to
subdivide, they would have to be put on different lots.
So I would agree that if the homes are being
served by one meter, that's not going to change by allowing
the subdivision to proceed, they would continue to be served
by that one meter, that there would be no further use until
additional meters were available. I would support the
motion.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Thank you, Michelle. Ken?
MR. OKAMURA: If there's an agreement that can be
worked out, I would be in favor of that. I think it needs
parameters on it. Also, because Mr. Fevella's case is a
little different, he's pretty close on the waiting list. He
is 188. But let's say somebody who is like 325, he comes in
and requests the same -- like Mr. Nakamura mentioned, you
are already -- other people that might come in to make the
same request, and which we -- I don't know how big the
subdivisions are.
But we should look at the draft agreement and make
some parameters that we would say, okay, this would apply
only in this particular situation, if we decide to go ahead
with this. Thank you.
MS. PYLE: The only other thing I would add is
there really is some recognition of the fact that there will
be no substantial additional water resource use. Because we
really would be setting a precedent by saying you can then
put two houses on one meter. And that could, down the road,
cause some difficulties if that precedent has been made.
So I think it needs to have a qualifier that these
two houses can share this meter with no substantial increase
in water resource usage until such time as -- there is no
meter. That would be something that would be looked at for
any other requests that came in that was in any way --
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: I think that's a reasonable
request. We can look upon that. I think at this point,
unless there's no further questions, I will call for the
question. Question, Mr. Kushi?
MR. KUSHI: Mr. Chair, just for clarification.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: You got a copy, everybody?
MR. KUSHI: I just glanced at it, it's not the
complete copy, there's no signature, nothing. I will at the
next meeting submit the formal agreement, the one that's
recorded.
MR. OKAMURA: What's the motion?
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Ginny, would you restate it?
MS. PARSONS: I could. I would make the
recommendation that this be handled by the -- reviewed by
the director and corp counsel and to work out an agreement
based on the discussion that the board has had for
Mr. Fevella through Mr. Arakaki.
MR. OKAMURA: Would that mean that an agreement
would be worked out, but the board would need to look at
that agreement before we say it's okay?
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Go ahead, Mr. Kushi.
MR. KUSHI: Excuse me. But speaking with the
director is, if you pass this motion, the director would
request that we draft something up, review it with the
applicant and their people, and bring it back to you so you
can look at it. And since this will be a precedent, then
have you read through the agreement.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: I think that's a fair
request. Does everybody agree with that?
MS. RAISBECK: Yes.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. Mr. Fevella and
Mr. Arakaki are agreeable to that?
MR. ARAKAKI: Yes.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: No further questions. Call
for the question. All those in favor say "aye."
(A chorus of ayes.)
Opposed?
(No response.)
So we'll -- hopefully, at the next meeting -- we
can knock on wood. Mr. Fevella and Mr. Arakaki, if we can
work it out, bring it back to the next meeting, then we'll
look at the entire package.
MR. ARAKAKI: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Next one will be
Communication 04-05. A letter from Kenneth M. Rothman
regarding Chloe Kiana Subdivision. I cannot pronounce the
first one. I just didn't want to go there. Is Kenneth
here? I didn't want to blow the name out in public. Thank
you.
Mr. Rothman, would you come up and go ahead.
We're recording it.
MR. ROTHMAN: We're trying to --
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: State your name, please.
MR. ROTHMAN: Sure. Kenneth Rothman. I was
before the board here in December. We're trying to complete
a three-lot subdivision in a very difficult area. Not all
that far from this. But we're up in the Keokea area.
My partner, Mark Peterson, bought into this
property with two other partners back in the late '80s. And
back in 1994, they officially put their application in.
Their numbers did come up, and we have put our reservation
fee down for the source development fee, or whatever is, for
the two additional water meters. We're trying to figure out
a way to be able to hook them up. It's a very steep area
and there is some elevation problems.
When I came before the board in December, I had
asked, and the board had asked me to meet with the
department to see if there's a possibility for an elevation
agreement. We tried at that point to have no construction
within the subdivision above the elevation sufficient for
the water pressure.
And I had since met with the department and
Mr. Tengan and others, it's very interesting, because in
this pamphlet today, there is an elevation agreement from
1998. It's on page 21, I believe. I don't know what is in
that agreement. But if you go to page -- maybe not page 21.
Page 23, the very first paragraph, elevation agreements were
entered into. So, I don't know, I didn't know that until
today. But there is such a thing.
Mr. Tengan had been nice enough to meet with me, I
believe it was February 10th, and said that that was not
acceptable. Again one of those things that the rules are
changing on a regular basis, and I can understand what the
last applicant was going through, wanting to finish it
before they change on them. I can see that perhaps it's not
acceptable.
After my meeting with Director Tengan, we went --
do you have a question? Okay. It was decided that I would
meet with a lot of my neighbors, and we tried at that point
to -- a lot of the people in my area have the same problem.
The requirements cost too much for any individual to
complete the subdivision. So we're all there.
I met with a number of them, and I guess in my
area there's probably somewhere around 20 lots that they
can't hook up. Either they have a meter coming, or they
don't, but either they -- they're just not able to do it.
When we met back with Mr. Nakamura, one of my
neighbors and myself, trying to figure whether there was
some way they could show some leeway in some of the
requirements. My property runs from 3300 foot to 3600 foot
elevation. We were going to attempt to put a tank up at
about 4,000 feet above some of the neighbors that are above
our property.
And it just gets so expensive. The project was
going to be well over a million dollars and it just doesn't
seem -- I think my neighbors kind of lost interest when they
found out how much it was going to be. Even to the point
where some of the things that need to be done were to do a
paved road up to the water tank. And that adds another, you
know, 3-, 4-, $500,000 to the cost of trying to do it, when
maybe a paved road wouldn't be needed. But that's beside
the point.
What we're trying to do is -- there's times that
in areas the department cannot provide water. What I have
requested in this here is that we still want to do our part;
we're willing to put in a couple thousand feet of waterline
on Middle Road. And for now, I want to provide sufficient
water for our three lots, but do it in a private way.
When it gets to be a public system and stainless
steel tanks and waterlines, it's amazing how expensive it
is. We can build a private system that will supply water to
the two additional lots at a higher elevation, building our
own tanks, a pump station, a booster bump, and provide water
and sign off in any responsibility that the department would
have on maintaining it.
So sometimes -- I guess what I'm trying to say is
that sometimes maybe the government should be able to step
back and allow people to do what they need to do and, you
know, they are off the hook of trying to provide it.
So sometimes when I talk for a while, it's better
if someone asks me a question about what it is at this point
and that's what I can say instead of keep going on.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Ms. Parsons?
MS. PARSONS: Why do you need our approval to do
your own private system?
MR. ROTHMAN: Because I'm trying to subdivide and
I need -- I don't need --
MS. PARSONS: No, the board does not have the
approval over private well systems.
MR. ROTHMAN: It's not a well. What I want to do
is I want to use the county water and bring it up into our
property through private lines.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Different scenario.
MS. PARSONS: You might consider a well.
MR. ROTHMAN: I looked into that, because we're
that high, we have to go pretty close to sea level and 3,000
feet is --
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: It's easier to --
MR. ROTHMAN: Right. Right. It'll probably be
less money.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Yes, Michelle?
MS. MC LEAN: I'm trying to understand, similar to
where we were at the last meeting, what the department would
require and what your proposed deviation to that requirement
would be -- is that the map that's Exhibit A on page 40
versus the map that's Exhibit F on page 48? Page 40 is what
you're proposing and page 48 is what the department would
like?
MR. ROTHMAN: Yes.
MS. MC LEAN: The difference is that the
department wants the tank off site on the neighbor's
properties and wants the waterline installed along Polipoli
Road as well?
MR. ROTHMAN: Yes. The idea of putting the water
tank on the property above ours looks good on paper; but
that water tank that we have been asked to put on their
property would not help them when they want water. It's too
low to provide them with sufficient water pressure. So I'm
being asked to get a neighbor to put a 30- or 60,000 gallon
water tank on their property that won't help them.
This is why we went above there to the state land,
but then we have to build -- I'll give you an idea. If you
look on the map on 48, Exhibit F, if you go up about another
inch further up, it becomes state property. And we were
going to try to -- because the other people that are
interested are the property just to the left of where the
water tank is. And they are in the same thing. They are
actually sharing a water meter right now, among five
properties.
MS. PARSONS: Get their address, would you,
please?
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Don't be telling too many
things.
MR. ROTHMAN: I think everyone is well aware of
that. It's one of those --
MS. PARSONS: We don't do that.
MR. ROTHMAN: The rules kind of allowed that ten
years ago when they were doing that. I think. I don't
know. Forget that last comment. I didn't say that.
MR. TENGAN: It's in the record.
MR. ROTHMAN: To give you an idea part of what
this problem is, not only would we need the larger tank up
on the state property, which can be done, the pump stations
become very expensive when they have to go up. From
Polipoli Road to that road that really doesn't exist by the
Waihuli Road, that's an elevation rise of over 300 feet
there, but we have to go about a hundred feet above there.
So you're talking about a 400 feet rise in elevation over
maybe 1500 feet and having a paved road going up from
Polipoli to that.
The little things add up to be a huge project and
this is why my neighbors have, I guess, basically given up.
Even one of the fellows hasn't paid for his $6700 for his
two meters because he just doesn't think it can be done. I
think there's ways to accomplish this, and I'm very new at
this, so I'm trying to get some feedback.
It's only from private sources that I've found out
that a, you know, a 30,000 gallon water tank by county
standards and stainless steel is a hundred and something
thousand dollars, but I can put one up on my own property
that would work for 50 or 75 years for about $10,000.
So if I put one of each of my subdivided lots --
I'm finding out whether I can, in a sense, get the county
off the hook of having to do this. Putting the 2,000 feet
on Middle Road and I can complete my subdivision. Take all
the liability away from the county, meeting all the other
requirements that can be done.
When my partner applied for the subdivision in
'94, there were a lot of very simple answers to this. Just
not the case anymore.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Anything else, Michelle?
MS. MC LEAN: I have a question for the
department.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Let's hold up on the
questions for the department. Let everybody have a -- one
of you can ask. Go ahead, Ms. Raisbeck.
MS. RAISBECK: Again, I have trouble putting
things in context when it's all verbal, and I don't have the
list in front of me. So you did come up on the list to get
water meters; is that correct?
MR. ROTHMAN: Yes.
MS. RAISBECK: And the department is telling you
that you have to provide certain improvements in order to
actually get the water meters or to -- no, you get the water
meters anyway, but the subdivision requires you to put in
infrastructure that by department standards is very
expensive; correct?
MR. ROTHMAN: Yes.
MS. RAISBECK: But if you could do it to your own
private standards, you feel you could accomplish the purpose
of that infrastructure much more cheaply?
MR. ROTHMAN: Yes.
MS. RAISBECK: So why can't you do it?
MR. ROTHMAN: I'm not sure. This is why I'm here,
to see why. I am trying to learn a lot about this along the
way. I have not been through this and other people haven't.
It was only the fellow that builds water tanks gave me some
of the initial information that led me to come before you
with this idea.
And it's not just that it's expensive what they
required me to do. The initial requirement from last July,
when I paid the -- it was $6700 for the two resources --
I'm sorry, I don't remember what that's called. I can't put
that tank on these other people's property. I don't have --
it's not that it's expensive, although it is, but that's not
the only thing.
If it would help them, they would probably say
sure, go ahead, and I would see what the budget was there.
But at this point, it has to go above their property to
provide water pressure. They are up for one meter as well.
They have about 23 acres and they're not looking for
subdivision, but they are looking for water. As well as --
there's three or four properties up there and they're all
looking for it.
So I think in the long run it very likely could be
that the department will be putting a larger tank up on the
state property somewhere, but I don't think it's in the
short term. I think there's much more pressing issues to
help a greater number of people that the department is faced
with.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Before we continue on this
track, unless there's a question specifically for
Mr. Rothman, I would like to go to the department to get
some of the answers that you are asking, and Michelle. I
mean, we can go on, but it's not helping us at this
juncture. So I'd like to, unless there's another direct
question, turn it over to Mr. Tengan.
And Mr. Tengan, you can enlighten us a little more
of what specifically is occurring with this situation. Or
Mr. Nakamura.
MR. NAKAMURA: Mr. Chairman, reviewing this
situation, one of the problems that we see as far as having
a tank as Mr. Rothman is proposing, is that on the upper
edge of that Polipoli Road area, the problem we're looking
at is there won't be sufficient water pressure there. The
other thing is that we normally don't feed private water
systems from the county water meters. That's another thing
that also needs to be taken into consideration.
For your information, what we didn't tell
Mr. Rothman, and after discussing it with staff, was that
the pipeline along Polipoli Road and along Middle Road will
be eligible for this 50 percent reimbursement. Because, in
essence, it will help other potential customers along the
way. This was not mentioned to him.
But we would require a pipeline along Polipoli
Road to service the front edge of his property that fronts
Polipoli Road, as well as the pipeline along Middle Road
that services that bottom portion of this property.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Do you understand what he
just was saying?
MR. ROTHMAN: Yes.
MS. PYLE: The question is, why? Why do you
require that?
MR. NAKAMURA: That's part of our rules. The
subdivision -- the rules on subdivision require that
improvements be placed along the front edge of the lots.
MS. PARSONS: It requires them?
MR. NAKAMURA: That's one of our requirements.
MS. PARSONS: Where is that? Can we have a copy
of that?
MR. NAKAMURA: I don't have a copy with me right
now. Section 24 of our rules on fire protection, All
subdivisions and businesses, industrial -- hotels,
apartments, and airports rule a residential district shall
be required to install fire hydrants or shall be -- and
shall be in accordance with these regulations. Subdivisions
in agricultural districts shall be required to install --
this is under Rule 2.4.
There is also under Section 2.6, main extensions.
If the department facilities are -- if the department's
facilities in the area are inadequate or facilities are not
readily available to serve the subdivision, the subdivider
must extend a water main from the nearest adequate facility.
The water main -- constructed -- the subdivision -- to the
nearest adequate public water facility.
MS. PARSONS: Doesn't have to go on both sides?
MR. NAKAMURA: It --
MS. PARSONS: Doesn't have to?
MR. NAKAMURA: Our understanding is that it has to
front the front edge of the particular lot in question. And
since this particular lot, Middle Road and Polipoli Road, we
are requesting that it extends on both front edges of this
particular lot.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Mr. Rothman, in perspective
to what he just said, is this more apt for you to be able to
accomplish what you are trying to do, or are we still far
away from what you are trying to accomplish?
MR. ROTHMAN: I don't think we're very far away.
I don't think the problem has ever been improvement to the
road frontage, although it seems very exorbitant to have to
do all of that. It was the water pressure for the standards
that has always come in the way.
If you will notice on everything I've prepared,
I've always offered to do 2,000 feet of 6-inch line on
Middle Road. We have always done that. That's in spite of
the fact that the 8-inch Kula pipeline runs right through
the center of my property. So the statement that there's
insufficient water on the property never really rubbed me
the right way, but I always tried to do my part.
The fact that there is not sufficient water there,
we're already tapped into that 8-inch line in the existing
house, so we could just take water off of there to provide
for all three lots. We already have our tap in. We offered
to take it off of there to do that. It's been my feeling
from day one, if we have offered to do something good such
as 2,000 feet of waterline, and I've always known about the
50 percent reimbursement, that people would help me find a
way to do this.
And I had a very good meeting with the director
and he seemed very helpful. He didn't like my elevation
idea, because at that point I wanted to be able to only
build on the area of the lots and put restrictions on my
subdivision as to where it is. Other than that, I think he
was helpful. The idea is there is water there, and that
always seems very funny to me. I've always tried to say
okay, if we do our part.
So it isn't the Middle Road or Polipoli Road. I
think other people will help me with Polipoli Road and
Middle Road. It's having to put the water tank at a higher
elevation that has really been the roadblock.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Mr. Nakamura, did you
understand what he just completed? And can I have a
response to that?
MR. NAKAMURA: Our only response is that we feel
that the private -- the tank in the location that he is
proposing will not provide adequate water pressure, and
especially if a dwelling is built on the upper side from the
Polipoli Road area. And since we have no control over that,
we have some concerns about that.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Mr. Nakamura, what's the
difference in pressure that we're referring to at this
juncture?
MR. NAKAMURA: Normally, we're looking for about
40 pounds of pressure. If you take a look at Exhibit B,
page 42, you'll see this dotted line that's going across
this property, and in essence, what that illustrates is
where that 40-pound pressure we estimate to be. It provides
that pressure for that particular lot. I don't know if I
answered your question.
MS. MC LEAN: Mr. Chair?
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Go ahead, Michelle.
MS. MC LEAN: Looking at Exhibit B on page 41,
that dotted line, you're saying that if the lots were served
only from the Polipoli Road side going up, you couldn't
build above that dotted line because the pressure would be
inadequate?
MR. NAKAMURA: That's correct.
MS. MC LEAN: Did you discuss the limitation,
that's not something -- was that something that you guys
discussed?
MR. ROTHMAN: Actually, the result of the hearing
in December said that if it could be found that that had
been done before, that would be sufficient. Something close
to that. I have the letter here in my packet.
And I didn't question Mr. Tengan when he said that
that was not -- Mr. Chang said he found one, and as we see,
I don't have a copy of it, but there's one in the
information package today that there was one made for the
last people that were sitting here. There was an elevation
agreement of some kind made in 1998.
I never got a copy of it; I never found out who
had it. But that was not acceptable to the department, as I
found out in my February 10th meeting.
MS. MC LEAN: Is that acceptable to the owners
to -- essentially, you would be able to build above --
MR. ROTHMAN: Oh, yes, we would be perfectly happy
with that. And just so you know, we would be willing to
construct a pump station on our property. It's not that
much more pressure we need to supply pressure to a fire
hydrant on Polipoli Road, even though the -- if you see
where that line is, that line is a hundred feet below where
water will go to. The water will actually come up to 3574,
because that's what the tank is that it comes from.
So we don't need to move the water very much
higher. Our property only goes up another 25 feet in
elevation. So to pump the water to there, I was told about
pumps, and I was told about booster pumps outside of the
tanks, or whatever, that would provide pressure. I am under
the understanding that I can build those. It may not be
what the department has as the beaten path. I'm just trying
to find a way to do this up to code. I'm not trying to have
some standard water pressure.
What I have offered today in this package would
provide sufficient water pressure and we'll build as much of
a tank as we need on our property, so we can meet all of the
standards, or do the elevation agreement, or tell me
something that I can do and chances are we can find a way to
do it. I just haven't -- no one has been able to come back
to me from the department with anything that's a doable
solution.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Mr. Nakamura, this situation
with Mr. Rothman, is there a possibility of sitting down and
working -- I mean, it doesn't sound like everybody is really
far apart on this deal. It's just a matter of some minds
meeting somewhere that we can resolve this problem. Am I
correct in saying that, or am I off the beaten track in this
area?
MR. NAKAMURA: I guess we could sit down with
Mr. Rothman and discuss this. However, couple of things to
keep in mind, and that is, if the subdivision is approved,
we don't have any control as to where dwellings are situated
on this particular lot. That's one concern.
The other thing is, of course, our department
standards requires us to put the pipeline along Polipoli
Road fronting the particular subdivision, so that it
provides proper fire protection for this subdivision. Under
his proposal, this would not occur. There is some concern
about that as well.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: I understand that. I think
all of us agree -- not agree, but we understand that. But
yet, I think if we can let the minds meet, maybe we can get
this resolved.
And Mr. Rothman, you have to understand that the
standards they are referring to, even though they are not
potable water, it's for fire flow protection, it's still
very important.
MR. ROTHMAN: Yes, I understand that.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: You know, so I think that's
why my suggestion is to let the minds meet. Because I think
we can go back and forth and we're not going to solve it for
them.
MS. PARSONS: We keep going back to this issue
that we don't have control once we give approvals for
subdivisions. We make agreements and they don't seem to
stick, we have problems with it.
Well, I'm wondering, maybe they need to be
recorded with the deed, and we record them. If there's
three subdivisions, each single TMK, this is recorded on the
deed. And maybe that will help us in the future.
I think it's something we need to talk about with
planning, because they are the ones allowing, you know,
subdivide once and the second subdivision comes in, then we
find out that A and B made a deal that they weren't going to
get building permits -- we don't find this out until later.
I think we need to think about recording each one of these
agreements against each -- and each subdivision.
MR. ROTHMAN: It's a very interesting point that
I've always questioned, because I may not have talked about
it as much on this one as I did in my last presentation, but
we were offered to record them. And I believe that a lot of
things can get accomplished, such as in the last meeting
that was here, if they did get recorded and there should be
sufficient penalties if someone goes around them and they
were caught.
I mean, there should be some kind of a tracking
system to that. And we're perfectly willing to get anything
recorded against -- you know, we have 18 acres here and
we're trying to have six of the acres in the old agreement
that couldn't be built on. It happens to be a very steep
area and not that great of an area anyway. We have plenty
area to build on and plant on and do whatever we need to do.
So recorded agreements, there should be a way to
get through the process. I can't imagine that the water
department wants to go over these things and over these
things and -- I mean, they should want to get them out of
their office and move on to the next one. I think by having
that tracking system -- and we're perfectly willing to
record any of these things on our property.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Ms. Pyle?
MS. PYLE: Actually, what I want to say is not
necessarily just in reference to Mr. Rothman. But I think
that one of the stumbling blocks that we seem to be running
into is that the water department and the fire department
have different standards for fire protection. And until we
can resolve some of those, this is confusing to everybody.
The fire department says one thing; the water department
says something else. We need to try to clarify some of
those things for the public as well as for ourselves.
MR. ROTHMAN: I did talk to the fire department
and they gave me something like 250 gallons for an hour or
two hours, whatever, and it added up to 30,000 gallons.
Understanding now, it could turn into 50,000 gallons.
There wasn't anything -- I asked over and over
again when I was on the phone with them, is there something
I'm missing? Because they're not telling me anything that
we weren't willing to do. And I kept hearing that, well,
the fire department was going to be a problem. And I wasn't
getting anything like that from them, it was just meeting
the requirement.
At that point, it was, you know, having sufficient
pressure and sufficient volume and we were willing to do
those. I mean, that's --
MS. PYLE: Like I said, this is a side issue that
needs discussion, besides just your problem.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. Thank you, Ms. Pyle.
We'll try to keep our discussion on the subject at hand and
make that as a note for a future agenda item.
Mr. Nakamura, you have something else you would
like to add?
MR. NAKAMURA: I have had some preliminary
discussions with people at the fire department and we have
talked about wanting to have some discussions about
consolidating and making the fire protection rules more
uniform for both the water department and the fire
department.
However, due to the workload and due to other
commitments, we just have not been able to get together.
But this is one thing that I know -- engineering's agenda is
to try to get together to try to work something out.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay, and that's fine.
State your name, please.
MR. ABE: Arnold Abe. I'm an engineer with the
Department of Water Supply. Just to let you know that the
subdivision process doesn't -- for residential stuff that
the water department reviews, the fire department typically
does not review those subdivisions. Only if they are served
by a totally private water system that the fire department
reviews those subdivisions.
So regardless of what the fire department says,
fire protection is something that's covered by the
Department of Water Supply. We have to make sure that -- I
think we have a duty to make sure that fire protection is
adequate on roadways and the standards not only for the
subdivision that's being affected but for neighboring
properties also.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: I don't think anybody is
disputing this. I think the challenge is getting everybody
to be on the same page. I think that's where we can take
away some of the confusion to the public and as well as some
of us board members sometimes, because we get kind of
confused with the various regulations.
Anyhow, Mr. Rothman, not to spend any more time
and belabor the point, I think I would like to recommend,
and it's up to the board to defer this matter, to let you go
back and work with Mr. Nakamura and the department and kind
of see if you guys can get a meeting of the minds.
I mean, you seem close enough in some areas and
maybe still further in others, but I think we're not going
to make any -- I'm not speaking out of turn, but I would
recommend not making any -- deferring this action and let
them kind of work it out.
Any other discussion on that matter? If somebody
wants to make a motion to that effect, that's fine with me.
How would you like to handle it?
MS. MC LEAN: Move to defer.
MS. PARSONS: Second.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Any other discussion?
MS. MC LEAN: Mr. Chair, I would like to make a
comment. In looking at situations like this, I think that
we're all trying to find a way not to deviate from the
department standards, but to put restrictions on the project
and on the improvements so that those standards won't be
deviated from in the future.
If, for example, they can do an elevation
agreement that -- and keeps it below that point, and
pressure can be sent there, in my mind, there isn't a
deviation from the department's standards at all. It's
saying the standards will apply if everything is restricted
to that lower elevation. So that's just my opinion.
And what I would like to see in the situation is
not deviating from the department's standards, because those
are important and -- but to come up with agreements and
restrictions to insure that they don't get abused down the
road.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: I think that's a good point.
And I think Ms. Parsons had mentioned, I think a lot of us
agree that maybe what we need to do is make sure these are
recorded on the deed, so that in the future they can't be
deviated without some penalty being assessed against these
people.
Or if they turn around, if Mr. Rothman turns
around and sells it, that the new owner will see this as
part of the deed and understand that this is part of the
subdivision that she or he may be purchasing, that they
don't come back to us, you know, like they have, and
indicate, Oh, we bought it and we were told we could do
this. But there was nothing in writing.
You know, I think we got to have something like
that where it's accountable. I think that's the key word,
some accountability, yeah?
MS. PARSONS: Protects the department.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: It protects us, yeah, us and
the department, and not be caught in a Catch-22 every time
somebody decides to make a change. Ms. Raisbeck?
MS. RAISBECK: I like Michelle's clarification,
that if the condition on the project are -- they protect the
standards, that basically. And I like that as a
clarification of what we're talking about doing here.
I also agree with the people who have said there
needs to be better tracking so that the right-hand knows
what the left-hand is doing. Planning knows what the water
department has done. There needs to be more communication
and tracking on that to make it accountable.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Thank you. If there's no
further discussion, I'll call for the question. All those
in favor of deferring the action say "aye."
(A chorus of ayes.)
Opposed?
(No response.)
Mr. Rothman, good luck.
MR. ROTHMAN: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Call for a five-minute break.
(A recess was taken.)
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Calling the meeting back to
order. If everybody is ready, we'll move on to Unfinished
Business, Communication 04-03. A letter from Mr. Wayne
Arakaki Engineering regarding Carter Estates waterline. Mr.
Arakaki?
MR. ARAKAKI: Good afternoon. I'm Wayne Arakaki.
Anne Carter, one of the family members, could not be here,
but Janet Mercer is here to represent her. So she has a
letter that she wants to read.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: I do have a question. Do we
have copies of these letters in our correspondence?
MS. MERCER: I have copies for you. Rob was going
to talk to you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Go ahead. Why don't you
start while she passes out the letter.
MR. CARTER: Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.
My name is George Carter. I apologize for my sister Ann who
can't be here. I would like to tell you why we're here.
This is, for us at least, a family matter, it's not an
economic one.
We're brother and sister who inherited this land
from our family, it's been in our family for generations, we
want to split this land. It was four lots and we made them
even, and my sister wants the side with the farm; I want the
side with the house. And so she needs to build a house, and
I want to build a farm.
In some ways I think we have bit off more than we
can chew, because we're just lay people and here we are
involved in some very complex matters. And I would like to
thank the board for their time and consideration on all of
this. I know you have so much before you, so many things
like this. But we really appreciate your help and your
advice.
I'll probably remember everything I should have
said to you folks as soon as I put the microphone down.
Thank you again.
MS. MERCER: My name is Janet Mercer. And I'm
reading the letter that Ann Carter wrote to the board. It
says, Dear Board of Water Supply Members. Thank you for
your careful consideration of my brother and my request to
install a private water system. I apologize for not
appearing in person, I'm currently off island.
I would like to share a little information about
our family property and what my brother and my goals are.
The property has been in our family four generations. My
brother and I inherited the property as joint tenants in
common from our grandmother in 1993 upon her passing.
The land is located in a remote area. We are
surrounded by Haleakala Ranch and are a mile from the Upper
Kula pipeline. Our nearest neighbors are eight-tenths of a
mile away. This provides us with a wonderful rural
life-style, and we have continued to run cattle on a
majority of our property, and I have a farm growing produce.
Water is essential to continue these pursuits.
In 1999 my brother and I decided to divide the
property amongst ourselves so that we can each have an
undivided interest. Unfortunately, there were four existing
lots of uneven size. We began discussions with the
Department of Water Supply to obtain water service for all
four lots. We also applied for a reconsolidation
subdivision of our existing four lots to reallocate the lot
sizes evenly between my brother and I.
The portion of the property that has been
allocated to me is basically undeveloped except for the farm
and some storage buildings. My goal is to obtain water
service to continue farming and build a home near my farm so
I can keep an eye on it. As you know, farming is a 24/7
job. The water system that the Department of Water Supply
is asking us to install would involve installing a 60,000
gallon tank that our drinking water will run through. As we
are only two people drawing from the line, the water will
sit in the tank and become stagnant.
The Department of Water Supply is also asking that
the land under the tank be deemed to the county fee simple.
This would require that my brother and I purchase the land
from the -- for the tank from Haleakala Ranch, which is both
a lengthy and costly project, and the ranch is not willing
to sell. Both my brother and I are committed to installing
and maintaining a private water system and provide fire
suppression required by the Maui Fire Department.
I respectfully request that the Board of Water
Supply approve -- recommend approval for my bother and I to
install a private water system. Sincerely, Ann Carter.
Any questions on that?
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Any questions for Ms. Mercer
at this time? Or for Mr. Carter? Now, these questions are
for them now, not for the department, okay? If not, then I
will --
MS. RAISBECK: Well, wait.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Go ahead, Sally.
MS. RAISBECK: I am remembering from last time
that what we were told was that the reconsolidation --
reconsolidate and subdivide four lots -- into four lots does
not require approval from the water department. Is that
correct?
MR. NAKAMURA: (Nods head.)
MS. RAISBECK: And they have, if I remember right,
they have two meters and they have a reservation for two
meters?
MS. MERCER: That's correct.
MS. RAISBECK: I'm asking the department at this
point. Again, it's a question of providing infrastructure
to county standards, which is too expensive?
MS. PYLE: Water for fire protection.
MS. RAISBECK: Water for fire protection. In the
letter, I wasn't aware last time that the drinking water
would be going through a 60,000 gallon tank. And I believe
that it's true that you don't want to have water sitting in
a tank for a long time. And if the water is there for fire
protection, it would get stale, it would lead to problems
with the water not being sufficiently disinfected or
whatever. Is that not true? I mean, is that true?
MR. NAKAMURA: As far as the water getting
stagnant, I guess if it's not used, it would probably get
stagnant. However, you must keep in mind that the 60,000
gallon requirement is what we require for fire protection.
So I think it's the fire flow requirements that's requiring
the size of the tank to be a 60,000.
MS. RAISBECK: I went to this four -- five-day
water conference in Florida and they mentioned in some of
the sessions I was at, the problem of when the pipes are
oversized for fire protection, it means you don't get enough
flow through the tank to be optimal for drinking water, and
it can lead to problems.
So I wonder if this request -- I mean, why does
their drinking water have to go through a 60,000 gallon
tank?
MR. NAKAMURA: I don't know if the drinking water
has to go through a 60,000 gallon tank, but the 60,000
gallon tank is for fire protection requirements. That's
what is setting the size of the tank.
MS. RAISBECK: They would like a private system
for fire protection and drinking water? I'm sorry --
MS. MERCER: What they would like here, if you
look at the diagram, they're willing to put the 60,000
gallon tank in and make it a catchment system which they
fill from a pump. Because it's in Kula, they bring a water
truck up there and fill it, so that the water -- the fire
suppression system is totally separate from the water, the
domestic waterline.
And so they have got a 5-foot wide easement that
comes -- Haleakala Ranch gave them years ago to their
grandparents, it comes from the 12-inch line down to their
property. And what they would like to do is put the remote
meters up where their two existing meters are now and, you
know, bring it down to the existing 5-foot easement so they
don't have to get a new easement.
Haleakala Ranch isn't going to give them a 15-foot
wide easement. So they can continue to use the easement
they have. They'll put the 60,000 gallon tank on their
property, so that they'll be putting in a 60,000 gallon tank
fire suppression system. So it's meeting the standards;
it's just a matter of where is the tank going.
And so Wayne had done a -- he could probably
explain this diagram to you, but the top shows what the
Department of Water Supply is wanting. And if you go down
item by item in system A, the top one says the County of
Maui will maintain the installed water system.
If you go down to the private water system, if you
look at 1, it says private water system to be maintained by
the owners. So the water department doesn't have to
maintain that system because the tank is on the Carter's
property. So if you go to No. 2 in the water supply, the
other one, it says the Department of Water Supply pays for
maintenance fees and upkeep of the water system.
If you go down to 2, in the private, the Carters
will be required to pay for this private system. So
basically -- basically, it's the same system. It's where
the tank goes and who is going to have to maintain it.
3 is, there will be three pressure reducing valves
which will require maintenance by the Department of Water
Supply. In 3, this isn't actually -- 3 is the private water
system will be using existing easements. It should have
been the 3 on the above in the water supply is that they
would have to get easements from Haleakala Ranch, which
Haleakala Ranch has written a letter saying, We're not going
to sell you the land for the tank and we're not going to
give you a 15-foot easement.
So they are kind of dead in the water there,
because if they can't get the property, they can't put the
tank in. So they came up with the idea of putting it on
their own property. It would give them better quality
water, it would give them the fire suppression. They would
do everything the way the county wants it except the tank
will be on their land, so that the water doesn't go -- they
don't have to drink the water that's really set aside for
fire suppression.
That's basically what they are asking for here, is
to be able to put the tank on their own land which thus then
creates a private water system. That's basically the bottom
line.
MS. RAISBECK: Can I ask the department what their
objections are to the bottom one there?
MR. NAKAMURA: Mr. Chair, one of the objections
that we have is that when we have the county water meters --
when you have county water meters, you are not allowed to
put in a private fire protection system. This would be a
violation of the rules and regulations, Section 27-A. So
that's why we're objecting to this situation.
MS. PARSONS: Say that again.
MR. NAKAMURA: It would be in direct violation of
our rules and regulations, Section 27-A.
MS. PARSONS: What does that mean?
MR. NAKAMURA: I can read that to you.
MS. PARSONS: Yeah.
MR. NAKAMURA: Section 27. Here it says, I quote,
Water main construction is necessary and the subdivider
shall provide each lot and subdivision with service laterals
from the water main to the lot boundary as specified in the
standard for water system construction.
As a -- one-third -- minimum size required is
for -- provided in Section 2-3 -- may be installed for each
of -- the two lots. Where the lots to be created --
existing water main laterals as required -- shall be
installed by the subdivider and supervised by the department
or as agreed upon with the department.
MS. RAISBECK: That doesn't say anything about
fire flow.
MR. NAKAMURA: Section 24, All subdivisions and
businesses, industrial hotels, apartments, and airports --
rule a residential district shall be required to install
fire hydrants which shall be -- by the subdivider and shall
be in accordance with these regulations. Subdivisions in
agricultural districts shall be required to install -- fire
hydrants in rural and agricultural districts.
MS. RAISBECK: Would not the tank --
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: One at a time. Okay, go
ahead, Ms. Pyle.
MS. PYLE: Maybe I'm being stubborn about this,
but I don't really hear where it says that they have to be
installed by the county. It just says they have to meet a
certain standard. And if a private system can meet a
certain standard, isn't that a possibility?
MR. NAKAMURA: In the past, it's always been that
if you have a county meter that the department has been
required -- the fire protection system be according to
county standards and not a private system, this has just
been something practiced in the past.
MS. PYLE: Right, and I understand that. But I
think that one of the things that I see happening all around
me on Maui and probably all through Hawaii, is that since we
have so many more residents coming in the State of Hawaii
and certainly in Maui County, that many of the areas that
perhaps 30 years ago when many rules and precedents were
set, that those areas were not really subject to pressure of
subdivisions, perhaps like your property or other people
that have come.
Since we have so many more residents and such a
demand for housing and to subdivide land that may not
actually be the most appropriate, perhaps we need to review
and analyze and maybe be a little more flexible in what the
rules are. Subdividing Upper Kula is not the same as
subdividing Kahului. And the rules may need -- perhaps to
be looked at a little differently and a little more
flexibility --
MR. NAKAMURA: Mr. Chair, in response to that,
generally, what the staff has been attempting to do is be as
consistent as we can in terms of application to the rules
and standards. So whether it's Kahului or whether it's
Upcountry, the staff has at least tried to be as consistent
so we be as fair and equitable as we can to all people that
are requesting systems such as this.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Mr. Nakamura, we appreciate
that, and I'm not trying to -- I think Dorothy is not trying
to deviate. Again, we're just trying to see if we can look
at the rules and maybe review them. I think times change
and we have to look at the changing times.
But let's go to Mr. Kushi, I think he has
something he needs to present. Go ahead.
MR. KUSHI: Mr. Chair, and maybe to help clarify
Dorothy's question and to also, on behalf of the department,
kind of justify what they have done and what they are doing.
Here, the situation is that the applicant wants to do a
private fire system, fire and water system. Not a private
water system.
MS. PYLE: That's right.
MR. KUSHI: They still want their meters to be
hooked up to our system. The rules and regulations, first
of all, have all these requirements and standards. And they
also mention fire hydrants, standpipes, etc. Now, it
doesn't say in the rules private or public fire hydrant.
It's assumed that it's public fire hydrants, or public
standpipes.
The other rule that comes into play is under the
subdivision rules, Section 2-2, it's entitled "Reservoirs,"
which really doesn't hit the spot. But it does say that, in
essence, 2-2, Subsection B as in boy, it says tank site
lots, access roads, and pipeline easements shall be
dedicated to the Board of Water Supply before final
subdivision approval.
That's what the department is really using in
their past practice. So all these things, it was assumed
that the department would take it over, and now the county
will take it over. So that's why the private versus public.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Go ahead, Ms. Parsons.
MS. PARSONS: Mr. Kushi, have we ever deviated
from that?
MR. KUSHI: Not that I know of in terms of fire
protection. We have in terms of allowing subdivisions with
a total private system. Total private with the private
wells, private potable water, etc.
MS. PARSONS: What I'm hearing from the public,
and this is a chant that we hear constantly, is we want more
affordable housing. And we're not going to afford
affordable housing unless we're wealthy, wealthy developers
that have to reconfigure or reconstruct and jump through the
hoops. And that's why the developers sell their lots for
5-, 600,000, a million dollars, because they put all this
infrastructure in.
Now, if we want what the people are asking for,
for more affordable lots, I think we need to maybe help bend
the rules where we can, in order to give people an
affordable place to live.
MR. KUSHI: One comment to that. I can't agree
with you more. I'm totally for affordable housing as long
as, if we deviate from the standards, we don't get -- come
back and get sued when there's a fire.
MS. PARSONS: Right, I know.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Ken?
MR. OKAMURA: Thank you, Mr. Chair. In regards to
what Mr. Kushi was reading about, the county taking over the
fire, the tank, I guess that's the idea. In other words,
you want them to build the tank so that it can be dedicated
to the county. Is that right? Or that's not right? That's
right?
MR. NAKAMURA: (Nods head.)