BOARD OF WATER SUPPLY
COUNTY OF MAUI
REGULAR BOARD MEETING
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 2005
Kahului Shopping Center
Kaahumanu Avenue
Kahului, Maui, Hawaii
Reported by: Katherine Eismann, RDR, CRR, CSR #439
APPEARANCES
Chairperson: MICHAEL VICTORINO
Vice Chairman: KENNETH OKAMURA
Board Members: KENT M. HIRANAGA
STACY HELM CRIVELLO
GINNY PARSONS
DOROTHY R. PYLE
SALLY RAISBECK
RALPH JOHANSEN
MICHELLE McLEAN
Corp Counsel: EDWARD KUSHI
Director: GEORGE TENGAN
Board Secretary: CATHY HOWARD
Staff: ELLEN KRAFTSOW
HOLLY PERDIDO
HERB CHANG
ALVA NAKAMURA
JOE MENDONCA
(Thursday, February 24, 2005, 9:05 a.m.)
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: I'd like to call the Board of
Water Supply meeting for February 24th, 2005, to order.
Members present, Michele, Stacy, Kent, Ken, Sally,
Dorothy, Ginny, and myself, Mike, Chair. Missing is Ralph,
and I'm not sure why, because I saw Ralph yesterday and he
said he was going to be here. Hopefully nothing serious or
maybe stalled in traffic.
First is approval of minutes. Oh, before I move
on, announcements. Sally, you had an announcement you wanted
to make.
(Mr. Johansen entered the hearing room.)
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yes,
I noticed that the Planning Committee of the Board of Water --
of the County Council is having a meeting next Monday
afternoon, and they will be taking up the question -- a bill
submitted by Dain Kane, which would make the Water Use and
Development Plan a part of the General Plan process.
And I haven't yet learned the details of that
bill, but I think it is something that the whole Board should
inform itself about and possibly take a position on as it
proceeds through the Council. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Thank you. And let the
record reflect that Ralph has now come in. Thank you.
Any other announcements? None?
I will move to approve the minutes from the
January 2nd, 2005, Budget Workshop. The minutes was included
in the packet you got and also, if I'm not mistaken -- were
the minutes from the regular meeting also in there?
MS. HOWARD: No.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Also, correction,
Mr. Chair. I believe that's January 12.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: January 12. Oh, what did I
say?
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: I think you said 2nd.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: I apologize. January 12,
2005. Do I hear any motion to approve the minutes?
BOARDMEMBER JOHANSEN: So move.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Second.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: It's been moved and seconded.
All those in favor say aye.
(Chorus of ayes.)
Opposed?
(Silence.)
Okay. Agenda item number five would be testimony
from the public. Do we have anyone?
I have nothing here, Cathy. Do we have any
testimony from any public member out in the audience? Seeing
none.
Going on to item number six, unfinished business.
Unfortunately, I just was informed that Holly -- I forgot to
put my phone on stop. Excuse me. Quiet. Okay. It's off
now. Sorry.
I was just informed by Cathy that Holly is going
to be late in arriving. They had some car trouble. So, I
would like to ask if we could defer under unfinished business,
under items A and B, until their arrival, if that's all right
with the committee.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: No objection.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: No objection. Thank you.
Moving on to item number seven, other business, we will start
off with A, verbal update for the Hamakaupoko wells.
Mr. Director. Mr. Tengan.
DIRECTOR TENGAN: Mr. Chair, we have Alva from the
Engineering Division to do this update.
MR. NAKAMURA: Good morning, Mr. Chair, Council
Members.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Alva, would you introduce
yourself, please?
MR. NAKAMURA: My name is Alva Nakamura. I am the
engineering program manager for the Water Department. As far
as the H'poko wells, I have been contacted, in fact, this
morning. And the latest is is that Maui Electric has
indicated that the service for this well is now slated to be
completed by about mid-April. Initially, it was going to be
the latter part of March or early April. Now they are talking
about mid-April.
The main reason for the slight delay is they have
been trying to coordinate the cane burning out in that area,
because the cane has to be burned before they can begin the
installation of the poles. That, coupled with the wet weather
out in that general area, has kind of hampered some of the
efforts in terms of trying to meet the timeframe that they had
initially indicated.
However, I've been reassured by them that they are
making every effort to move forward and get the permit power
to H'poko by the middle of April. So, that is where it sets
right now.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Any Board Members have any
questions for --
BOARDMEMBER JOHANSEN: No, I was just pointing.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Oh, I am sorry. Yeah, go
ahead, Ken.
VICE-CHAIRMAN OKAMURA: Thank you, Mr. Chair. So,
the electricity would be -- the purpose of it would be to --
it doesn't have any electricity now?
MR. NAKAMURA: That's right. As you know, both
wells are currently on generators. And once the pole line is
brought in to both well sites, then we will have permanent
power. And that's, in essence, what the intent is.
VICE-CHAIRMAN OKAMURA: Okay. And then -- I will
wait to ask another question.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Where are we currently
pumping to at this point with H'poko?
MR. NAKAMURA: I think it's going to Upcountry. I
mean, you know, to the treatment plant.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: To which one?
MR. NAKAMURA: Upcountry, I believe, Upcountry.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: To which one of the
treatment plants?
MR. NAKAMURA: I think it's Kamole, if I'm not
mistaken.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Kamole.
MR. NAKAMURA: It's routed up that way. Now,
initially, once this well becomes permanent, you know, we also
have in the works to bring a pipeline down from H'poko wells
to tie it into the Paia tank. And that's currently being
negotiated with the general contractor for the change in scope
of work.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: And then for pumping up to
Kamole, do you have any idea what the cost -- just since we
are going to get into rates and things like that, what the
cost is to pump up there? Do we have any figures?
MR. NAKAMURA: I don't have that information with
me right now. I guess we could look at -- you know, we could
find out what it is, but I couldn't answer that right now.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Okay. If we could find that
out.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. Ken? Anybody else
have any other questions? Sally.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair.
Alva, just to straighten my thinking out about this, when is
it planned to have water from the H'poko wells go to Paia to
replace part of the Central Maui water?
MR. NAKAMURA: I think this is going to be
dependent upon how soon we can finish up the negotiation with
the general contractor, who they will -- they are reviewing
the plans right now, and once that has been completed and they
have given us a final proposal, what the change in scope of
work is going to be and what it's going to cost, then I think
we will be in a better position to determine exactly when the
pipelines will be completed.
So, right now, I can't really tell you. If I were
to guess, maybe the end of the year or early next year
sometime. But, again, it's just purely a guess right now.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Okay. So, when the project
is complete, the water will go to Paia?
MR. NAKAMURA: Paia, that's correct.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Is that correct?
MR. NAKAMURA: That's correct.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: It's planned.
MR. NAKAMURA: Yes.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. Anybody else? Ken.
VICE-CHAIRMAN OKAMURA: Thank you. I know when I
went to the meeting in Haiku or Paia and they were discussing
this issue, the residents were concerned about the -- you
know, having that water put into their system.
And it wasn't determined, at that point, that it
was going to be done. It was just like getting public input.
And, so, what else would need to be done so that -- you know,
or dialog with the residents. So, has a decision already been
made, or don't we have to have a process for making the
decision, or, you know, or inform the residents that it's
going to be done or -- I don't know what would be the best way
to do it.
MR. NAKAMURA: I think I will defer to the
Director for response.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Defer to the Director. Okay.
DIRECTOR TENGAN: Mr. Chair, I believe at a
meeting, we stated to the community that we would hold another
community meeting before we put the wells on line.
In the meantime, we will be looking at
alternatives as to how we can use the -- utilize the water and
minimize the amount of water that we would be putting into the
Paia system. There are a couple of alternatives available to
us, and I haven't received any response from A&B yet. But one
alternative is to pump the water out to the Hamakuapoko -- I
mean, to the Kamole treatment plant. In exchange, to bring
treated water from the Kamole treatment plant down into the
Paia system.
Another alternative is to pump the wells and pump
it into the plantation's reservoirs, after the CAC plan,
because we don't want to be contributing more DBCP back into
the ground without treating the water. So, that's been --
that's in the works also.
We looked at -- we looked at diluting the water,
but that seems to have more complications involved. Anyway,
those are the alternatives we are looking at right now and
working out.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: So, would the public have an
opportunity, when you -- I mean, you are going ahead and
putting the pipeline, that is correct?
DIRECTOR TENGAN: Correct.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. So, once that's done,
then the options, as you just discussed, will the public have
a chance to put their input before that final decision is
made?
DIRECTOR TENGAN: As to how we utilize the water?
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: That's correct.
DIRECTOR TENGAN: Yes. What I plan to do is
present to them the alternatives that are available to us and
that are workable. And when I say workable, we will have the
cooperation of the plantation. Without that, these
alternatives would not be available to us, and we would need
to -- whenever the Central Maui System needs some supplemental
source, then we will use the Hamakuapoko wells.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: So, the primary use, at this
time, if I gather you right, is that we want to use most of
that water for Upcountry via the Kamole treatment plant?
DIRECTOR TENGAN: No. The wells were intended to
provide water for Central Maui.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Central Maui.
DIRECTOR TENGAN: Yes.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. And do you have any
time line? And I know Alva has said it's going to go out to
contract and bid and all these other aspects. But do we have
any other time line as far as when the public would be called
in to come in and sit down and discuss this matter with the
Department? Do you have any kind of idea when that might
occur?
DIRECTOR TENGAN: No, we haven't discussed the
matter as to when would be a good time to meet with the public
again.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Since this is such a hot
topic with the public, the Department of Health has a -- what
they call a chain of command, chain of custody sheets for
pesticide chemical reports, and organic chemical reports, and
volatile organic chemical reports.
Could we see those for the H'poko in the next
Board meeting and discuss, so that we can look at them
together, so that we can feel comfortable, when we are
speaking to the public, that what we are seeing, the water
quality, so that we can help to support what you want to do?
DIRECTOR TENGAN: Mr. Chair, I believe the
document that Member Parsons was talking about is strictly a
control to make sure that the samples taken are appropriately
handled and not, you know -- there's not a break in the
control of the sample from the sample point to the lab.
And I would think that you would be more
interested in the lab results than the chain of custody
document.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Right. That's --
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: You are looking for results,
Ms. Parsons?
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Right.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Yes, if we could. Is that
possible?
DIRECTOR TENGAN: Yes, that's not a problem. We
can get you the latest report.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. We will put that as an
agenda item for the next meeting.
Any other discussion on this matter? Thank you,
Alva. Appreciate it.
If it's all right with the Board, I'd like to go
back out of order again and go back to where we were in
unfinished business, item six, because Holly is here. And I
guess you guys are about ready, Miss Perdido, to give us the
good news. So, we are going to start, A, update of the water
rate study, yeah? Holly.
MS. PERDIDO: Yes.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: So, you need to introduce
yourself, because today we are live.
MS. PERDIDO: Good morning. My name is Holly
Perdido. I am the fiscal officer for the Department of Water
Supply. Just wanted to give a brief update of the water rate
study.
We have finished all the public meetings, as
everybody should be aware of. The draft -- the comments are
all in your packet, and I hope everyone was able to look at
them from all the meetings. The turnout was low, but from
past meetings, it's not to be ex -- you know, unexpected.
The draft report of the water rate study has been
handed out to numerous people. I think the Board Members,
Stakeholders -- I think a copy even went up to the Council and
the Mayor. We are waiting for comments on this draft report.
The Stakeholders did attend most of the meetings.
They are also meeting with various County Council members now.
I know Bruce Falkner, Elliott Krash, and Mike Quinn are
heading that up and making sure the Stakeholders are meeting
with Council members.
Next month, R.W. Beck will be here at the Board
meeting to update and any questions or -- and, actually, go
over our next steps, what we are going to be doing in the rest
of this year.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Any questions? Any questions
from the Board Members as far as the report is concerned? And
also one quick comment.
I want to thank all of the Board Members who made
the time to attend these various meetings throughout the
County of Maui. I'm going to be honest. I was a little taken
with the lack of participation from the public, not that it
was unexpected, but I was sure hoping a lot more people would
show up or at least more than did. I mean, some meetings, we
had one or two members from the public, and --
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: Or none.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Or none. And it was kind of
a sad chronology that here is an opportunity for people to
give us their input and very few people showed up. And we all
know that as we get closer, there will be more public
testimony, but here was an opportunity to really understand
what was going on.
Unfortunately, it didn't happen. So, we will
go -- we will take the ball and run with it from here.
Members from the Board?
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Mr. Chair.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Sally.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Would it be -- is it
necessary and appropriate that the Board, at this time,
consider this Stakeholders report and it -- and pass it on
officially to the Mayor, with our either recommendation or
lack of recommendation regarding it? Would that be
appropriate?
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: I think that's exactly what
we want to do. That's exactly what we are trying to
accomplish right now.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Then I will -- for purposes
of this discussion, I will make a motion that the Board accept
or approve -- approve the Stakeholders report to the Board of
Water Supply and transmit it to the Mayor for his approval.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Do we have a second?
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: Second.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: It's been moved and seconded.
I open the floor for discussion. I will open -- okay. Ralph.
BOARDMEMBER JOHANSEN: I just want to speak to the
questions that I raised in my letter to the Chair with respect
to how the distinction was being made between new growth and
existing plant equipment.
And I think that's been answered to my
satisfaction except for one thing, and that is that the
16 percent, which was originally the proportion of the total
CIP that was reflected as new growth, seemed to me very low
and still does. And that's a question I still have that is
unresolved in my mind. Thank you.
VICE-CHAIRMAN OKAMURA: Repeat the last of the
question.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. The part of the
question that Ralph was asking, the last question was he
still -- he still doesn't quite understand the 16 percent
earmarked for new development out of the CIP. He thinks
that's very low, right? It seems extremely low for that
portion.
And we did have a meeting, and we went over a lot
of this area. And that still seems to be, even in my mind, a
little bit low. But we also have the water development fees,
and there's other fees that go in to making or developing new
water sources as well as hooking up people or systems to our
system.
So, but anyhow, that's another discussion matter.
So, I will try to stay right with the report as itself. Any
other discussion from members of the Board as far as the
Stakeholders report is concerned or the comments from the
public, too, and that is also open to discussion?
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Yes.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Go ahead, Sally.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I
did attend some but not all of the Stakeholders Committee
meetings, and I congratulate them for working very hard and
making a very concerted attempt to deal with the question of
the operating and maintenance budget and what would be
required to do a good job.
They recommended a much larger CIP budget than
they considered the Department, at this time, would be able to
do. They did it as a challenge. And they are -- they were
fully aware of the failure, really, of the Department to
accomplish dealing with its CIP budget in the past.
And they were very concerned by this. In fact,
their report really has been late because of trying to deal
with that issue specifically. I think, at this point, the
budget process for the Council is close enough that we must
simply transmit this, their report, to the Mayor. And I note,
with great regret, that the rates recommended basically amount
to, in practice, a 12 percent across the board increase,
although less for agriculture.
But I am very disappointed that the rates that the
consultants came up with and that were approved by the
Stakeholders Committee show no conservation structuring. It's
there on paper, but not in practice, that there's no real
increase in water rate depending on how much you use.
That was the goal of the committee. I understand
they did not accomplish it. And basically, it's just status
quo with a slight increase for everybody. So, I find this
disappointing that we don't have truly conservation structured
rates.
They also did not deal, because of time problems,
with the question of -- and in furtherance of my remarks about
not being conservation oriented, I refer to the testimony of
Dick Mayer at our last meeting, which went into detail about
the actual numbers that showed there was no actual real
conservation stepping in the rates.
But, due to lack of time, they were unable to deal
with the question of different rates for different classes of
consumer. They put that off to be possibly considered next
year. If the Council renews the contract of the consultants,
they have promised to deal with that in the coming year. And
these rates are recommended for one year only. It's a --
although they included possible increases, what the Council
would be voting on this time is only this one-year increase.
So, I will be voting -- actually, I considered
abstaining on this vote, because a abstention is counted as a
yes, so it wouldn't hold up the process. But I guess I will
vote in favor of my motion. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Thank you, Sally. Any other
comments? Ms. Parsons.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: I just have a quick
question, and I was not involved in this Stakeholders process.
I have only been -- I have only asked some questions after
people have attended. But have we polled -- have we or has
the Department considered polling the public and asking them
some of the questions of -- since we didn't get such a
turnout, is it something we are considering or did we do, to
see how they are going to feel about the rate increases, and
how they feel about their service? I mean, we could
incorporate a lot of questions in there.
But to get a feel, because these are -- these are
rather large hikes in the -- although it's -- it relates to
pennies when it comes out, but they are rather large increases
being considered. Just a question there.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Mr. Director, has anything --
any consideration between done in that area?
DIRECTOR TENGAN: No, we don't plan to, you know,
conduct any kind of survey as to the acceptability of the
proposed rate increases. That's part of the reason why the
Stakeholders Committee was formed. That was to get a
representation from a broad spectrum of the community. And
hopefully, the members of the committee would have -- would
have voiced their concerns about the rate increases. I don't
know that we have time to go and -- and poll the community.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: And I think I -- are we
correct in saying this, that this still has to go before the
Council, and people will still have an opportunity to give
testimony at that point?
DIRECTOR TENGAN: That's my understanding.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: So, you will have additional
opportunities to give feedback to the Board as well as the
Council as far as these rate increases are concerned.
So, hopefully, the public will take that as notice
that this is another opportunity for their involvement, so
that whatever rate increase we do come up, it is a workable
and tangible type of increase that all of us can live with,
you know.
DIRECTOR TENGAN: Mr. Chair, if you look back at,
you know, the activities that occurred throughout this process
here, the public has had at least three opportunities to
provide input, once with the Stakeholders Committee, once
through the Board, and then at the community meetings. And
they will have a fourth opportunity when it goes before the
Council.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Thank you. I think the
public has had ample opportunities and hopefully, at the
Council meeting, will be our last chance -- their chance to
give. Yes, Miss Dorothy.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: I think, from my own
experience, Maui Community College frequently does needs
assessments and surveys in the community. And they are really
difficult to handle. The amount of information or the amount
of work that goes into developing a questionnaire of some kind
that has questions that are not ambiguous and difficult to
answer is really difficult, and you need a lot of lead time to
do it.
So, I understand the problem of doing that. It
does concern me, though, that there are many, many people that
live in Maui County, not just in Kahului or in Kula, or maybe
even Kihei, who are not really well aware that we have these
meetings.
And I know that we can say publicly, yes, it's
been noticed in the newspaper. There are announcements made,
and so on and so forth. And we should be able to say plainly
they have had their opportunity. Yes.
But, is it possible to just put a notice in
everybody's water bill that simply says water rate increase
coming up in the next year, hearings to be held at this time,
and put it in everybody's water bill? So, when they open
their water bill, they will see this little, bright,
violent-pink-colored paper, or citrus-colored yellow, or
something, with a big bold statement on it that says now you
need to make your comments known.
To me, that's a far more efficient way of
notifying the public than putting a notice on the back page of
the Maui News. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Point well taken, Dorothy.
Thank you. Something to keep in mind for futuristic meetings,
yeah? I think --
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: Not the future, now.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: You think they should do that
in the next billing?
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: Yes.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Would that be possible? I am
not really well aware of the billing system that the County of
Maui -- that the Water Board does. Would that be possible, a
notice of that nature?
DIRECTOR TENGAN: Mr. Chair, I think I will leave
that question to Holly.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. Holly.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: Holly.
MS. PERDIDO: I would have to check with who does
our billing, Honolulu Board of Water, and I know they have --
our billings actually come, I think, out of Texas now. So,
I -- it's been -- I can't think of the word, but --
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: It's been farmed out.
MS. PERDIDO: Yeah.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: Outsourced.
MS. PERDIDO: Outsourced.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: That's the word, outsourcing.
MS. PERDIDO: So, what I could do is check with
them to see the timing, you know, that we have to get some
notices together and get them to insert into the billing.
But we do insert things. We can add a line item
onto the billings as a memo. So, we could do that, you know,
when the Council -- we don't even know when that will be yet,
the Council meetings for our budget.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: Just a heads up.
MS. PERDIDO: Yeah, but we could do like a memo on
the bills, definitely, we can do pretty quickly. Just a
notice, I'm not sure when I could get that to them.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: I guess we need to find out
from the Council when they intend to have these hearings, and
we can incorporate that. Maybe what we can do, Holly, if you
could check with the Council and see what their dates --
tentative dates would be, and if we could incorporate it in
the next mailing, that would be great. I am not sure when the
billings go out. I think it's bimonthly, right?
MS. PERDIDO: Correct.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Am I correct? So, our last
one was February, last month, January.
MS. PERDIDO: Actually, billings are going out
constantly, you know, every day. Not necessarily every day,
but billings go out throughout the island over a two-month
period as we read everybody.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: So, it's segmented.
MS. PERDIDO: Yeah.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: In other words, some of the
community get their billing this time of the month.
MS. PERDIDO: Correct.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. Somebody has a phone
on, if you don't mind, please. And I am guilty, so I will be
the first to admit I forget sometimes myself. Okay. Ken.
VICE-CHAIRMAN OKAMURA: I wanted to talk about
the -- yeah, the public information thing. I agree with
Dorothy, maybe -- well, I was thinking that the way the public
was informed about the meetings for the rates was sort of last
minute, and it wasn't part of the plan into the process for
notifying or having the meetings with the community.
So, what if a part of the contract for next year
would include this thing where the committee or the consultant
would be responsible for trying to define some kind of
timetable for notifying the public.
I think the other thing about a lot of -- you
know, some of the notices were good. I didn't see all of
them. But if we just say that there's going to be a
12 percent increase, people might sort of jump at that, you
know. But if you explain -- we explain what the specific
increases will be and how it would affect them, so sort of
like an education notice or something, so that they understand
the increase, I think that would be better. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Thank you. Any other
discussion? Yes.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Yes, Mr. Chair. If I may,
I would like to, for the record, include what the
recommendations of the Stakeholders Committee were, if that's
acceptable to you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Yes.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: This is a letter from the
Water Rate Stakeholders Committee, to Director Tengan, dated
December 14th, 2004. They have seven recommendations.
The first three deal with CIP, with capital
improvement programs. They recommend that they vigorously
pursue the implementation of the CIP implementation plan. The
plan must specify the actions necessary to accomplish capital
projects at an annual level of approximately $25 million.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Right.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: That is much larger than
the Department has been able to do recently. Recommendation
two, progress reports for CIP implementation plan. They
recommend a reporting mechanism be developed to regularly
assess their, the Department's, progress on the CIP
implementation plan and the completion of projects.
Recommendation three, management audit of DWS.
The WRSC recommends that a management audit of the DWS be
conducted in fiscal year 2005. Specifically, that they
recommend the audit include, not be restricted to, but include
an assessment of the engineering and planning divisions of DWS
and a determination as to how CIP spending levels can be
increased in order to support the renewal and replacement of
aging infrastructure as well as future growth in Maui County.
Recommendation four has to do with the proposed
rate adjustments, and we have talked about those.
Recommendation five is the need for future rate
increases. They simple mention that there probably will be
need for future rate increases.
Recommendation six, plan to move to customer class
based rates. That is not included in the current budget, the
current rate structure, but they are hoping to move to that
later.
Recommendation seven is a miscellaneous set of
issues for further consideration.
And I would like to have the Board discuss and
possibly say that the management audit of DWS is a very
important recommendation here that the Board fully supports,
and I would -- I notice, included with this letter, is a draft
contract for management audit, but it only refers to the
engineering and planning sections.
I would like to have the Board, if they so desire,
state that the management audit should include the entire
department.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Absolutely.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: So, that would be my -- I
support their -- all of their recommendations, and it would be
nice if the Board could especially highlight the need for the
management audit of the department. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: We have a motion on the floor
at this time. If you want to, we can add another motion or
amend the motion as stated. Okay. So, Dorothy, do you want
to amend the motion?
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: What I was going to offer is a
friendly amendment to the motion that we have before us, and
that this friendly amendment actually has two pieces to it.
One, that the issue of conservation and a strong
appeal to the Council and to the Mayor to look at the
conservation of water issue and perhaps a method by which that
can be placed into this rate structure. That, I think, is one
part of the amendment.
The other is that we add and note very carefully
that the -- what are they called?
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Recommendations.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: The group that made the --
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: The Stakeholders.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: That the Stakeholders Committee
made a series of recommendations, and that we support those
and clearly note them as part of their report, particularly
the issue of an audit for the water supply -- the Department
of Water Supply.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Is it all right with the
Board, the rest of the members, as a friendly amendment, or
should we have it --
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: I would withdraw my motion
and include Dorothy's, the motion as amended by Dorothy.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: I don't think -- we can just
add that?
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: It becomes the final.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: So, that would be added. So,
do we have a second on that amended motion?
BOARDMEMBER JOHANSEN: I second.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. All right. So, I hope
you got all of this. Thank you. Any other discussion? Yes,
Sally.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: No.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: If not, then I will -- Ralph.
BOARDMEMBER JOHANSEN: Just can we have the motion
restated, because it got kind of lengthy.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: It is.
BOARDMEMBER JOHANSEN: And put it in a more
succinct form?
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Is it possible that you
restate the motion along with the amendment? You made the
motion, and you made the amendment, so --
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: May I make a -- maybe
Michele has something to say.
BOARDMEMBER McLEAN: Thanks, Mr. Chair. I
understood the original motion to be approving the report as
drafted and transmit that to the Mayor. And we would be
making an amendment to change one of the components of the
report by focusing on -- asking that an adjustment to the
rates be made to acknowledge conservation, which I -- I --
maybe you can clarify that, because they seem to be
contradicting. Either we support the report or we prefer that
the rates acknowledge conservation measures instead.
Maybe we could support the report, but in our
transmittal letter, in a separate motion, saying we support
the report, but we would also like to see more emphasis on
conservation. Something like that.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: That was my intention, is that
the initial motion to support the report and forward it still
stands, but that the Board of Water Supply has noted that
there is a -- several areas that we would like to call out for
particular continued observation or continued information, one
of them being the area of conservation, the other one clearly
noting that, in the report, there are these other
recommendations made, so that those will not be ignored.
That was really my intention, not to undermine the
sending forward of the report, but to just note that there are
issues that need to be continually looked at. Okay.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. Is everybody all right
with that now?
VICE-CHAIRMAN OKAMURA: So, we are going to be
voting on the amendment to the motion or -- I think it would
be simpler if you just did what Michele said. We vote on the
main motion and make other recommendations as our
recommendations to the -- as our recommendations to the Mayor.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: I don't want to do that. I
actually don't want to do that, if possible, because it will
be too easy to simply say that the Board of Water Supply voted
in favor of this and then to ignore the second motion.
VICE-CHAIRMAN OKAMURA: I didn't mean to -- I
didn't mean to ignore the second motion, but --
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: No, no, not you, not us, but
for someone then down the road to report, in the newspaper, or
in the Mayor's office, or somewhere else to say the Board of
Water Supply voted to approve this, period, and never say they
had a second motion where they made these recommendations. I
think it's really important to put them together, so that they
will always be looked at together.
VICE-CHAIRMAN OKAMURA: Okay. Thank you.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Are you through with that,
Ken?
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Mr. Chair.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: While I agree with you, you
cannot control how they are going to write this anyway.
Whether we put them together, it doesn't matter. They are
going to say -- they are going to shorten it to however they
are told to shorten it.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: It's a better shot to have it
there.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: No, it's not. Six of one,
half dozen of the other. I think it's clearer if we vote on
this to accept it, and then we do motions. I think it will be
stronger, after the fact, and then they have to -- if they are
going to do anything at all, they will have to note what
motions went along with it and what was passed and what
wasn't, if they are going to do a full story.
But, to base it on the fact that we are going to
get better coverage won't happen. I just --
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Mr. Chair.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: I think we are getting a
little -- go ahead, Sally.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: May I substitute a
condensed version that I hope will be satisfactory to what we
want to accomplish?
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Why don't we do this. Before
we do that, just to get back into some semblance of order,
will you retract your amendment?
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: I will.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: And will you retract your
second to that amendment?
BOARDMEMBER JOHANSEN: I will, yeah.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: So now all that's on the
floor, if I am correct, is the original motion to accept the
report at this point. Am I correct? Everybody clear on that?
To approve -- I guess to approve the report. Now --
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: I would like to withdraw
that motion and substitute a motion to the following effect,
if that is -- may I withdraw that motion?
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Then who made the second
needs to withdraw your second.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: Withdrawn.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: So, the main motion now is
being withdrawn and the second. Go ahead, Miss Raisbeck.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Okay. I would like to make
a motion that the Board of Water Supply conditionally approve
the report -- the final report of the Stakeholders Committee,
dated December 14th, 2004. That the conditions on which we
approve it are that the -- a notice be -- or that we note the
lack of true conservation rate structure along with the --
that we note the lack of true conservation rate structure -- I
will wait -- and recommend that, if possible, conservation
rate structure should be included.
And we note with great approval the recommendation
of the Stakeholders Committee that a management audit of the
Department of Water Supply be performed in fiscal 2005.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: I will second that.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. So, you are saying, if
I am correct in summarizing, we accept this report
conditionally.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Conditionally approve.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Approve this report with the
following conditions. That conservation be noted as one of
the -- being lacking in this report, right?
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Yes, yes.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: And that the recommendations
made by the Stakeholders, especially the audit of DWS, be
noted.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Yes.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Are we clear with that,
ladies and gentlemen? Okay.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: That's not exactly how she
stated it. She stated that the conservation be placed into
this. And my question is, by whom is going -- is going to
facilitate placing the conservation structure? Who do you --
who do you imagine to do that?
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: This report will go to the
Mayor for his consideration and approval, and he will, if he
so desires, transmit it to the Council or transmit his
recommendations to the Council. Either one of those could put
a more conservation-oriented rate structure in if they wanted
to.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. Holly.
MS. PERDIDO: I just want to bring up, during the
Stakeholders -- one of their main meetings, conservation was a
very big issue for them. Our current rates do hold some
conservation. As you use more water, you get charged more.
So, we do have -- I mean, that's what we have right now.
Unfortunately, we did not have the data available
to give them for another -- and the time available to give
them another -- what am I trying to say? Structure, that we
could change a total structure. It would take a lot of work
to change the structure.
That's why they are looking at going into the
multifamily, customer class rate structure in the future.
MS. KRAFTSOW: What they did do, in deference to
the concern about conservation, was increase the steps, so
that the steps of the tiered rate are steeper than they used
to be. And that, in itself, will increase the incentive for
conservation and should hopefully also increase actual
conservation.
But in order to do a specific customer class based
conservation rate structure, it was determined that a certain
amount of research needed to be done, and that that research
could take us five months to a year, depending upon the
various factors and how difficult it was to get the data
correct enough. And that's why they went with the one year
approval, with the intention to move towards a more
conservation-oriented rate structure as soon as we could
dedicate the staff and the resources and gather the data.
So, I think that they did try, at least, to
specifically target this rate increase for conservation,
although it's not the perfect solution yet.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Member Kent.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: I would be voting against
this motion basically for -- based on the statements that
Ginny made and also staff. And basically, this motion is
recommending that the administration look at the rate
structure and possibly come up with a new rate structure. And
what basis are they going to have to do that?
There's been a lot of time and effort to create
this rate structure, and I'm satisfied with it. So, I will be
voting against this motion.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Thank you. Member Michele.
BOARDMEMBER McLEAN: Thanks. In a similar vein, I
am voting against it, too. I agree with the intent of it, but
I -- my support of this report comes without conditions. I
support the report, and I would also like to emphasize the
issues that were raised, but that's not a condition of my
approval of the report. Thanks.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Member Stacy.
BOARDMEMBER CRIVELLO: I also will vote negative
on that motion, because if you look at the report that will be
submitted, we have a section on issues for further
consideration, and it includes a rate designed issue for
conservation as well as for low income, when you look at the
next rate. So, it appears, you know, sort of packaged in this
report.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Thank you. Any other further
comments?
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: I just would reply to the
statements made by Holly and Ellen that customer class based
rates are one thing. Conservation-oriented rates are a
different aspect. And the testimony provided, as I said, by
Dick Mayer last time, showed that, in practice, the rates, as
presently structured, although they are stepped, the steps are
such that it does not result in a true higher cost for higher
usage. So, which is the whole intent of conservation-based
rates. So, I would just make that distinction and that has
nothing to do with customer class. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Thank you. If there are no
further discussion, I will call for the question, and I will
ask by roll call the members vote, just to make sure we have
no confusion in this. Okay? Ralph.
BOARDMEMBER JOHANSEN: I think before we wind this
up, we should have a little more detail, so that we can read
into the record again what it was that the Dick Mayer
specifically said about where this falls short in terms of
conservation.
I don't know. We could take a recess and be very,
very easy to locate it, in the minutes that we just approved,
but I would like to see something more specific about the
grounds for Sally's motion before we vote on it.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: It's your call.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. I am going to say I am
going to call for the question, Ralph, even though you made
that request, and see what happens after that. So, going by
with that, starting from Michele.
BOARDMEMBER McLEAN: No.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: No. Stacy.
BOARDMEMBER CRIVELLO: No.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Kent.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: Nay.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Ken.
VICE-CHAIRMAN OKAMURA: No.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Ralph.
BOARDMEMBER JOHANSEN: Yes.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Sally.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Yes.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Dorothy.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: Yes.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Ginny.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: No.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: And I vote no. So, six to
three. Okay. So, the motion fails. So, now, Member Kent.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: I would like to make a
motion that we approve the Stakeholders Committees
Recommendation and forward it to the Mayor.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Do we have a second?
BOARDMEMBER CRIVELLO: Second.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. So, the motion is just
to forward the Stakeholders Report and Recommendations.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: With the Board's approval.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: With the Board's approval, so
I get it perfectly clear.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Clarification. I think we
already accepted the report as a report, but this would be
approving the report. Is that not --
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Yes, it's an approval of the
report. Member Michele.
BOARDMEMBER McLEAN: And I would ask -- this isn't
a motion -- just ask for consensus that the transmittal from
the Board to the Mayor indicate the two issues that we have
talked about, wanting to underscore our concern about
conservation and wanting to highlight the recommendations, to
report that out in our transmittal.
If that's more appropriately done in a motion,
that's fine. But that would actually be the Chair's decision
in preparing that transmittal of what to include in the
Board's discussion in forwarding the report to the Mayor.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Well, I think that came clear
from many Board Members, and I will make sure that is in the
transmittal and be very much highlighted as a very important
point of this approval process. Okay.
So, I will assure you that will be. I will make
sure you folks see it before I send it out. Okay?
Any other discussion on the approval of this
report to be forwarded on to the Mayor? I will do the same
thing through a roll call. Michele.
BOARDMEMBER McLEAN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Stacy.
BOARDMEMBER CRIVELLO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Kent.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: Aye.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Ken.
VICE-CHAIRMAN OKAMURA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Ralph.
BOARDMEMBER JOHANSEN: Yes.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Sally.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Aye.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Dorothy.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: Yes.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Ginny.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Yes.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: I say aye also. Thank you,
members. Okay. If it's all right with everybody, let's take
a five-minute recess, I think, before we move on to the next
one. I want to give her a moment to rest her fingers. I will
call a five-minute recess.
(Recess, 9:58 a.m. Resumed, 10:14 a.m.)
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: I would like to reconvene the
meeting. A question was brought up by a Board Member, and I
will allow her to read into the record her question in regards
to a transmittal from R.W. Beck. Miss Raisbeck.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
We got into a discussion during the recess as to whether the
Stakeholders Committee letter was final or merely a draft.
And it turns out that we were given -- when the Board of Water
Supply packet was sent out, we were sent out a draft report
from the consultants, not from the committee, but from the
consultants, R.W. Beck.
And the first page transmittal letter says, in the
third paragraph, as -- this letter is dated February 14th, and
today is February 24th, 10 days later. As we -- this is a
letter to Mr. Tengan transmitting a draft report.
It says, as we discussed, we need you and your
staff's comment on this report by February 16th, so that we
can send out another draft to the Water Rate Stakeholders
Committee and the Board on February 18th. We will need their
collective comments by the 22nd in order to prepare a final
draft for you to transmit to the Mayor on February 28th.
The Board did not receive another draft on
February 18th. We have not had any opportunity to comment on
the draft. This one, I have noted, I received it -- actually,
this draft, which they -- would be to say the first draft, and
we haven't received a second draft.
And my question would be has the Department
transmitted any comments to the consultants in the interim
about this draft or any previous drafts? Have they
transmitted comments? Thank you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. So noted in the
record. Mr. Director, just to follow up on Sally's question,
have comments been made from the Department as regards to this
draft report?
DIRECTOR TENGAN: Mr. Chair, no. I personally,
you know, haven't submitted any comments to the consultants.
I don't know if Holly sent anything to them.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Holly, do you have any
comments in this area?
MS. PERDIDO: I'm still reviewing it and
commenting as we go. I know some Stakeholders have commented
and the consultant did ask that the Board review it, and if
they have any comments, also, that, you know, they could give
to the consultants also. So, I have been working with them
back and forth, but I'm not completely done reviewing the
whole document as of right now.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. Thank you. And just
so we note this, that the recommendation or the motion that we
passed was just the acceptance of the recommendations by the
Stakeholders Committee to the Mayor. Yeah, we approved that,
and that was all we did. Nothing else. There is no final
draft at this time. Member Dorothy.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: Pardon me for just being a
little disturbed. A lot of the discussion that we just had a
while ago about approval, not approval, amendments, not
amendments, whatever, would have been somewhat avoided if
someone from the staff or the Department would have informed
us very clearly that this was a draft, it was not a final, we
were under a misconception, and that there were ongoing
comments back and forth between the Department and the
consultant.
And that there was plenty of time, apparently, for
us to add comments before we were going through any kind of an
approval process. So, I really do find that the kind of lack
of information is really disturbing. Thank you.
DIRECTOR TENGAN: Mr. Chair.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Thank you, Member Dorothy.
So noted.
DIRECTOR TENGAN: If I may.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Director Tengan.
DIRECTOR TENGAN: I would like to respond to that.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: You may.
DIRECTOR TENGAN: If you notice, the document
clearly states that it's a draft report on one page here. On
the back side, on the transmittal letter from the consultant,
it all states draft. And if you notice, even the narrative
within the report itself has provisions to discuss matters
where it's indicated in the brackets.
So, it's clearly a draft document in my mind, and
I didn't think that I needed to insult the Board members'
intelligence by repeating that it's a draft.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. George, first of all,
I would like to say thank you for getting this together for
us, and Holly and all the staff that has worked along with the
Stakeholders and the R.W. Beck.
I mean, there has been, I think, a real challenge
from all of us trying to put this together and get it out in a
timely manner. And you folks have done an excellent job in
many areas.
There's sometimes been things that have not been
communicated and whatever. Whoever fault it may lie on, I
apologize up front to all the people here. Now, you guys have
done a -- I would like to say an admirable job. Now it's up
to the public, the Council, and the Mayor to accept these
recommendations, and reports, and rates, and move it on.
So, with no further discussion on this matter,
moving along, I would like to go to item B under agenda,
unfinished business. Discussion possible action on approval
of the submission of the 2006 operating and CIP budgets to the
Mayor.
Now, this was given to us in November and
December's meetings. I think most of us got that information.
I will open up the floor for discussion. But before I open it
up for discussion, I would like to open it up with a motion to
either accept, to move on -- you know, some kind of motion,
then we can discuss the matter with that motion. So, would
somebody like to make a motion? Okay.
VICE-CHAIRMAN OKAMURA: Just a point of order. I
was hoping that we could decide whether we want to talk about
the CIP first or the operating budget and deal with them
separately instead of just as one. Is there -- Mr. Chair.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Am I correct in saying that
they are one in the same, or they are one in the same. They
are not two separate. Operating budget and the CIP are for
2006 is one.
MS. PERDIDO: Yes.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Is that correct, Director
Tengan?
DIRECTOR TENGAN: That's correct.
VICE-CHAIRMAN OKAMURA: The material we have is
like the operating budget is one different set of things,
where we had the CIP budget where we have the different CIP
budgets. We could discuss it together. That's fine. But I
guess to make it -- possibly make it easier to deal with.
DIRECTOR TENGAN: Mr. Chair.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Yes.
DIRECTOR TENGAN: The budget -- this operating and
the CIP is a single document. If you notice on the
operational side, where it involves or shows schedules
referring to the funding of the project and the cash flow
schedule, you will see that there are some funds being
transferred to the CIP fundings and some funds come in from
the water system development fee going to pay for improvement
projects.
So, the budget itself is a single document.
However, it can be segmented, for discussion purposes, for,
you know, taking operations by itself and also CIP sections.
So, it's up to the Board.
VICE-CHAIRMAN OKAMURA: Thank you. I stand
corrected, and I guess I was talking about the Capital
Improvement Program proposal versus the operating budget. And
I thought it would be easier to talk about the CIP improvement
program proposal separate from the operating budget. But, I
guess it doesn't really matter. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Thank you, Member Ken. I
still open the floor for a motion, so that we may really get
some discussion started on this item. I guess nobody wants.
Yes, go ahead.
VICE-CHAIRMAN OKAMURA: Mr. Chair, I move that we
approve the CIP and operating budget for 2006.
BOARDMEMBER McLEAN: Second for discussion.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: It has been moved and
seconded. Now I open the floor for discussion. Ralph.
BOARDMEMBER JOHANSEN: We have got a very large
volume of material here to digest, and I'm not sure that
everyone has done that. I will assume that we have. I get
back to my point about the apportionment between new growth
and existing plan as a part of the improvement project budget.
They state here 16 percent, and they have not
committed that. I have seen the figures that were shown to me
yesterday. In the voluminous material, I overlooked them.
But I would like more information about -- this isn't the
total budget. This is the Capital Improvement Budget.
And the 16 percent, as the total of the amount of
new growth budgeted for the Water Department, is very
difficult for me to accept, and I would like more information.
If they are telling me that these figures are the
only accurate figures, and that's what I have to live with, I
still question them. I look out at the community, and I see
growth up one side and down the other. And that improvement
includes only 16 percent of the expenditure for new growth
just doesn't wash with me. That's what I stick with. Thank
you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Ellen, do you have a comment?
MS. KRAFTSOW: Yeah. Holly and I were kind of
looking at each other. I am sorry, Mr. Johansen, but we are
not sure where you are getting the number 16 percent from.
What is it based on?
BOARDMEMBER JOHANSEN: It's based on one of the
pie charts that was presented for discussion. It's based on
the first document that we got on December 14th, which was the
recommendations. And if somebody can help me out here, the
information was plain, but I have got a lot of material in
front of me.
DIRECTOR TENGAN: Mr. Chair.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Yes.
BOARDMEMBER JOHANSEN: December 14th.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: December 14th. Okay.
DIRECTOR TENGAN: Maybe I can ask a question of
Mr. Johansen.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Yes, go ahead.
DIRECTOR TENGAN: I think, if I am interpreting
you right, I think you are looking at all this growth as being
taking place right now in Wailuku and in Kihei especially.
And you are questioning why is our CIP so low, when you see
all this development going on.
Maybe it can be explained in a manner that all
these projects that are going on in Wailuku and in the Kihei
area, the on-site infrastructure is paid for by the developer.
So, we don't -- we don't expend any monies for the
distribution system. We don't expend any monies for the
on-site fire protection. That's all the developer's cost.
BOARDMEMBER JOHANSEN: If I may respond, the water
source development fee is, as I understand it, a fee which is
generated by payments by new applicants for meters as part of
the cost of obtaining a meter and water. And I understood
that that was the main source of funding for new growth.
If there's another source of new growth -- for new
growth of funds, then that's something I would like clarified,
because I didn't understand that.
DIRECTOR TENGAN: Maybe I can respond by saying
that, you know, as I stated earlier, the developers pay for
the improvements on site. If there are off-site improvements
needed, they often construct a tank at their cost and issued a
credit. They may develop their own source, such as Dowling
did up in Kula, and they get a credit for a portion of their
water system development fee.
If they provide a transmission line, then they get
a transmission credit, and that -- the credits themselves
don't enter into the -- into the budget. You know, it's not
an expenditure on the part of the Department to construct
facilities to service these developments.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Ralph.
BOARDMEMBER JOHANSEN: Well, then I would like
to -- I'd like to know what the total cost, including
transmission, which is a very big item, treatment, a very big
item, storage, a big item. I just would like to be clearer
why only 16 percent of that cost is coming from -- from the
new development.
I would like to understand how, with all this
development, even though individual developers may be paying
fees in other ways, which aren't reflected in this budget, we
can have a clear picture of just what is going on. I don't
have that picture at all.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Ellen, go ahead.
MS. KRAFTSOW: You know, I am sorry, because I
wish that I had the pie chart you are referring to. But I
can't recall a time ever when I estimated expansion projects
as only 16 percent of the budget. It's simply not. And if
you look at page five of the handout you got today, which all
the projects are the same. The costs of a couple projects
have changed, and there is one project added which is Wailuku
and Fleming Roads.
But other than that, the costs you received in
your original document are just as more information came in
about the project costs. But if you would turn to page five
of that handout, please. No, this one sitting on your desk.
You got it today. Ralph, see this one?
MS. PERDIDO: Is this the one?
MS. KRAFTSOW: It's the fifth page. I am sorry.
They don't have page numbers, but it's the pie chart broken
down by program. Also, we just -- somebody just handed me a
pie chart in which distribution projects --
BOARDMEMBER JOHANSEN: Before you go on, let me
say that where I got my initial figure of 16 percent was the
projected CIP five year program was $179 million. Of that
amount, water resource development fund was $29 million, and
that comes out to 16.1 percent.
And then following out on the pie chart that was
distributed, which I don't have here right now, the same
figures were reflected both in terms of resources and in terms
of expenditure for their development.
MS. KRAFTSOW: 179 million, 16 percent. Do we
have that one? I can look at that, but I don't -- it
doesn't -- it doesn't register that way with me that it's been
that way.
But anyway, looking at this year's budget,
5.3 million are capital reserve projects, 8.2 million are new
bond projects, and 8 million are water system development fee
projects. It's often the case that an expansion of a tank or
an expansion of a line will serve both purposes.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: Mr. Chair.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Yes, Member Kent.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: May we ask someone to
define what new growth is so we know what we are talking
about?
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. The question has been
posed by one of the members for a definition of new growth.
Sally or Ralph, would you like to define, in your mind, what
new growth is? That's the question the other member is
asking.
BOARDMEMBER JOHANSEN: New growth is additional
need for water for commercial, industrial, agriculture, and
housing development, as I understand it. I would be glad to
be corrected. And that includes transmission, generation of
new sources, storage, treatment, and distribution as well as
accounting for costs in building.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Member Kent.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: With the utilization of
County funds, not private funds, or you want new growth that
includes County funds and private funds or just County funds?
BOARDMEMBER JOHANSEN: Well, I am talking about
the funds that are committed to the Department of Water Supply
to obtain new -- new supply of water.
MS. KRAFTSOW: Can I -- if this would help.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Yes, Ellen, go ahead.
MS. KRAFTSOW: I have an query in the database
program that we use for the CIP that will instantly generate a
five-year picture of what's improvement versus what's
expansion. And not only that, it can say how it's all funded.
I could bring that to the next meeting. It will
only take me like 10 minutes to prepare. It won't look
pretty, but it will break down the funds, and you can then --
then we can maybe discuss it more.
But my off-the-top-of-my-head recollection is that
it usually runs about 50/50, sometimes more, sometimes less.
And distribution lines tend to be -- you know, growth includes
source, storage, and transmission, as I think you were saying.
It's not just distribution. Everything that we are finding,
where there's a 16 percent, is referring to distribution not
to improvement versus expansion.
So, without looking at that chart that you are
specifically referring to or knowing which one it is, I can't
say what that is. You know, and I apologize for that, but I
can certainly pull the numbers out of my computer. They don't
change, and they will break it down for you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Miss Parsons.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: I would just like to note
that we are about almost two months overdue from our meeting
with the Planning Commissioners, and I think that this might
help with what Ralph's query is on capital improvements and
what can be done.
Also, the fact that since we are doing what we are
in the budget, I think it's imperative that, within the next
month, that we do put this meeting together, so that we can
see if there's any areas of development that they may be able
to help offset some of this budget with, so we can do some
comparison notes.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: I can answer that question as
far as why the meeting wasn't held in January. Because it
came from their Planning Department and from the Planning
Commission that they wanted to move it to March due to some --
some reasons that they didn't discuss with us. But they
wanted to move it to March.
No, after March. Excuse me. I stand corrected.
It was after March. And it was a letter transmitted to us
that they couldn't do it until after March.
Okay. So, I will, as soon as possible, put that
together with them. And I know that will help clarify a lot
of the matters. Kent. Ken, I should say.
VICE-CHAIRMAN OKAMURA: Thank you. In the budget,
CIP budget, you don't have a separate category for expansion,
right, from what I see here?
MS. KRAFTSOW: We don't -- we don't consider it in
terms of -- yes and no. We have a field, and in the field,
it's either an I for improvement or an E for expansion. And
each project gets assigned to that. And based on that, that's
how I programmed for the initial funding.
But then that sometimes changes based on what we
have. And, you know, some projects actually serve both
functions, and I don't have a between I and E field. I just
have I or E.
VICE-CHAIRMAN OKAMURA: Because like maybe here
you budget one million for Iao source development, and the
source is needed because there is a need for more water and
because there's more growth. So, that's expansion in a way,
right?
MS. KRAFTSOW: Well, actually, right now, I think
that Iao source projects are -- that's a good example of
something that's both. Iao source projects are basically to
distribute existing withdrawals, because we can't expand our
withdrawals from the Iao. So, it's to protect the aquifer.
So, in a sense, it's an improvement project, even
though it's an expanded -- it looks like it would be an
expansion. Waihee is budgeted as an expansion project even
though we also need better sources away from Iao. So, there
are gray areas here, but I do have each project assigned and
the computer will break it out.
VICE-CHAIRMAN OKAMURA: But it could be
misleading, because some things that you repair because you
have added demand, and so you are sort of expanding the system
at the same time.
MS. KRAFTSOW: Or sometimes we need a bigger line
because of existing zoning, but it's a bigger line.
VICE-CHAIRMAN OKAMURA: In the operating budget,
under director program, there was a expansion for one
position? What was that for?
MS. PERDIDO: The director's office requested a
safety officer.
VICE-CHAIRMAN OKAMURA: What's that? What is that
for?
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: What is the safety officer
he's asking. Director Tengan.
DIRECTOR TENGAN: Mr. Chair, that would be a
person that would be in charge of our safety programs. Part
of the function would be to look at Worker's Comp claims,
vehicle accidents, and all those kinds of things, and to
conduct safety training programs.
Right now, we don't have anybody doing that, and
it's pretty much left up to the division. So, there's no
concentrated effort in this area right now.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: I think you make a good point
that most departments and most businesses today have someone
who is regularly scheduled or mandated to continue the safety
programs and safety training, also to monitor Worker Comp
claims and various other losses that may be occurring. So, I
think it's a position that really needs to be filled, yeah.
VICE-CHAIRMAN OKAMURA: Thank you. The other
thing I wanted to bring up was -- which was in the public
meeting. And I think it was Haiku they talked about trying to
use alternative sources of energy. And, you know, because it
was brought out that one of the biggest costs right now is
electricity, about $7 million.
And I was thinking, you know -- and I notice that
in your budget, you had a section for studies and stuff like
that. So, I was wondering, would it be possible, or not
necessarily possible, but is there some way we could find out,
or you could find out the feasibility of trying to shift to
alternative sources of energy?
You know, because I don't think the price of oil
will be coming down in the future. It doesn't seem like it.
But maybe $7 million, if you can save 10 percent, that's
$700,000 you are saving. And, so, maybe we owe it to the
people that pay the rates that we try to look into alternative
energy as a possible means to save -- you know, cut down on
costs, and this was brought up at one of the community
meetings, informational meetings.
So I was thinking, you know, is there some way we
could look into it to see if it's feasible?
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Director Tengan, do you have
any comments in that area?
DIRECTOR TENGAN: I'm pretty sure that we have
considered alternative energy sources in the past, such as
utilizing the flows going downstream and the head pressure to
generate electricity. It's been done successfully on the Big
Island at the water treatment plant there.
And you know, the hydroelectric plant produces
enough energy to run the plant and provide some power into the
utility's grid. We haven't really explored alternative energy
projects. We have been concentrating on what we need to do
right now to get the systems up to speed and the other issues
with water quality. Frankly, we really haven't had time to --
to look into this area.
VICE-CHAIRMAN OKAMURA: What about the possibility
of getting some -- you know, paying some money or budgeting
some money to have a consultant look at it or somebody? I
know not the staff, because you are understaffed right now,
but some way to look at it. You know, because it would not
only take a study, but if it seems feasible, take capital
costs to do that.
But, maybe it's feasible now, because oil prices
are so high. We are paying like -- it seems like the
Department is paying about 25 percent of its income for power
costs for electricity. But just a suggestion, but get some
consultant, or you could look into it further somehow. It
might be worth it, but just a suggestion. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Thank you, Member Ken.
That's a good suggestion, and we will see if we can somehow
continue this discussion and maybe see what we can come up
with, yeah?
Any further discussion as far as the budget is
concerned? Member Raisbeck.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Yeah, I think I do not feel
competent to make a recommendation for this budget. I think
the whole process has been so badly delayed. We should have
had data to review much earlier, and I hope that -- I would
take this opportunity to request the Board that next year, a
budget subcommittee be appointed, possibly in September, so
that that subcommittee, at least, can be kept apprised of
exactly what the Department's budget process is coming up with
as we go along, so that we will have before us, in November or
December, preferably November, a budget proposal that we
understand and can comment on from a knowledgeable basis.
I will be abstaining from a vote on this motion,
which will not interfere with passage of it, because an
abstention is an affirmative -- counted as an affirmative
vote, but simply to indicate my disapproval of the fact that
we were not included in the budget process early enough to be
effective in reviewing it and even in making changes to it. I
will be abstaining on this measure. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Thank you, Member Raisbeck.
Do you have something else?
It was brought to my attention, and I will make a
note of this, that the following statements have been put in
to the 2005-2006 capital improvement program proposal. And I
am reading directly off of the proposal. Under the areas of
drought, efficiency, facilities -- for example, under drought,
it says the Board will develop/implement plans to reduce the
impact of drought to BWS customers. This is the same we just
got. That would be page seven.
And the next one on the efficiency, the Board will
continue to enhance conservation, automatically and other
efficient efforts. The one that I really get a little nervous
on is on the facilities. The Board will insure the systems
elements, property, and building, will be well maintained and
that space, supplies, and resources are adequately -- are
adequate for efficient operations.
Under Iao, the Board will plan, organize, and
control the activities necessary to reduce the draw from the
Iao aquifer. I have just made it a note that all of these
really do not fall under our preview anymore. I mean, we can
advise, but we do not have in one area control, as it states.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: Unless we pass rules that say
we do.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: But at this point, we don't
have any rules.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: That's right.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: So, I just want to make a
note of that as far as our budget. And there's some more
statements if you read on further that are kind of conflicting
saying that the Board, you know, will formulate and implement
programs to replace, you know, Board will repair and replace.
I think, Holly, this was just a continuation, yeah? Ellen.
MS. KRAFTSOW: Yeah, thank you. Yeah, I will
change that. It was just programmed in. These were Bob's
bullets way back when. I just never changed the wording, but
I can change the word Board to Department everywhere.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Yeah, I think it has to be
noted as that, yeah. Ken.
VICE-CHAIRMAN OKAMURA: One question. Regarding
the increases in the Planning Division, it says here like they
are going to increase conservation by 180,000. What would
that include?
MS. KRAFTSOW: A little bit of it is just
increases in our usual media costs, but then there's some
provision for a pilot toilet retrofit and a leak detection --
enhancement of the leak detection program.
Also, in the Water Use and Development Plan
process, as he evaluates the financial structure of the
Department and the operating costs, when he goes over the
supply options, it will be the same as an energy efficiency
study but both energy and conservation will be included in
those evaluations.
VICE-CHAIRMAN OKAMURA: Can you repeat the last
thing you said? I am sorry, the last few sentences regarding.
MS. KRAFTSOW: Just that this is just sort of a
preliminary budget for some conservation measures that we want
to increase, and that we hope and expect to increase them
further, as conservation is considered as a supply option in
the Water Use and Development Plan process. And also, as part
of that process, the relative operational costs of different
choices had been included in the evaluation, which won't --
will not be the same as the energy study that you recommended
earlier, but will help get at some of those questions.
VICE-CHAIRMAN OKAMURA: So, like who is going to
do the conservation thing? Like the same staff will be doing
more, or are you going to get more bodies to do this?
MS. KRAFTSOW: Well, we actually asked for an
additional position for another conservation specialist so
that we can fill out that. Some of the things that we want
them to do, they should go out in pairs for safety reasons.
But we -- as you know, we are moving our office to -- our
Division Office to another building.
Right now, we are getting the County safety
officers on our case. Every couple months, they come down and
say when are you moving out, because we are in all kinds of
violations because of crowding. And as soon as we move, we
plan to try to hire and fill out our organization, so our
staff will be doubling, so hopefully we will be able to
accomplish more.
VICE-CHAIRMAN OKAMURA: Thank you. Yeah, I would
be interested to see what -- what you guys are doing in terms
of conservation and, you know -- you know, the planning things
that you do, not to keep track of you, but just to know that
these things are going on.
And I was going to suggest that maybe in the
division report, maybe quarterly or something, you know, if it
doesn't take too much time, that you would know -- or at some
interval know, you know, what you are doing, or at least give
us a one-time basis of -- you know, one-time explanation of
what you guys are doing in the planning department. And right
now, it's a big black box for me.
MS. KRAFTSOW: I can provide a little outline of
our current and planned measures, if the Board wishes.
VICE-CHAIRMAN OKAMURA: Outline?
MS. KRAFTSOW: An outline of our current and
intended, you know, as we grow conservation measures, but
understanding only with the proviso that, of course, there
could be edits as our consultant looks at these issues.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Any other discussion for the
budget, both operating and CIP? Sensing none, I will call for
the question, and I will again do a roll call, starting with
Member Michele.
BOARDMEMBER McLEAN: Aye.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Stacy.
BOARDMEMBER CRIVELLO: What is -- what is the
motion, to approve this?
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Yes, to forward it onto
the --
BOARDMEMBER CRIVELLO: I am going to abstain on
the basis that I don't feel I'm knowledgeable. I
appreciate -- I can appreciate the work that staff has done,
but I need to have more in-depth studies to support that kind
of recommendation approval.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. Thank you.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: Aye.
VICE-CHAIRMAN OKAMURA: Yes.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Ralph. Member Ralph.
BOARDMEMBER JOHANSEN: No.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Member Raisbeck.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Abstain.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. Dorothy.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: Yes.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Ginny.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Well, I am confused. Are we
going to make the changes on there first, and then take it?
Because right now, it has the Board on there. I have to say
no.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Well, the changes as far as
the wording, I think that's what she's concerned about. And
that will be changed. That will all be removed and put
Department instead of Board.
MS. KRAFTSOW: Yes. But also, that -- that is
just a summary packet that we do for you. The County has a
whole different format which is less informative. Actually,
it's one-by-one-by-one sheets. So, you have --
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: They are less informed. You
got to be kidding me. That's all they need is to be less
informed.
MS. KRAFTSOW: No, we just submit in the format
that they request. But I think you got these, too. You got
these sheets, too, or an earlier draft of them. But that's
all that they ask for. So, the summary sheet was just for the
Board's information, because it seems more concise and
informative.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: Clearer.
MS. KRAFTSOW: You did get what we send to the
County though.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Generally, would you change
that with the words being removed, your vote?
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: I know we have worked as
hard as we can with the numbers that we have. If you change
the wording, I will support the motion.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Thank you. And I also vote
yes.
DEPUTY CORPORATION COUNSEL: What's the count?
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: The count, if I am not
mistaken, was one to eight. Two abstained, one -- wait. Hang
on. There were two abstains, one no, and six yes. Okay.
That was the count.
DIRECTOR TENGAN: Just for clarification.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Yes.
DIRECTOR TENGAN: Those statements that you read
off earlier, with all the CIP projects, we have continued to
use those -- those goals that the Board had established some
years ago to give us some direction as to, you know, planning
our CIP and how it relates to the overall goals of the
Department and the Board. And, so, we have continued to use
that. However, they are not official budget documents that go
up to the Mayor's office.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Thank you for that
clarification. Okay. Now, going back to item number seven,
under other business, B, report on number of all wells on
Maui. Holly. Okay, Ellen.
MS. KRAFTSOW: I think we provided a list in your
packets, yeah? So, I don't have anything to add to that,
unless you have questions.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: I have lots of questions.
MS. KRAFTSOW: Oh, I was packing up to go.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: And actually, I have to go to
school very soon. I thank you. I don't know where you got
all this information from, but I thank you. It is amazing to
me how many wells there are in Maui County. And that was, I
think, my purpose in the first place was to bring to
everyone's attention how many wells there are in Maui County.
And who has oversight over them still is a major
question in my mind, and what kind of impact these wells have
on our aquifers is a huge question in my mind. For the
information that you gave us, which I really appreciate, but,
where it says over here well type, what's an ROT?
MS. PERDIDO: Rotary.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: Rotary. Under uses, UNU means
unused?
MS. KRAFTSOW: Yes.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: All right. There's a bunch of
other terms here that I really don't understand. So, it would
have been great if we could have had a little --
MS. KRAFTSOW: Key?
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: Key. Thank you.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: E-mail one.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: Yeah, we can probably do that.
Also, there is no amount on here which says what amount of
water is withdrawn from these wells.
MS. KRAFTSOW: That's correct.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: And I'm sure you probably have
no idea.
MS. KRAFTSOW: Actually, one of our biggest
frustrations, you know, I look in the Maui Tomorrow web site,
and it says there's been a history of poor resource
management, you know, in the Water Department. And I am
thinking, you know, actually, historically, there was no
resource management, and now we actually have a crew trying to
start managing resources. And instead of supporting and
helping, they write this.
But, you are right. This was a State -- this was
a State database, and nobody is required to report what they
are pumping to us. And there have been cases, historically,
where we have asked that pumpage be reported to us, on
planning condition approvals, and that has not happened.
One of the things we want to raise during the
Water Development Plan process with the Stakeholder
Committees, and then it will go on to whoever else, is whether
or not there should be some sort of County level approval
process and/or reporting requirements so that reports are
sent.
Because, as it is, I have some requests for
information to the State that are literally more than three
years old where I still don't have the data, and they are
understaffed, too, and they are struggling as it is.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: I understand, and we have
talked about this a little before when you were here before.
And I really do recognize that there are different
requirements for different agencies.
All, I guess, my point is trying to make is to
bring to everyone's attention how important it is that we work
together, as best we can, and to try to put this particular
issue on everyone's radar screen, so that as more and more
private wells are developed -- and a lot of these, as you can
see, are private wells -- that there be some kind of an
accounting for the water that's being taken out of the
aquifers, or the Department's going to be short somewhere down
the road.
And we just simply don't know. If we don't know
how much is being taken out, we have no idea. And that's
really what my point was. So, I thank you for the work, and I
really would hope that more information will be continuously
brought to the attention of the Board. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Ralph.
BOARDMEMBER JOHANSEN: First of all, I would like
to know if all of this information was obtained from the State
and what -- what department of the State, if that is the case.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Ellen.
MS. KRAFTSOW: We get regular updates from the
State Commission on Water Resource Management as to the list
and location of wells that they have registered. When
somebody applies for a well, it is plotted into the database,
and we get that information.
BOARDMEMBER JOHANSEN: Then I would like to know
if there is --
MS. KRAFTSOW: But --
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Go ahead, Ellen.
MS. KRAFTSOW: But the pumpage is kept in a
separate database, so although there is a column for the
draft, it is not a reliable column. It's not one that is
regularly updated.
BOARDMEMBER JOHANSEN: And my second question is,
what is the State legislation that requires that these records
of wells, in the four counties of the State, be kept and by
whom? What information is required? What reporting
requirements are there of individual well driller's or their
contractors? And what are the sanctions or what is the
enforcement process if someone fails to make this necessary
report?
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Ellen, if you would like to
comment on that.
MS. KRAFTSOW: Okay. I didn't get all the parts.
The State Constitution says that there will be a Commission on
Water Resources Management, and then the State Water Code sets
the guidelines for what they have to do and includes a well
permitting process. And then administrative rules under that
give more specifics.
Wells are required to report if they -- the
number's escaping me right now, but I think it's -- they are
required to report monthly if they pump more than one amount,
and they are required to report annually if they pump more
than another amount. And forgive me for my brain lapse right
now, but I can't remember the exact number.
There is currently no fee or enforcement. They
have technically got the authority to withdraw the permit, but
there's no fee or enforcement for failure to report right now.
That's one of the things they are trying to work on
themselves. So, we are both relatively powerless to do our --
fulfill our mandates.
BOARDMEMBER JOHANSEN: Then also, what kind of
monitoring is available to either the State or the County as
to what wells exist? Same answer, I assume. None.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Yeah. Okay. Dorothy.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: Since this is the last day that
I'm going to be here, I guess I am just going to say it. It's
also very apparent, under the current political scenario in
our State, that the Governor does not support the State Water
Commission or any kind of, apparently, a recordkeeping of this
type.
So, I think that it becomes increasingly important
for our County to do this, as best we can, because we are
going to have increasingly less. If there was already none,
how can we have less than none? But there is going to be less
interest on the part of the State to do this kind of thing.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Thank you, Dorothy. That's a
good, valid point, and I think we just read recently that the
Deputy for the --
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: They have all resigned.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: They have resigned due to
some political pressure. That is correct. Thank you. That's
all.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: I would just like to say,
before I was a Board member, it was brought to our --
actually, shortly after I became a Board member, before Mike
and I joined the Board, that the Board of Water Supply passed
rules where there is no oversight on private well systems
through the Board or the Department of Water.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: Mistake.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: They have fallen through the
cracks. And I want folks to know this. I mean, Department of
Health has not taken over this area either. And I have a
great concern, and we have talked about this. George has
asked the Department of Health, I believe, to look at this a
little bit closer, and they have just kind of said they are on
their own, even for some of our two-tier well systems or tanks
systems.
So, I don't know how we -- I am just appalled --
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: Appalled.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Yes, if you haven't been
paying attention, right?
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: That's why I did it.
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Of the number of wells here.
And I think that if anybody in the Council or anybody
considering running in the next administration doesn't take a
hard, long look at this issue, that the health and the welfare
of the Maui County residents and the people that are utilizing
these wells is a great, great concern, considering all the
issues we have going on throughout the County.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Thank you. Sally.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Yeah, Mr. Chair. I would
like to ask Ellen if it would be possible, from the same
database or an associated database, to put the pump size.
Because even a well that isn't fully utilized, if it has a
very large pump, obviously, it is capable of producing a lot
more water, whereas a tiny pump would produce a negligible
amount of water. So that if there were a column, in the lists
that we were given, that had the pump size, I believe that is
available.
MS. KRAFTSOW: There is a column. It's a little
bit sporadic, and I'm not sure how updated it is or how filled
it is, but I can certainly produce a report. I will have to
take out one of the columns just to fit it on the page. But,
yeah, I can do that.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. Can I just interrupt
one second? And if this is off the record -- I mean, not off
the record, but this is going off the agenda item. But
Dorothy Pyle, as many of you know -- wait. Sit down, Dorothy.
Dorothy, sit down.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: No, I have to go.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Before you run out, has
resigned from the Board. And we would like to take this
opportunity, on behalf of us members here, to thank you very
much for your efforts, your contributions over the short span
of time, but very well received time with the Board.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: I'm going to another agency.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: She's going to another
agency, Culture and Resources, so I want to thank her very
much. On behalf of all the Board Members, thank you very much
for all your contributions, and good luck, and we hope to see
you around.
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: Thank you.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: May I ask, although Dorothy
would like to leave, I would like to be able to read her
letter of resignation into the --
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: I will later. Since she's
running off now, I won't take the time. But thank you very
much.
(Boardmember Pyle left the hearing room.)
BOARDMEMBER PYLE: Okay.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Back to what we were
discussing. I apologize for getting off track. Ralph.
BOARDMEMBER JOHANSEN: First of all, I looked at
this report of wells. There are, from page 12 to 34, which is
what, 22 pages, there are an average of 50 wells reported on
each page. Do the math. That's an enormous amount of water,
and yet we have an administration that is exploring the
feasibility of desalination. I mean, we have got to account
for what water is available here before we make any
investigation of converting seawater, which is -- as I
understand, is a very expensive process.
It's what they do in Saudi Arabia, aside from
hauling icebergs to the peninsula. And I want to say that the
current State Chair of the Sierra Club -- I think she still
is -- Lucienne de Naie, recognized this problem and, on her
own, obtained a grant, and spent weeks and weeks with the
records and the archives over in Honolulu exploring well
permits and any other historical information that she could
obtain on the islands here in our County as to what wells
there were, and what wells were in use, and how much usage and
that sort of thing.
This has not been asked for, as I understand it,
by the Department of Water Supply. And I understand that
there's an objection that they don't know what her methodology
was, and there was no participation by the Department of Water
Supply in obtaining that information. But nevertheless, this
is valuable information which can be easily verified.
Methodology can be easily explored.
I don't know why we don't have that information as
part of this report on wells. And I am asking the question of
the Department, why that has not been done and if it can be
done.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Let's take it two parts.
First of all, why it's not included, and that's the first part
of the question. Okay.
MS. KRAFTSOW: Actually, I have, by phone, a
couple of times asked for the report. I don't have it. I
have asked Lucienne personally a couple of times. I have
never written a formal letter requesting it.
We were not only not invited to participate, they
stated, at a Board meeting, that they didn't want the Board
staff to -- or Department staff to participate, because they
wanted to be sure the information would be correct. And you
can check the minutes on that.
I don't have the report. I have asked for the
report. What I did was use the best and most reliable and
broadest sorts of data which is still the State.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. Ralph.
BOARDMEMBER JOHANSEN: I will just respond that
there was a lot of -- a lot of suspicion and a lot of
hostility in the community. And I think that's reflected very
clearly in the fact that a Charter Amendment was passed
removing semi-autonomous status from the Board of Water
Supply. And I think that there's an easy chance to overcome
that kind of hostility.
I don't think that Lucienne de Naie is a person
that is going to hold that kind of a grudge. I think a formal
letter should have been submitted or should be submitted now
obtaining that information from her, so it can be at least
evaluated if not included.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. Thank you, Ralph.
Okay. Any other discussion on the wells? Thank
you very much for the information. I think this is very eye
opening. I mean, you know, just the awesome number of wells
throughout the County of Maui is just astonishing. And I
think that information alone brings up or raises a red flag as
far as what we are doing and how we are doing it.
A lot of it is not your fault and a lot of it was
done many years ago, prior to not only the Board being
autonomous or semi-autonomous, but even before then, when the
Board was under the County, a lot of deals were made. And
today we live with the past. But we can hopefully correct
ourselves now, right this year, and get these documents.
You know, if Lucienne's report needs to be
included, I have no qualms in asking for it in a formal
letter. I will ask for it to include it. I have no problems
with that, barring the fact that I want to make sure that
whatever information we have is as accurate as possible. So,
I will put that in the commentary with the letter that I will
send out to her. I will ask her for that information. Okay?
Sally, you have something else to add?
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Yes. I would like to have
a revised version of this excellent list of wells that
includes the pump size, where available, and if we need to
leave out a column, I would be willing to leave out the column
that says geology, since I don't understand the notations
anyway.
And I would request that on other columns, where
units are needed, that a key be given as to, for example,
units on chlorides, and initial chlorides, and so on. And
whether -- I assume all the distances are in feet, but it's
not explicitly said what the units are. So, I would request a
revised version that includes pump size, so it can distinguish
between major wells and minor wells.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Put that on the request for
future agenda item.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Okay. So noted. Ellen.
MS. KRAFTSOW: I am sorry. I just have one more
thing to respond to.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Sure.
MS. KRAFTSOW: Because it's been something that
bothered me, and I talked to Lucienne about it. I like
Lucienne. No problem with that. The time she was pursuing
the grant, before she got it, as far as I know, I heard about
it. And I called her, and I said, this is great, because we
have been talking with EPA and DOH about the same thing,
inspecting wells where we don't know the status. A lot of
them are unused and some are lost. And we don't have the
staff or the time to do this, and maybe we can work together.
And at the time, it was like, no, no, no. It's no big deal.
It's no big deal.
And I said, well, okay, if it comes that you want
to work with us, call me. So, it's -- the whole thing
proceeded. We did actually try forthrightly to work with
them, and because of this air of distrust or whatever was
going on, we really just weren't given the opportunity. It's
not that we were unwilling.
And I had called the State Water Commission staff
member to ask what they knew. And that's when they expressed
a concern about, well, neither you nor us have been involved
in oversight. Even if it's great work, how can -- you know,
we can use it to check our future work, but how can we rely
upon it.
It's not criticizing that she might have done poor
work or anything like that. It's just that's just how it
happened.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: And I think that is well
noted, and history has not always worked out real well in the
past. Hopefully, in future, we can work in a more harmonious
way with these various organizations. Ralph and all of us
understand they bring to the table a lot of good information.
But, barring that, let's say we start with a clean
slate. Let's get the letter off. I will put the letter
together, get it off to Lucienne, and go from there. And I
think that will start the ball. And maybe some of this
distrust can be dissipated. You know, the first step in any
journey is one step, and then I will take the next step after
that. Okay?
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: Question.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Yes, sir.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: Ellen, you may have
answered this question, but this list is based upon permits
applied for?
MS. KRAFTSOW: I believe it's based upon
permits -- actual drilling reports for wells that have been
drilled and approved.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: But this doesn't indicate
whether they are active or not. This is just that they were
approved but some of these could be inactive?
MS. KRAFTSOW: Right. Where it says use, if
there's a UNA, they know it's inactive. But often they just
don't know. Some of the wells have disappeared, and they
can't even find them anymore. A lot of them, the majority --
the vast majority are probably unused. But it needs to be
verified, because unless they are properly sealed, they are
also a potential contamination into the aquifer.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: That's a good point. Thank
you.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Any other discussion?
BOARDMEMBER PARSONS: Are we going into agenda
items? Because on that same line, there was something I
wanted to discuss.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: I am going to go into
discussion regarding improvement procedures for the Board to
receive more timely information from the Department, item
number C. If we are done with B, I am going to item C.
I think this was a request by Board members, and I
understand, and I think most of the Board members will
understand, that right now, the Department is inundated with
reports, budgetary, other reports needing to go to various --
whether it's the EPA, whether it's the Department of Health.
And you are understaffed, and many times we make requests --
Board members make requests which are difficult to be done
because of your time constraints. I understand that part.
But I think what they are -- that most of the
challenges that we have been hitting upon were things that if
we don't have it, we can't make good, educated decisions. We
can't make good, informed decisions. And I think that's where
the challenge comes up.
That's where, I think, the Board is requesting,
when information is requested, not just by a single Board
member, but by the entire Board, if it cannot be obtained by
the next meeting, that it be let -- that we be let known that,
so that we don't put it as an agenda item.
But if it can be, in all possibilities, especially
when you are talking budgetary, like you were referring to,
Sally, if we don't have these supplementing with budgets in
September, it's going to be difficult in January to start
making decisions, at least informed decisions anyhow.
And whether they are water rate reports or
whatever, we need the help of the Department, wherever
possible, especially for these decisions or recommendations
that we need to forward to both the Council, the Mayor, and
whomever else is requesting it. So, wherever possible, I
strongly urge, from the Board to the Department, your
assistance in these areas.
Now, I have said to the Board members many times,
if you have a specific question that you want to ask of
budget, of Ellen, or Holly, or anybody, you can go directly to
them, so long as you understand that they are busy people, and
they may not be able to get back to you right away with an
answer. You don't have to bring it before the whole Board as
far as a question is concerned.
I just want to make sure that that is clear. That
every one of you have the right to ask questions, but
understand and give the respect to the Department, because
they are busy people. And we need to, you know, work with
them in conjunction with that aspect. Yeah? Any other
comments in that area? Kent.
BOARDMEMBER HIRANAGA: I would just like to say,
on behalf of the Department, that we did have a Budget
Workshop, and we had difficulty obtaining a quorum. So, there
was an opportunity for the Board members to analyze the budget
in depth and many of them did not take advantage of that
opportunity.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO: Again, I place no blame on
anyone. Again, I hope that's clear that we are just trying to
work harmoniously with the Department. I think all the Board
members understand that.
And that is a fact. That if you are not doing
your due diligence, when you get your reports and taking the
time to look at them and read them -- I will be the first to
admit they are difficult to understand. I would be the first
to admit I don't understand a lot of the things, and I have
called Holly and Ellen and asked questions.
But don't be afraid to ask what these codes mean,
what these charts mean, you know, don't be afraid. That's
something that you need to take upon yourself. But again,
understanding they are busy people, and they can always --
they can't always get back to you immediately. Sally.
BOARDMEMBER RAISBECK: Yes, Mr. Chair. I would
like to say that asking about specific questions about
specific details is one kind of thing. But what about
major -- major developments in the field of water that we read
about in the newspaper rather than hearing about from the
Department.
And I'm sure you all remember when the Iao Aquifer
was designated. We did not hear this from the Department. We
heard it -- we read it in the newspaper. There are other
issues. For example, I asked last fall a number of times -- I
asked about the progress of our water use permit applications
for Iao Aquifer. I was given, unfortunately, that there is no
problem. There is no problem. We got them in on time, and so
on, and so on.