BOARD OF WATER SUPPLY
COUNTY OF MAUI
REGULAR MEETING


HELD AT THE COUNCIL COMMITTEE ROOM, 7TH FLOOR, KALANA O MAUI
BUILDING, 200 SOUTH HIGH STREET, WAILUKU, MAUI, HAWAII,
COMMENCING AT 9:00 A.M. ON THURSDAY, APRIL 27, 2006.

Reported By:  JEANNETTE W. IWADO, RPR/CSR #135

ATTENDANCE:

CHAIRMAN:             MICHAEL P. VICTORINO
VICE CHAIRMAN:        KENNETH M. OKAMURA
BOARD MEMBERS:        LEE ALDRIDGE
                      MICHAEL S. HOWDEN
                      KUILAUOKALANI F. LESTER
                      GINNY PARSONS
EXCUSED:              CARL MARTIN HOLMBERG
                      RALPH JOHANSEN
DIRECTOR:             GEORGE TENGAN
DEPUTY CORP COUNSEL:  JAMES GIROUX
                      EDWARD KUSHI
                      BRIAN MOTO
                      JANE LOVELL
BOARD SECRETARY:      MICHELE SAKUMA
STAFF:                HOLLY PERDIDO
                      ELLEN KRAFTSOW
                      ALVA NAKAMURA
                      CARI SUMABAT
                      JOE MENDONCA


TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
BOARD OF WATER SUPPLY, REGULAR MEETING
April 27, 2006, 9:00 A.M.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  I WOULD LIKE TO CALL TO ORDER
THE BOARD OF WATER SUPPLY REGULAR MEETING FOR APRIL 26,
2006.  MEMBERS PRESENT TODAY -- I'VE GOT SO MANY NEW MEMBERS
I HAVE GOT TO LOOK AT THE NAMES NOW.  LET'S SEE.  WE HAVE TO
MY FAR LEFT MICHAEL HOWDEN.  WELCOME.

BOARD MEMBER HOWDEN:  THANK YOU.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  AND WE HAVE LEE ALDRIDGE.
WELCOME.

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  THANK YOU.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  VICE-CHAIR KENNETH OKAMURA.

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:  GOOD MORNING.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  MEMBER GINNY PARSONS.
WELCOME KUI LESTER.  AND THE CHAIR, MYSELF, MICHAEL
VICTORINO.

AT THIS POINT I WOULD LIKE TO CALL FOR A FIVE
MINUTE RECESS BECAUSE I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE A QUICK MOMENT
AND PRESENT TO OUR NEW MEMBERS A LITTLE WELCOME FROM US.
(WHEREUPON A BRIEF RECESS WAS HAD).

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  OKAY, I'LL RECONVENE THE
MEETING.  ANNOUNCEMENTS.  I WILL OPEN UP FOR ANNOUNCEMENTS.
YES, MISS GINNY.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  ON THIS SUNDAY, APRIL 30TH,
FROM 9 TO 4 AT HANNIBAL TAVARES CENTER WE HAVE OUR FIRST
UPCOUNTRY MAUI SAFE WATER FAIR.  IT'S SPONSORED IN PART BY
THE MEO, THE COUNTY OF MAUI, THE DEPARTMENT OF WATER SUPPLY,
THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, AND THE EPA.  IT'S GOING TO BE
MORE OF A FUN EVENT WITH WATER FACTS, BUT FOCUSED ON THE
KEIKI, LOTS OF GAMES FOR THE CHILDREN.  AND THERE WILL BE
SOME VENDORS THERE WITH PRODUCTS THAT YOU MAY WELL BE
INTERESTED IN TO HELP MAKE YOUR HOUSEHOLD WATER SYSTEMS
BETTER. 

AND ALSO WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF WATER THEY WILL BE
THERE WITH THEIR GOODIES THAT THEY ALWAYS BRING, THE
AERATORS AND THE SHOWER HEADS AND SOME GOODIES TO TAKE CARE
OF, AND THEY'LL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE ABOUT
THE UPCOUNTRY WATER, BUT WATER IN GENERAL.
AND THIS ISN'T JUST FOR THE UPCOUNTRY AREA.
BECAUSE WE'RE ADDING SURFACE WATERS INTO THE CENTRAL VALLEY,
IT'S SOMETHING TO LOOK AT TOO, HOW TO KEEP YOUR HOMES CLEAN,
MAKE SURE YOU CHANGE AND OPEN UP YOUR AERATORS, AND THAT
KIND OF THING.  THEY'LL TALK ABOUT THINGS THAT ARE REALLY
IMPORTANT IN YOUR OWN HOME TO KEEP THEM CLEAN.

                      
AND WE'LL HAVE LIVE MUSIC.  THE HULA HONEYS ARE
GOING TO BE THERE FROM 1 TO 4.  AND HOME DEPOT GAVE US A
GRILL TO GIVE AWAY, SO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A DRAWING AT
11:00 FOR THE EARLY BIRDS.  WE HAVE A BEAUTIFUL GRILL AND
ACCESSORIES THAT GO WITH IT, A GAS GRILL.  AND WE'VE GOTTEN
A LOT OF GIFTS FROM THE COMMUNITY TO BE ABLE TO DO A LOT OF
GIVE-AWAYS, SO IT SHOULD BE A LOT OF FUN.

                       
I HOPE YOU ALL CAN ATTEND.  TAKE A LOOK, IT'S THE
FIRST ONE.  WE WOULD LIKE TO DO IT ANNUALLY, SO IF THIS IS
SOMETHING THAT'S SUCCESSFUL AND WE GET A GOOD ATTENDANCE --
AND WE'VE DONE THIS ON A SHOE-STRING BUDGET, I MEAN ON A
TOTAL SHOE-STRING BUDGET -- IF THIS WORKS WE WILL DO IT
EVERY YEAR.  AND IT'S JUST A REMINDER FOR FOLKS IN-HOME, HOW
TO TAKE CARE OF THEIR HOME FROM THE METER INSIDE THE HOUSE,
AND HELP WITH ANY WATER QUESTIONS THEY MAY HAVE.

                       
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  THANK YOU, MISS PARSONS.  ANY
QUESTIONS FOR GINNY AS FAR AS THE EVENT IS CONCERNED?  ANY
OTHER ANNOUNCEMENTS?  I WILL AT THIS POINT, BEFORE I MOVE ON
TO OTHER BUSINESS, I WILL OPEN THE FLOOR TO OUR THREE NEW
MEMBERS.  IF YOU WANT TO SAY A FEW WORDS, I WOULD WELCOME
ANY COMMENTS.  I KNOW YOU'RE VERY NEW AND YOU'RE LIKE, WOW,
THIS IS OVERWHELMING.  BUT SINCE I DID ALL THE TALKING, I'LL
GIVE YOU A MINUTE OR TWO TO SAY A FEW THINGS ABOUT WHAT YOU
ARE AND WHAT YOU EXPECT OUT OF THIS WHOLE THING.  WHY DON'T
WE START WITH YOU, KUI.


BOARD MEMBER LESTER:  I'D RATHER WAIT.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  YOU'D RATHER WAIT.  THAT'S
FAIR.  MICHAEL?

BOARD MEMBER HOWDEN:  I'LL PASS FOR NOW.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  YOU'LL PASS FOR NOW.  I LIKE
THIS GROUP.  LEE?

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  WELL, I'LL SAY A VERY
BRIEF MESSAGE.  I'M PLEASED TO BE HERE, AND I WORKED FOR TEN
YEARS FOR THE WATER DISTRICT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE TABLE,
FOR THE STAFF, SO IT WILL BE INTERESTING BEING ON THIS SIDE
OF THE TABLE FOR A CHANGE.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  WELL, THANK YOU, LEE.  WE
WELCOME YOU.  OKAY, I WOULD LIKE TO NOW, INSTEAD OF -- WELL,
FIRST OF ALL, LET'S APPROVE THE MINUTES FOR THE MARCH 23RD,
2006 MEETING.  DO WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES
FOR THE MARCH 23RD, 2006 REGULAR MEETING?

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  I'LL MAKE A MOTION WITH THE
NORMAL 30 DAYS TO REVIEW.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  IT HAS BEEN MOVED.

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:  SECOND.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  AND SECONDED.  ANY
DISCUSSION?  I KNOW IT'S PRETTY DIFFICULT, I UNDERSTAND.
BUT THEN HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY "AYE."

(A CHORUS OF AYES)

OPPOSED?

(NONE)

OKAY.  I KNOW IT'S AN EXTREME CHALLENGE FOR YOU
FOLKS, BECAUSE YOU'RE GETTING ALL THIS MATERIAL AND YOU
HAVEN'T REALLY BEEN A PART OF THESE MEETINGS.  BUT AGAIN, AS
YOU GET INTO IT YOU'LL FIND SOME CONTINUITY AND YOU'LL
UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON.

WHEN I STARTED THE MEETING I SAID APRIL 26TH.  I'D
LIKE TO CORRECT THAT AT THIS TIME AND SAY APRIL 27, 2006.
I'M TRYING TO HOLD BACK TIME.

MOVING RIGHT ALONG, BEFORE I GO INTO PUBLIC
TESTIMONY I WOULD LIKE, TO WITH THE BOARD'S CONSENT, MOVE TO
COMMUNICATION.  AND I WOULD LIKE TO GO TO ITEM B, BECAUSE
I'M IN RECEIPT, AND I THINK YOU HAVE COPIES OF A LETTER FROM
MUSTARD MURAYAMA REQUESTING THAT WE DEFER ACTION ON THE
LETTER DATED FEBRUARY 16, 2006.  MR. MURAYAMA IN HIS LETTER
SAYS THAT HE'S UNABLE TO BE HERE AND THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO
ARRANGE TO BE HERE IN MAY AND BE PUT ON THE MAY AGENDA, THE
MAY 25TH AGENDA.

I WOULD LIKE TO ASK FOR A MOTION OF DEFERENCE
UNTIL THE MAY 25TH MEETING ON THIS MATTER REGARDING THE
COMMUNICATION 06-06, PAGES 21 THROUGH 129.   DO I HAVE A
MOTION TO DEFER?

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:  SO MOVED.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  IT'S BEEN MOVED.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  SECOND.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  MOVED AND SECONDED.  ALL

THOSE IN FAVOR SAY "AYE."

(A CHORUS OF AYES).

SO THIS WILL BE PLACED ON OUR MAY 25TH MEETING AS
FAR AS AN AGENDA ITEM.

OKAY, NOW PUBLIC TESTIMONY.  I THINK I HAD A LIST
HERE.  WE HAVE THREE SPEAKERS HERE.  I HAVE NANI SANTOS,
JOHN DUEY AND ROSE MARIE DUEY THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON
VARIOUS MATTERS.  WHY DON'T WE START WITH YOU, NANI.  NANI,
ARE YOU PRESENT?  WHY DON'T YOU SIT RIGHT HERE, NANI.

MRS. SANTOS:  GOOD MORNING MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.
THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HERE BEFORE YOU TODAY
AND HAVE OUR VOICES HEARD.  I'M HERE ALONG WITH MY HUSBAND,
FRANK SANTOS, AND MY MOTHER AND FATHER, JOHN AND ROSE MARIE
DUEY, AND MY BROTHER DAVID DUEY.  WE ARE ALL OWNERS OF THE
SUBJECT PROPERTY FOR THE BUILDING PERMIT IN QUESTION, AND
WE'RE HERE TO HUMBLY ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT AND GUIDANCE IN
HELPING US TO OBTAIN OUR BUILDING PERMIT THAT'S BEING
DESIGNED US BY THE COUNTY OF MAUI WATER DEPARTMENT.

WITH A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND, WE MOVED TO IAO
VALLEY IN 1969, AND OUR FAMILY HAS LIVED THERE EVER SINCE.
IN DECEMBER OF 2001 WE PURCHASED LOT NUMBER 1.  AND IF YOU
REFER TO YOUR MAP HERE, IT'S LOT NUMBER 1 OF THE IAO ZEN
DOJO SUBDIVISION.  IT'S THIS PARCEL HERE (INDICATING.)  AT
THAT TIME THIS PARCEL CONSISTED OF 18 ACRES.

REALIZING THE CLIMBING PRICES OF REAL ESTATE, WE
SAW THIS AS A MEANS TO SECURE A FUTURE RESIDENCE FOR OUR
CHILDREN HERE ON MAUI.  WE SET UP OUR ESTATE WITH LLC CODES
AND COVENANTS THAT STRICTLY PROHIBIT ANYONE IN THE FAMILY TO
SELL THE LAND OUTSIDE THE MEMBERS OF THE FAMILY.

NOW, BACK ON JULY 19, 2005, MY HUSBAND AND I
APPLIED FOR A BUILDING PERMIT.  DURING THE MONTHS THAT
FOLLOWED WE CHECKED THE STATUS OF OUR APPLICATION ON LINE ON
NUMEROUS OCCASIONS, ONLY TO FIND THAT NO ACTIVITY WAS TAKING
PLACE.  THREE MONTHS LATER ON OCTOBER 7TH I CALLED THE WATER
DEPARTMENT AND WAS TOLD THAT OUR APPLICATION HAD NOT YET
BEEN REVIEWED.  AND TO MAKE A VERY LONG STORY SHORTER, AFTER
NUMEROUS PHONE CALLS, EMAILS, OFFICE VISITS, AND REQUESTS TO
MEET WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF WATER STAFF TO RESOLVE THIS
ISSUE, WE WERE TOLD THAT OUR BUILDING PERMIT WOULD NOT BE
ISSUED TO US DUE TO A WATER SERVICE AGREEMENT THAT IS
ATTACHED TO THIS PROPERTY.

ON NOVEMBER 10TH WE THEN PROVIDED THE DEPARTMENT
WITH A COPY OF A LETTER, AND IT'S ONE OF THE HANDOUTS WE
PROVIDED YOU.  IT'S THE ISSUANCE OF A WATER METER FOR
PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SUBDIVISIONS.  I WAS TOLD THAT THIS
LETTER WOULD BE FORWARDED TO CORPORATION COUNSEL.  HOWEVER,
BY FEBRUARY 2006 THIS LETTER HAD NEVER MADE IT TO
CORPORATION COUNSEL.  AND WE WERE TOLD THEN BY TWO WATER
DEPARTMENT REPRESENTATIVES THAT THE LETTER HAD NO STANDING,
AND WE WERE RECOMMENDED TO COME BEFORE THE BOARD OF WATER
SUPPLY.

SO I THEN SENT A LETTER ON FEBRUARY 28TH
REQUESTING TO BE PUT ON YOUR AGENDA FOR YOUR MARCH 23RD
MEETING, AND ON MARCH 22ND I CALLED THE BOARD OF WATER
SUPPLY SECRETARY TO SEE IF WE WERE ON THAT AGENDA, AND I WAS
TOLD WE WERE PUT ON TO THE NEXT MEETING AGENDA.  SO FINALLY
YESTERDAY WE RECEIVED THE STAFF REPORT FROM THE WATER
DEPARTMENT THAT'S DENYING OUR REQUEST TO WAIVE THE
REQUIREMENTS.

SO HERE WE ARE IN FRONT OF YOU TODAY, NO LESS THAN
NINE MONTHS LATER, WITH ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS DRAFTED AND
PAID FOR, UTILITY SERVICES CONNECTED, CONSTRUCTION LOAN
RATES AND BUILDING FEES RISING, AND A GREAT DEAL OF
FRUSTRATION IN HAND.

WE ARE ASKING FROM THE BOARD OF WATER SUPPLY OR
THE WATER DEPARTMENT FOR AN EXPLANATION AS TO WHY YOU FEEL
THAT A BUILDING PERMIT FOR A THREE BEDROOM, TWO BATH HOME
REQUIRES A 60,000 GALLON WATER TANK.  IT SEEMS AS THOUGH THE
WORD "SUBDIVISION," WHICH IN THIS CASE ENCOMPASSES THREE
LARGE LOTS, IS THE DEFINING WORD AND THE REASON WE'RE BEING
DENIED OUR PERMIT.  SO WE ARE TRYING TO RATIONALIZE AND MAKE
SENSE OF WHAT WE FEEL IS AN UNREASONABLE REQUEST.

WE ARE NOT DEVELOPERS LOOKING TO TURN A PROFIT ON
AN INVESTMENT.  WE ARE A FAMILY WITH ROOTS HERE IN THE
ISLANDS WHO WISH TO BUILD A HOME FOR OURSELVES, AND PROVIDE
A FUTURE FOR OUR CHILDREN HERE ON MAUI.  AND IT'S HARD TO
FATHOM WHY A BUILDING PERMIT FOR A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE
IS SO DIFFICULT TO OBTAIN WHILE DEVELOPMENT CONTINUES TO GO
ON ALL AROUND US.

WE ARE ONLY EIGHT HOMES AWAY FROM THE MAIN WATER
SOURCE IN THE IAO TUNNEL, AND THAT FEEDS ALL OF CENTRAL
MAUI, PAIA, AND SOUTH MAUI.  AND THE IAO RIVER IS LITERALLY
IN OUR BACKYARD.  SO ALL WE ASK IS THAT WHEN YOU ARE CALLED
UPON TO MAKE DECISIONS ON BEHALF OF THIS COMMUNITY, THAT YOU
TAKE THE NEEDS OF GOOD, HONEST, HARD WORKING, LOCAL FAMILIES
IN MIND, AND DON'T LEAVE US WITH THE LEFTOVERS.  DON'T ASK
US TO FOOT THE BILL FOR LUXURY HOMES WITH SWIMMING POOLS,
PART-TIME RESIDENTS, LARGE DEVELOPMENTS, GOLF COURSES AND
RESORTS CLEAR DOWN IN SOUTH MAUI.

SO BASICALLY WE'RE LOOKING FOR CLARIFICATION ON
SOME OF THESE REQUIREMENTS, ESPECIALLY ON THIS LARGE WATER
TANK.  AND IF YOU CAN DEFINE AND RATIONALIZE THE NEED FOR
THIS LARGE CAPACITY WATER TANK FOR A BUILDING PERMIT.  THANK
YOU.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  BEFORE WE DO THAT, MR AND
MRS. DUEY, ARE YOU GOING TO SPEAK BASICALLY ON THE SAME
ISSUE?  I MEAN NOT THAT I DON'T WANT YOU TO SPEAK, BUT IF WE
ARE JUST GOING TO HEAR THE SAME THING, THEN CAN WE MOVE ON
AND ASK QUESTIONS AND SHE CAN SPEAK FOR YOU, OR WOULD YOU
RATHER COME UP?

MRS. DUEY:  WE WANT TO SAY OUR PIECE.  IT'S A
LITTLE DIFFERENT FROM WHAT SHE'S SAYING.

THE WITNESS:  MY FATHER IS GOING TO SPEAK TO
STATISTICAL MATTERS.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  OKAY.  I JUST WANTED TO MAKE
SURE.  WELL, THEN WHY DON'T WE GO AHEAD AND ASK QUESTIONS,
AND THEN WE WILL ASK THE DUEYS TO SPEAK, AND THEN BRING IN
THE DEPARTMENT.  ALL RIGHT, GINNY.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  I HAVE A COUPLE OF
QUESTIONS.  THIS ENTIRE PIECE IS YOUR PIECE, IS THAT
CORRECT?

NANI SANTOS:  YES, THE SHADED AREA.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  AND YOU HAVE ALREADY DONE A
SUBDIVISION IN IT?

NANI SANTOS:  NO, THERE'S ONLY ONE LOT.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  AND THERE IS ONLY ONE
BUILDING ON IT?

NANI SANTOS:  YES.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  AND YOU'RE ONLY ASKING TO
BUILD A COTTAGE?

THE WITNESS:  THERE'S A COTTAGE, AN EXISTING TWO
BEDROOM COTTAGE, AND WE'RE ASKING TO BUILD A THREE BEDROOM,
TWO BATH HOME.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  BUT THERE'S ONLY ONE
DWELLING ON IT?

NANI SANTOS:  YES.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  AND YOU'RE ONLY ASKING TO
BUILD THE MAIN HOUSE?

NANI SANTOS:  RIGHT.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  I JUST WANTED CLARIFICATION.
THAT'S FINE.  WE WILL ASK THE DEPARTMENT TO CLARIFY THAT
MATTER.  ANY OTHER QUESTIONS TO OUR PRESENTER AT THIS TIME?
OKAY, MISS SANTOS, THEN WE WILL SPEAK TO MOM AND DAD, AND
THEN WE WILL MOVE FROM THERE.

NANI SANTOS:  THANK YOU.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  MR. DUEY?

MR. DUEY:  GOOD MORNING, CHAIR VICTORINO AND THE
REST OF THE BOARD, GEORGE, BRIAN, ALL YOU DISTINGUISHED
PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE.  MY NAME IS JOHN V. DUEY.  I AM A
RESIDENT OF IAO VALLEY FOR 37 YEARS, AND A TAXPAYER.  MAHALO
TO THE BOARD FOR VOLUNTEERING YOUR TIME, ESPECIALLY THE NEW
MEMBERS THAT ARE COMING ON, TO SERVE ON THIS BOARD.  I AM
FULLY AWARE THAT AFTER THE LAST ELECTION YOU NOW SERVE IN AN
ADVISORY CAPACITY ONLY TO THE MAYOR, THE COUNCIL, AND THE
DIRECTOR.

AFTER SPEAKING TO ONE OF THE ENGINEERS ABOUT THIS
MATTER, HE SUGGESTED -- THE ENGINEER IS THAT MAN.  I CAN'T
REMEMBER YOUR NAME, IS IT ALVIN?  ALVIN.  HE SUGGESTED THAT
WE COME BEFORE THE BOARD TO EXPRESS OUR VIEWS AND TO GET ON
THE AGENDA FOR ONE OF YOUR MEETINGS.  NANI SENT A LETTER
THAT WAS RECEIVED BY DWS ON MARCH 2ND ASKING TO BE PUT ON
THE AGENDA FOR MARCH, BUT SHE WAS TOLD IT WAS TOO LATE.  BUT
IT DID GET TO DWS, AND THEY HAD 55 DAYS TO RESPOND TO OUR
CONCERN.  WE WERE NOTIFIED YESTERDAY ABOUT THE DWS REPORT
AND GIVEN A COPY YESTERDAY, 24 HOURS.  SO WE HAD LESS THAN
24 HOURS TO RESPOND.  IT SEEMED LIKE SOMETHING HERE IS NOT
FAIR.  IN FACT, THE WHOLE THING IS NOT FAIR.
AS MY DAUGHTER HAS STATED, THE PROPERTY IS FOR OUR
OHANA, NOT A SUBDIVISION TO SELL TO THE RICH.  IT STATED IN
FACT THAT OUR LLC COVENANTS STATE THAT THE PROPERTY IS NOT
TO BE SOLD OUT OF OUR IMMEDIATE FAMILY.  AND ALSO NANI
FORGOT TO MENTION THAT OUR SON DAVID'S TWO SONS, THE SIX OF
US OWN THE PROPERTY, THE LLC.

WE WEREN'T AWARE OF THE DWS REQUIREMENTS THAT WERE
PLACED ON THE PROPERTY UNTIL NANI TRIED TO GET A BUILDING
PERMIT.  THEN WE WENT TO LAND USE AND GOT A COMPLETE COPY OF
THE SUBDIVISION FILE AT A COST OF $51.00.

A POINT OF INTEREST HERE:  THE AUGUST 8, 1994
MODIFICATION OF THE SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENT AGREEMENT
STATING A 60,000 GALLON THANK WAS REQUIRED WAS NOT IN IT.  I
HAVE IT ALL RIGHT HERE.  AND ANYWAY, IT SAYS A 48,000 GALLON
TANK, BUT NOT 60,000.  I DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT CAME FROM.
ONLY AFTER GETTING DWS COPIES YESTERDAY DID WE SEE WHAT WAS
HAPPENING.  IT IS UNFATHOMABLE ME THAT SOME ENTITY, IN THIS
CASE WAILUKU AG, CAN GET APPROVAL FROM THE COUNTY TO
SUBDIVIDE A PROPERTY, THEN DEFER ANY IMPROVEMENTS TO THE
BUYER.  IT'S UNREAL.

TO ADDRESS THE 48,000 GALLON TANK ISSUE, IT WOULD
COST OUR OHANA $25,000 TO $30,000 AND TAKE UP SPACE AND BE
AN EYESORE.  A 60,000 GALLON TANK AND PUMPS, AS STATED IN
THE MEMORANDUM OF AUGUST 8, 1994, WOULD BE IN THE $35,000 TO
$40,000 RANGE.  THIS IS A LOCAL, MIDDLE INCOME FAMILY WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT HERE.  THIS PROPERTY IS APPROXIMATELY 2,550
FEET FROM THE IAO TUNNEL, WHICH DWS DRAWS APPROXIMATELY 1.8
MILLION GALLONS A DAY, OR 1,250 GALLONS A MINUTE.

ALSO, THE PROPERTY IS ROUGHLY 1,600 FEET FROM THE
KEPANIWAI WELL, WHICH EVIDENTLY WAS PUT ON LINE AFTER 1993,
BECAUSE NO MENTION OF IT WAS MADE AT THE TIME THE
SUBDIVISION WAS MADE.  THIS IAO ZEN DOJO SUBDIVISION, THE
REASON FOR IT -- LET ME REGRESS A LITTLE BIT.  THE REASON
FOR THE SUBDIVISION IS WAILUKU AG WANTED TO GIVE THE IAO
DOJO A LITTLE LAND.  THEY TOOK OUT ABOUT 22 ACRES OUT OF A
3,000 ACRE PARCEL, GAVE THE DOJO THREE-AND-A-HALF ACRES, AND
LEFT 18.146 ACRES THAT WE PURCHASED, AND ABOUT A QUARTER
ACRE ROAD WIDENING DOWN THE ROAD.

THE WELL SUPPLIES 835 MILLION GALLONS A DAY, OR
580 GALLONS PER MINUTE, FOR A TOTAL DELIVERY OF 1,830
GALLONS PER MINUTE.  THESE FIGURES ARE FROM AUGUST 5TH, THE
LATEST AVAILABLE FIGURES.  BOTH SOURCES ARE ABOVE THE
PROPERTY IN ELEVATION.  THE PRESSURE AT THE WELL HEAD IS 23
POUNDS, AND THE STATIC PRESSURE AT THE PROPERTY IS 51
POUNDS.  THE 12-INCH LINE THAT RUNS ALONG THAT IAO ROAD HAS
A CAPACITY OF 1,550 GALLONS A MINUTE, WELL ABOVE THE 400
GALLONS PER MINUTE THAT IS STATED THAT IS NEEDED.  THE
STATEMENT WAS THAT THEY NEED I THINK IT'S 400 GALLONS A
MINUTE FOR TWO HOURS, WHICH IS 48,000 GALLONS.  AND THEY
HAVE REVISED IT TO 60,000, WHICH IS I THINK 500 GALLONS.
AND STILL WE'RE WAY ABOVE THAT IN THE WATER LINE.

IF EITHER THE TUNNEL WAS TO FAIL, WHICH IT NEVER
HAS IN THE 37 YEARS THAT WE HAVE LIVED IN THE VALLEY, OR THE
PUMP WAS TO FAIL, WHICH IS MORE LIKELY, IT WOULD STILL BE
WELL ABOVE THE 400 GALLONS PER MINUTE REQUIRED.

JUST FOR YOUR INFO, I ASKED THREE DIFFERENT PEOPLE
AT DWS TO SUPPLY ME WITH SOME OF THESE FACTS LATE IN 2005,
AND NO ANSWER AS OF THIS DATE.  I HAD TO DIG IT OUT ON MY
OWN.  I JUST CAN'T UNDERSTAND WHY A TANK IS NEEDED WHEN THE
WATER IS AVAILABLE IN THE 12-INCH LINE.  IF WE NEED ONE,
SHOULDN'T EVERYONE NEED ONE?  AFTER ALL, HOW MANY OF YOU
HAVE A 12-INCH WATER LINE RUNNING IN FRONT OF YOUR HOUSE?

THE ELEVATION AGREEMENT, WHICH IS IN THE
SUBDIVISION, THE ELEVATION OF OUR PROPERTY DOES ASSURE US A
DEPENDABLE SOURCE OF WATER FROM THE TUNNEL AND THE PUMP,
JUST AS MUCH AS ANYONE ELSE ON IAO ROAD OR THE TANK NEAR
IZUMI'S, OR AT THE JUNCTION OF IAO VALLEY ROAD AND UPPER
MAIN STREET.  JUST HOW MANY OTHER PEOPLE HAVE 48,000 GALLON
TANKS IN THEIR YARD, DO YOU?  I ALSO UNDERSTAND WHEN THE
FIRE TRUCKS COME TO PUT OUT A FIRE, THEY PUMP WATER OUT OF
THE LINE AND INCREASE THE PRESSURE WITH A PUMP ON THE TRUCK
TO THROW WATER AT THE FIRE.  ALSO, THEY HAVE A THING CALLED
A PUMPER TRUCK.  I WITNESSED THIS IN UKUMEHAME A WEEK AGO
WHEN THERE WAS A BRUSH FIRE, AND THEY BROUGHT A TANKER TRUCK
UP AND A PUMPER TO THROW WATER AT THE FIRE.  SO WHAT GIVES
HERE?

WE OWN LOT NUMBER 1.  IS LOT 2 EXPECTED TO DO THE
SAME THING AS WHAT'S REQUIRED FROM US?  AS TO THE DOCUMENT
FROM CORP COUNCIL, I ONLY KNEW OF THIS BY ATTENDING THE
COUNCIL WATER RESOURCES COMMITTEE MEETINGS.  THE SAME ISSUES
WE ARE HAVING CAME UP WITH A FAMILY ON MOLOKAI.  THE OPINION
FROM CORP COUNSEL SETTLED THEIR PROBLEM IN A POSITIVE WAY.
NANI SUBMITTED THE OPINION TO DWS ON NOVEMBER 10TH, AND NO
RESPONSE TO DATE ON THE LETTER.

WE ARE NOT THE SUBDIVIDER.  THAT WAS WAILUKU
AGRIBUSINESS.  MY DAUGHTER AND HER HUSBAND FRANK JUST WANT
TO BE ABLE TO BUILD A HOUSE.  I WILL BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY
QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.  THANK YOU.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  QUESTIONS?  GO AHEAD, MISS
PARSONS.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  DID YOU GET A COPY OF THIS
BUREAU OF CONVEYANCE DATED AUGUST 4, 1994 BETWEEN THE
DEPARTMENT OF WATER AND --

MR. DUEY:  THE AUGUST 4TH ONE IS IN HERE.  THE
AUGUST 8TH IS NOT.  WE REQUESTED THAT.  THEIR REQUIRING THE
40,000 GALLON TANK, YES, THAT WAS IN THE AGREEMENT WHEN WE
BOUGHT THE PLACE.  BUT WE WEREN'T REALLY AWARE OF IT AND WE
DIDN'T KNOW.  AND THE ELEVATION AGREEMENT WAS IN THERE TOO.
BUT WHEN YOU SEE AN ELEVATION AGREEMENT YOU THINK OF HEIGHT,
NOT WATER.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  DO YOU HAVE ANY OTHER
AGREEMENTS THAT YOU MADE WITH WAILUKU AG WITH REGARD TO
WATER WHEN YOU BOUGHT THIS PROPERTY?

MR. DUEY:  OH, YEAH, YOU CAN'T DRILL AND YOU CAN'T
TAKE WATER AND ALL KINDS OF THINGS.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  DID YOU SUPPLY THIS TO CORP
COUNSEL?

MR. DUEY:  NO, WE HAVEN'T TALKED TO CORP COUNSEL
ABOUT THIS ISSUE.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  BECAUSE THIS IS ALL PART OF
IT.  ALL RIGHT, WERE ALL THESE STIPULATIONS TOGETHER IN THAT
DOCUMENT, IN THE DOCUMENTS?

MR. DUEY:  IN THE TITLE SEARCH THING, YES.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  WHEN WE GO INTO DISCUSSION
WE WILL TALK ABOUT THAT.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  YES, WHEN WE GO INTO
DISCUSSION.  WE WILL STICK WITH THE SUBJECT MATTER AT HAND.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  YOU DEFINITELY WANT TO GET
THAT IN FRONT OF CORP COUNSEL.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?  YES,
MICHAEL.

BOARD MEMBER HOWDEN:  I UNDERSTAND YOUR
FRUSTRATION.  I ALSO NOTE THAT YOU ARE AN EXPERT IN
IRRIGATION SYSTEMS.

MR. DUEY:  WELL, MY SON IS THE EXPERT NOW, NOT ME.

BOARD MEMBER HOWDEN:  NOW.  BUT FOR YEARS YOU
WERE.

MR. DUEY:  YES.

BOARD MEMBER HOWDEN:  WHAT WOULD YOU FEEL WOULD BE
REASONABLE IN TERMS OF WATER STORAGE AND FIRE PROTECTION FOR
YOUR LOT?

MR. DUEY:  WELL, WE HAVE AGREED BETWEEN OUR FAMILY
THAT IN THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENTS IT SAYS THAT THERE SHOULD BE
A FIRE LINE PUT IN BETWEEN LOT 1 AND 2.  LOT 1 ON YOUR MAP
IS THE DOJO LOT, THE THREE AND A HALF ACRES ON THE CORNER,
AND LOT 2 IS OUR LOT.  AND IT SAID IN THE ORIGINAL
AGREEMENT, WHICH WAS DEFERRED, THAT A FIRE HYDRANT SHOULD BE
PUT IN THERE, BETWEEN LOT 1 AND 2.

WE'RE IN AGREEMENT, OUR OHANA, TO PUT A FIRE
HYDRANT OR HYDRANTS IN, WHATEVER IS REQUIRED.  THERE IS A
FIRE HYDRANT 540 FEET FROM THIS PROPERTY.  WE LIVE RIGHT
ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE PROPERTY PRESENTLY.  WE HAVE
SINCE '72.  THERE'S A FIRE HYDRANT ON THE CORNER OF OUR
PROPERTY.  THIS PROPERTY IN QUESTION IS RIGHT ACROSS THE
STREET AND MAUKA.  WE ARE IN AGREEMENT TO PUT A FIRE HYDRANT
OR FIRE HYDRANTS IN TO SUPPLY WATER AND FIRE SERVICE.  THE
TANK TO ME IS JUST TOTALLY UNREASONABLE, WHEN THERE'S WATER
THERE IN THE WATER LINE.  THAT IS TOTALLY UNREASONABLE.

THERE WAS FIGURES THAT I GAVE YOU IN THE BACK OF THE
HANDOUT.  THERE IS A TECH THING FROM THIS PAGE HERE, THIS
SHEET HERE.  THAT'S FROM THE RAIN BIRD TECH MANUAL WHERE IT
SHOWS A 12-INCH LINE CAN SUPPLY THE 1550 GALLONS WITH NO
LOSS OF VELOCITY.  YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO MOVE WATER THROUGH
A PIPE AT MORE THAN FIVE FEET PER SECOND.  AND UNDER FIVE
FEET PER SECOND YOU CAN STILL GET -- AT 4.88 YOU CAN STILL
GET 1550 GALLONS A MINUTE THROUGH THAT LINE.

THEY'RE REQUIRING WITH THE NEW REGULATIONS 500
GALLONS A MINUTE.  YOU'RE STILL THREE TIMES MORE WATER
THROUGH THAT PIPE THAN IS REQUIRED TO FIGHT THE FIRES.  IT'S
BEYOND ME, IT'S TOTALLY BEYOND ME.  DID I ANSWER YOUR
QUESTION?  WELL, LET ME SAY WE ARE NOT IN AGREEMENT WITH
PUTTING A BLOODY STORAGE TANK IN THERE, THAT'S RIDICULOUS.
BUT WE WOULD BE IN AGREEMENT TO PUT ONE OR TWO FIRE HYDRANT.
WHATEVER WOULD BE NECESSARY FOR THE WHOLE PROPERTY.

BOARD MEMBER HOWDEN:  HOW ABOUT A SMALLER TANK?

MR. DUEY:  IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE, THE WATER IS
THERE.  THE AVAILABILITY OF THE WATER IS THERE, SO WHY GO TO
ALL THIS $40,000?  WE DIDN'T HAVE MUCH TIME TO GET A GOOD
ESTIMATE, BECAUSE WE WERE JUST NOTIFIED ABOUT THREE OR FOUR
DAYS AGO THAT WE WOULD BE ON THE AGENDA, AND JUST NOTIFIED
YESTERDAY ABOUT THE RESPONSE FROM THE DWS.  SO HAVING ANY
WATER TANK THERE, IT'S UNSIGHTLY AND IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE
WHEN THE WATER IS THERE ON THE BORDERLINE.

BOARD MEMBER HOWDEN:  WHEN YOU RECEIVED TITLE FROM
WAILUKU AGRIBUSINESS, OR ITS FORMER INCARNATION, DID YOU
GIVE UP YOUR KULEANA WATER RIGHTS TO IAO STREAM?

MR. DUEY:  I THINK WE GAVE UP THE PERTINENT RIGHTS
AND WE'RE RETAINING THE RIPARIAN RIGHTS, I THINK THAT'S THE
RIGHT TERMINOLOGY.  BUT WE CANNOT DRILL ON THE PROPERTY.

BOARD MEMBER HOWDEN:  BUT COULD YOU PULL FROM THE
STREAM?

MR. DUEY:  YES, WITH THE PERMISSION OF THE CWRM,
THE COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  KENNETH?

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:  I WAS WONDERING, WE'RE IN
THE TESTIMONY PART NOW?

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  QUESTIONS HERE.

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:  SO ARE WE READY TO DISCUSS
THIS ISSUE?

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  WE'RE JUST ASKING QUESTIONS
NOW, AND THEN WE WILL HAVE THE DEPARTMENT COME UP AND GIVE
THEIRS.  I DON'T WANT THE TWO MIXED UP AT THIS POINT.  I
WANT THE DUEYS AND THE SANTOS' TO GIVE THE FACTS THAT THEY
HAVE, AND THEN WE WILL CALL THE DEPARTMENT UP AT THAT POINT.

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:  I'LL JUST WAIT UNTIL THAT
POINT.

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  I HAVE A POINT.  I'VE
DRIVEN BY THIS ROAD GOING UP TO THE IAO VALLEY PARK, BUT I
AM NOT EXACTLY FAMILIAR WITH THE AREA.  YOU INDICATED --

MR. DUEY:  EXCUSE ME.  YOU'VE SEEN A WOODEN FENCE
ON THE RIGHT SIDE, AND YOU'VE SEEN A SIGN THAT SAYS
"HO'OULULAHUI."

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  I MAY HAVE, BUT I DON'T
RECALL.

MR. DUEY:  WELL, THAT'S OUR PROPERTY.

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  THAT'S YOUR PROPERTY.  I'M
VAGUELY FAMILIAR WITH WHERE THIS IS.  BUT I WANTED TO FOLLOW
UP ON A STATEMENT YOU MADE ABOUT THE SUPPLY IN THE PIPELINE.
I THINK YOU INDICATED THAT THERE WAS A 1,500 GALLON PER
MINUTE SUPPLY WITH RESIDUAL PRESSURE AND 40 PSI.

MR. DUEY:  THERE'S 23 POUNDS AT THE WELL HEAD,
WHICH IS -- I THINK THE WELL IS I WANT TO SAY AT 702
ELEVATION, BUT I'M NOT TOO SURE.

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  IS THAT A HIGHER ELEVATION
THAN YOUR PROPERTY?

MR. DUEY:  THE TUNNEL AND AT THE PROPERTY THERE'S
51 POUNDS OF PRESSURE, THE WELL HEAD IS 23, SO YOU CAN
FIGURE IT OUT, WHAT IS THAT, 24.6.

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  THE WELL IS OBVIOUSLY A
MOTOR DRIVEN WELL, SO IF THAT WENT OUT YOU WOULD NOT HAVE
ANY SUPPLY, IS THAT RIGHT?

MR. DUEY:  NO.  IT FEEDS INTO THE SAME LINE.

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  IT FEEDS INTO THE SAME
LINE.  THE TUNNEL IS A GRAVITY SOURCE, AND THAT'S ALSO ABOVE
YOUR PROPERTY?

MR. DUEY:  CORRECT.

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  AND THE TUNNEL SUPPLY IS
WHAT CAPACITY?

MR. DUEY:  THE TUNNEL SUPPLIES 1.8 MILLION, WHICH
AT 1440 MINUTES A DAY IS 1250 GALLONS A MINUTE.  WELL ABOVE.
I CAN'T TELL YOU OFFHAND, I'D HAVE TO LOOK AT THE TOPO TO
SEE THE ACTUAL ELEVATION OF THE TUNNEL, BUT I SUPPOSE YOU
COULD FIGURE OUT FROM THE 23 POUNDS OF PRESSURE AT THE WELL
HEAD TO PUT WATER IN THE LINE THERE HOW MUCH HIGHER.  THE
TUNNEL IS HIGHER THAN THE PUMP.  I'VE BEEN TO THE TUNNEL, I
KNOW WHERE THE PUMP IS.

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  YOU SEE WHAT I'M DRIVING
AT?  THE QUESTION THAT I HAVE IS THAT YOU WOULD HAVE A TWO
HOUR RELIABLE SUPPLY TO THE PROPERTY AT MINIMUM PRESSURES
REQUIRED TO DELIVER THE 400 GALLONS OF PRESSURE.

MR. DUEY:  THE PUMP COULD FAIL, IT'S MOTOR DRIVEN.
THE TUNNEL IS NOT GOING TO FAIL.

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT FOR
PRESCRIBING THE TANK, TO OVERCOME FAILURE OF PUMPS.

MR. DUEY:  RIGHT.  BUT THE TUNNEL IS THERE, AND
IT'S BEEN THERE FOREVER.  WE HAVE BEEN THERE 37 YEARS, AND I
DON'T KNOW THE DATE THE TUNNEL WAS DUG.  I WANT TO SAY I
KNOW A GUY THAT WORKED IN THE TUNNEL, HE'S PASSED ON NOW,
AND I DON'T KNOW THE DATE THE TUNNEL WAS DUG.  I'D BETTER
NOT GO THERE.

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  OKAY, THANK YOU.

MR. DUEY:  WELL, THERE IS MORE CAPACITY IN THE
TUNNEL.  THEY'RE ONLY TAKING 1.8, WAILUKU WATER COMPANY NOW.
WAILUKU AGRIBUSINESS IS NO MORE, THEY'VE BEEN DISSOLVED, AND
WAILUKU SUGAR HAS BEEN DISSOLVED.  SO WAILUKU WATER COMPANY
NOW TAKES THE REMAINING WATER OUT OF THAT TUNNEL.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR

MR. DUEY?  OKAY, IF NONE, MRS. DUEY, DO YOU WANT TO SAY
ANYTHING?

MRS. DUEY:  YES.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  THANK YOU, MR. DUEY.

MR. DUEY:  THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR HEARING ME OUT
AND ASKING QUESTIONS.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  MRS. DUEY, I WILL CALL YOU UP
NOW, PLEASE.

MRS. DUEY:  THANK YOU.  ALOHA CHAIRMAN VICTORINO,
AND GOOD MORNING MEMBERS OF THE BOARD AND WATER DEPARTMENT,
MR. TENGAN.  MY DAUGHTER ALREADY INTRODUCED OUR FAMILY, AND
I WAS GOING TO DO THAT, BUT THAT'S OKAY.  I AM NANI SANTOS'
MOTHER.  FRANK SANTOS IS MY SON-IN-LAW, AND JOHN DUEY IS MY
WIFE -- I AM HIS WIFE.  BUT YOU ALSO SAID WE'RE LOT 2.
WE'RE LOT 2.  SO YOU GET ONE ERROR, I GET ONE.

MY HUSBAND AND I RAISED OUR CHILDREN DAVID, LIA
(PHONETIC) AND NANI IN IAO VALLEY.  DAVID LIVES THERE, HIS
TWO SONS LIVE THERE, AND OUR DAUGHTER LIVES ON OAHU.  OUR
CHILDREN AND THEIR CHILDREN LOVE THE VALLEY, AND HAVE OFTEN
EXPRESSED DESIRE TO LIVE IN THE VALLEY IF LAND WAS
AVAILABLE.  SO YOU CAN IMAGINE OUR EMOTIONS WHEN WAILUKU
AGRIBUSINESS DECIDED TO SELL THE PARCEL OF LAND ACROSS FROM
OUR HOUSE AT A PRICE WE AS A FAMILY COULD AFFORD.

WE THEN PROCEEDED TO CREATE OUR FAMILY HUI,
HO'OULULAHUI LLC, AND TO SET FORTH COVENANTS TO PROTECT AND
PRESERVE THE BEAUTY OF THE VALLEY.  OUR DREAM HAD COME TRUE,
SO WE THOUGHT.  NANI AND FRANK APPLIED FOR A PERMIT TO BUILD
A HOME IN IAO VALLEY.  YOUR DEPARTMENT RECEIVED THEIR
BUILDING PERMIT, AND AFTER MANY ATTEMPTS ON HER PART -- YOU
HAVE HEARD THAT FROM HER -- YOUR DEPARTMENT, WITHOUT
REASONABLE RESPONSE, WE HAVE COME TO THIS DAY.

UNFORTUNATELY, THEY HAVE BEEN DENIED A WATER METER
UNTIL WE INSTALL AN INTRUSIVE 60,000 GALLON WATER TANK FOR
FIRE PROTECTION.  THIS WAS A REQUIREMENT IMPOSED ON WAILUKU
AGRIBUSINESS AT THE TIME THEY REQUESTED AND RECEIVED
APPROVAL FOR A SUBDIVISION, BUT IT WAS DEFERRED.  WE ARE NOT
WAILUKU AGRIBUSINESS.  WE COULD HAVE DEVELOPED THE PROPERTY
INTO A MAJOR SUBDIVISION OF AT LEAST 36 HOMES.  AND WE ARE
NOT A PRIVATE DEVELOPER WITH THAT INTENT.  INSTEAD, OUR
DAUGHTER AND SON-IN-LAW WANT TO BUILD A HOME FOR THEIR
FAMILY.

YOU HAVE HEARD WE ARE ASKING TO BE RELIEVED FROM
THIS COSTLY, INTRUSIVE, UNREASONABLE REQUIREMENT, AND YOU
HAVE ALREADY BEEN GIVEN THE RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL FROM
THE WATER DEPARTMENT STAFF.  WE ARE APPRECIATIVE OF YOUR
TIME AND YOUR PROCESS TO HEAR ARGUMENTS, AND HOPE THAT YOU
ARE NOT ALREADY COMPROMISED BY THE RECOMMENDATION, BECAUSE
WE ARE ASKING YOU TO FIND A REASONABLE ANSWER FOR REQUIRING
THIS COSTLY AND INTRUSIVE TANK FOR A FAMILY HOME.

OUR FAMILY HAS READ THE DWS DOCUMENT GIVEN TO US
YESTERDAY, WHICH HAS THE REQUIREMENT OF THE TANK BASED ON
PROPERTY ELEVATION IN CASE OF FIRE.  PLEASE REVIEW MY
HUSBAND'S DATA ON ELEVATION AND AVAILABILITY OF WATER, AND
DEFINITELY QUESTION WHY YOUR HOME OR ANYONE ELSE'S IN A
SIMILAR POSITION DOES NOT HAVE THIS REQUIREMENT, AND THIS
FAMILY WOULD.

NOW, MR. HOWDEN, YOU ASKED MY HUSBAND A QUESTION
ABOUT WHAT HE WOULD RECOMMEND IN CASE OF A FIRE.  I THINK WE
HAVE THE SAME SAFETY VALVE ALL OF YOU HAVE, AND IT DOES NOT
MATTER WHETHER THE TUNNEL FAILS OR THE SYSTEM FAILS.  YOUR
SYSTEM COULD FAIL TOO, BUT YOU ARE NOT BEING REQUIRED TO PUT
A 60,000 GALLON TANK TO BACK THAT SYSTEM UP.  THEN WHY
SHOULD WE?

IT APPEARS TO LACK INTELLIGENCE AND COMMON SENSE
TO REQUIRE THIS FOR OUR CHILDREN'S HOME.  IT MAKES MORE
SENSE TO REQUIRE IT OF A MAJOR SUBDIVISION, GIVEN THE ENTITY
THAT WE'RE SUBDIVIDING.  OUR CHILDREN WOULD LIKE TO MOVE
AHEAD WITH BUILDING THEIR HOME.  PLEASE CONSIDER THEIR
REQUEST, AND GIVE THEM YOUR APPROVAL FOR A WATER METER
WITHOUT THIS REQUIREMENT.

FINALLY, IF ALL ELSE FAILS, WE ARE WILLING TO SIGN
A DOCUMENT OF HOLD HARMLESS OF THE DWS, ITS BOARD, AND THE
COUNTY OF MAUI, IF THAT IS WHAT IT WOULD TAKE.  THANK YOU
FOR HEARING AND CONSIDERING OUR QUESTION.  DO YOU HAVE ANY
QUESTIONS?

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  ONE QUICK CORRECTION.  YOU
STATED, "YOUR DWS."  LET ME CORRECT THAT.  IT IS ALL OURS,
IT'S THE PEOPLE OF MAUI.  THEY SERVE THE PEOPLE OF MAUI.
NOT TO MAKE A BIG POINT OF IT, BUT I OFTEN THINK LIKE YOU
STARTED TO PUT ON AN ADVERSARIAL POSITION.  WE'RE NOT HERE
TO BE ADVERSARIAL, WE ARE HERE TO HELP YOU, LIKE THEY ARE.
WE ARE GOING TO FIND THE FACTS AND GET IT ALL DONE, BUT WE
WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU KNOW THAT WE'RE HERE TO SERVE YOU.

NOW, COMMON SENSE AND ALL THAT, I'M NOT GOING TO
TOUCH THAT SUBJECT MATTER.  BUT WE WILL DO WHAT WE CAN TO
HELP YOU.

MRS. DUEY:  SO I SHOULD SAY OUR DEPARTMENT OF
WATER SUPPLY.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  THERE YOU GO, THANK YOU.

MRS. DUEY:  THANK YOU.  THEN I APPRECIATE THAT
CORRECTION, BECAUSE I WILL SAY THAT IN THE FUTURE.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  THANK YOU, MRS. DUEY, WE
             APPRECIATE IT.  WAIT, I DIDN'T SAY YOU CAN GO.  MAYBE THEY
             HAVE QUESTIONS FOR YOU.  ANY QUESTIONS FOR MRS. DUEY?

MRS. DUEY:  NOT THE HARD STUFF.

BOARD MEMBER HOWDEN:  JUST ONE THING.  THE POINT I
WAS MAKING,  I MEAN WHERE I LIVE I HAVE A 75,000 GALLON
RESERVOIR, AND I HAVE TWO CEMENT TANKS OF 12,000, 14,000
LIKE THAT, BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO DEPEND ON THE DEPARTMENT
OF WATER SUPPLY, ESPECIALLY IN ULUPALAKUA WHERE YOU NEVER
KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN.

WHAT I WAS SUGGESTING TO YOUR HUSBAND WAS MAYBE
THERE'S A MIDDLE GROUND, YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD HELP MAKE IT
MORE PALATABLE TO THE DEPARTMENT, WHICH SEEMS TO TAKE --
SOMETIMES TAKES TOO LITERALLY ITS RULES AND REGS.  I MEAN
YOUR CIRCUMSTANCE WOULD SEEM THAT A LOT OF THESE
REQUIREMENTS WOULD BE SUPERFLUOUS.  BUT TO MAKE AN
EXCEPTION, YOU NEED TO MAKE AN INTELLIGENT EXCEPTION.  AND
TO MEET THEM PARTWAY, I THINK, WOULD BE HELPFUL.  THAT'S
ALL.

MRS. DUEY:  MY STATEMENT TO THAT WOULD BE, AS A
TAXPAYER FOR THIS COUNTY OF MAUI FOR MANY YEARS I SHOULD
HAVE THE SAME SERVICES THEY PROVIDE TO OTHERS.  THAT'S IT.
OKAY, THANK YOU.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  THANK YOU, MRS. DUEY.  OKAY,
AT THIS TIME I'D LIKE TO CALL MR. TENGAN.  WHO WILL RESPOND
FROM YOUR DEPARTMENT?

DIRECTOR TENGAN:  I GUESS WE HAVE ALVA HERE.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  MR. NAKAMURA.

DIRECTOR TENGAN:  MAY I JUST MAKE A STATEMENT?

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  SURELY, MR. TENGAN, GO AHEAD.

DIRECTOR TENGAN:  I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT, YOU
KNOW, WE ALL SHOULD UNDERSTAND THAT WE AS STAFF HAVE THE
RESPONSIBILITY OF PROTECTING THE INTEREST OF THE COUNTY.
AND SO WHEN WE SEEM TO BE SOMEWHAT HARSH IN THE APPLICATION
OF THE RULES, THE RULES ARE THE RULES, AND THE AGREEMENTS
THAT COME BEFORE US ARE THE AGREEMENTS THAT WE HAVE GOT TO
DEAL WITH.  AND SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE WORKING WITH RIGHT NOW.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  AND I THINK WE APPRECIATE
THAT.  I DON'T THINK ANYONE IS QUESTIONING THAT MOTIVE.  BUT
SOMETIMES I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT THE OVERALL PICTURE,
NOT JUST THAT ONE INDIVIDUAL.

DIRECTOR TENGAN:   SOMETIMES THE CRITICISM SEEMS
TO FOCUS ON INDIVIDUAL EMPLOYEES AND HOW THEY PROCEED WITH
THEIR WORK, BUT THAT IS NOT THE CASE.  STAFF IS PAID TO
ADMINISTER THE RULES, AND THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE DOING.  SO IF
THE RULES SEEM SOMEWHAT HARSH OR UNREASONABLE, THEN THE
RULES NEED TO BE CHANGED.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  OKAY, I THINK THAT'S A FAIR
STATEMENT, AND I APPRECIATE THAT.  MR. HOWDEN?

BOARD MEMBER HOWDEN:  CAN I ASK MR. TENGAN, I
UNDERSTAND THE RULES, AND I THINK IN AN IDEAL WORLD THAT
IT'S HELPFUL TO HAVE THAT AS A FRAMEWORK.  BUT I DON'T
UNDERSTAND WHY THERE WAS NEVER A RESPONSE TO THE DUEYS.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  MR. HOWDEN, BEFORE WE PROCEED
INTO THAT, LET US GO WITH THE DISCUSSION AND THEN CAN YOU
DEFER THAT MATTER TO A LITTLE BIT LATER?

BOARD MEMBER HOWDEN:  OF COURSE.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  MR. NAKAMURA, YOUR RESPONSE,
PLEASE.

MR. NAKAMURA:  MR. CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD,
             LET ME GO THROUGH THIS VERY BRIEF SUMMARY OF THE ISSUES.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  IS THAT THE ONE YOU HAVE?

MR. NAKAMURA:  I'M JUST READING FROM SOMETHING
THAT I WROTE.  THIS BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION WAS BEING
REQUESTED BY FRANK AND NANI SANTOS, WHO IS REQUESTING A
WAIVER OF REQUIREMENTS TO CONSTRUCT THE WATER SYSTEM
IMPROVEMENTS.  THIS APPLICATION IS FOR A BUILDING PERMIT TO
CONSTRUCT A SECOND DWELLING ON THE PROPERTY, WITH A LIVING
SPACE OF 1,648 SQUARE FEET, 337 SQUARE FEET OF CARPORT, AND
A 369 SQUARE FOOT LANAI.

THE PROPERTY WAS CREATED BY THE IAO DOJO LARGE LOT
SUBDIVISION, AND THE FOLLOWING IMPROVEMENTS WERE REQUIRED
FOR FINAL APPROVAL OF THE SUBDIVISION:
	1.  CONSTRUCT WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS IN
ACCORDANCE WITH STANDARDS.
	2.  CONSTRUCT A PRIVATE FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM IN
ACCORDANCE WITH STANDARDS WITH A STORAGE CAPACITY OF 48,000
GALLONS TO PROVIDE A FIRE FLOW OF 400 GPM FOR TWO HOURS.
	3.  TO PROVIDE WATER SERVICE TO EACH LOT.  AN
ELEVATION AGREEMENT WOULD ALSO BE REQUIRED.
THE SUBDIVIDER, WAILUKU AGRIBUSINESS, MADE A
REQUEST TO THE BOARD OF WATER SUPPLY ON AUGUST 8, 1994 FOR A
MODIFICATION AND DEFERRAL OF THE REQUIREMENTS.  THE BOARD
MODIFIED THE REQUIREMENTS TO THE FOLLOWING:
	1.  PROVIDE WATER SERVICE OFF THE 12-INCH WATER
LINE ALONG IAO ROAD.  INSTALL A BACK FLOW PREVENTER AFTER
THE WATER METER.
     2.  CONSTRUCT A PRIVATE FIRE PROTECTION WATER
SYSTEM CONSISTING OF A 60,000 GALLON RESERVOIR, A FIRE PUMP,
AND A FIRE HYDRANT.  A FLOAT VALVE SHALL BE INSTALLED TO
CONTROL THE WATER LEVEL IN THE RESERVOIR AND KEEP IT FILLED
AT ALL TIMES.
	3.  EXECUTE A PRIVATE WATER SYSTEM AGREEMENT FOR
LOT 2.
	4.  EXECUTE AN ELEVATION AGREEMENT.
REQUIREMENTS:  THE FIRST THREE REQUIREMENTS WERE
DEFERRED UNTIL A BUILDING PERMIT WAS APPLIED FOR.  STAFF
RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF THE REQUEST AND REQUIRING THE
APPLICANTS TO COMPLY WITH REQUIREMENTS ONE AND TWO STATED
PREVIOUSLY WITHIN THE MODIFICATION OF THE SUBDIVISION
REQUIREMENTS AGREEMENT.

SO IN ESSENCE, WHAT WE ARE RECOMMENDING IS THAT
BASED UPON OUR RULES THE WAY THEY CURRENTLY ARE, THAT UNLESS
THEY PROVIDE SOME SORT OF A STORAGE FACILITY TO ACCOMMODATE
THE FIRE PROTECTION OR FIRE FLOW REQUIREMENTS, WE ARE
RECOMMENDING DENIAL AT THIS TIME.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  OKAY.  QUESTIONS FROM THE

BOARD MEMBERS.  MISS PARSONS?

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  IS THIS AN AG PIECE OF
PROPERTY?

MR. NAKAMURA:  INITIALLY WHEN I CHECKED BACK IN
THE RECORDS IT WAS ZONED RURAL.  BUT JUST CHECKING IT THIS
MORNING, IT'S ZONED AGRICULTURAL RIGHT NOW.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  BUT WE ARE NOT POSITIVE, SO
WE NEED TO CHECK THAT.  THIS IS PROBABLY A QUESTION FOR CORP
COUNSEL, BUT CAN PRIVATE AGREEMENTS SUPERSEDE WATER BOARD
RULES?

MR. GIROUX:  I DON'T THINK I CAN ANSWER THAT RIGHT
NOW, AS FAR AS NOT LOOKING AT THE TYPES OF AGREEMENTS AND
WHERE THE RULES WERE AT THE TIME THAT THOSE AGREEMENTS WERE
MADE.  I DON'T THINK I CAN ANSWER THAT QUESTION RIGHT NOW.

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  MICHAEL, I HAVE A
QUESTION.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  YES, MR. ALDRIDGE.

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN
WAILUKU AGRIBUSINESS AND THE WATER DEPARTMENT, THAT WAS
ENTERED INTO IN 1994.  WHAT IS THE RELATIONSHIP -- AND MAYBE
I'M JUST CONFUSED IN LOOKING THROUGH ALL THIS MATERIAL --
BUT WHAT IS THE CURRENT RELATIONSHIP, IF ANY, BETWEEN
WAILUKU AGRIBUSINESS AND THE SANTOS FAMILY, DID THEY BUY
THIS LOT FROM WAILUKU AGRIBUSINESS?

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  I THINK NANI OR MR. DUEY?

MR. DUEY:  WE BOUGHT THE PROPERTY FROM WAILUKU
AGRIBUSINESS.

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  DID THIS AGREEMENT RUN
WITH THE TITLE?  AND YOU MAY HAVE ALREADY STATED THAT.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  WOULD YOU COME UP,
MR. SANTOS, AND NANI OR ONE OR BOTH AND BE UP HERE?  BECAUSE
WHEN QUESTIONS ARE ASKED AND YOU NEED TO ANSWER, I'D RATHER
YOU DON'T TALK ACROSS THE ROOM.  IF YOU WOULD GRAB A CHAIR
AND PUT IT UP OVER HERE, PLEASE.

THANK YOU, MR. DUEY.  NOW, LEE, IF YOU WANT TO
SPECIFICALLY ASK THE QUESTION AGAIN.

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  I GUESS MY QUESTION WAS,
WAS THIS AGREEMENT PART AND PARCEL OF THE TITLE?

MR. DUEY:  YES.  THE 48,000 GALLON TANK AND THE
ELEVATION AGREEMENT IS PART OF THE TITLE.

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  OF THE PRESENT TITLE.  SO
YOU WERE AWARE OF THAT, THE FAMILY?

MR. DUEY:  NOT WHEN WE BOUGHT IT.

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  NOT WHEN YOU BOUGHT IT?

MR. DUEY:  YOU READ THAT STUFF, BUT WE WERE SO
HAPPY TO BE ABLE TO GET THE PROPERTY.  AND YOU READ THE
STUFF, THE ELEVATION AGREEMENT.  WHEN I SEEN ELEVATION, YOU
THINK OF ELEVATION, NOTHING TO DO WITH WATER.  I DON'T KNOW
WHY THEY DIDN'T SAY A WATER AGREEMENT INSTEAD OF AN
ELEVATION AGREEMENT.  IT'S THERE, BUT I WASN'T REALLY AWARE
OF IT.

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  AT THE TIME YOU BOUGHT IT?

MR. DUEY:  AT THE TIME I BOUGHT IT, IT WAS THERE,
YES.  IT'S IN THE TITLE SEARCH.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  ON THE SAME SUBJECT, I WANT
TO JUST FOLLOW UP WITH MIKE.  WAS THIS ELEVATION AGREEMENT
ATTACHED TO YOUR WATER AGREEMENT?

MR. DUEY:  IT'S IN THE TITLE SEARCH.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  BUT YOU SIGNED A SEPARATE
AGREEMENT WITH WAILUKU AG?

MR. DUEY:  NO, NO.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  THERE WERE NO OTHER
AGREEMENTS?

MR. DUEY:  NO.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  BECAUSE YOU SAID BEFORE, I
ASKED YOU WAS THERE ANY OTHER WATER AGREEMENTS THAT YOU
DISCUSSED ABOUT NOT BEING ABLE TO DRILL WELLS.

MR. DUEY:  IT'S ALL PART OF THE TITLE, THAT YOU
CANNOT DRILL WATER ON THE LAND YOU BUY IN WAILUKU AG.
ANYBODY WHO WAS BUYING LAND.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  SO THIS WAS ENCOMPASSED
WITH THAT?

MR. DUEY:  YES.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  AND YOU SIGNED AN AGREEMENT
ENCOMPASSED WITH THAT?

MR. DUEY:  YES.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  THAT'S DISCUSSION THAT WE
NEED TO HAVE WITH CORP COUNSEL, AS TO THE LEGALITY.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  ALL RIGHT.

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  LET ME FOLLOW UP.  I THINK
MISS PARSONS ASKED ONE QUESTION EARLIER, WHICH YOU ANSWERED,
OR MAYBE IT WAS MR. HOWDEN.  YOU DID NOT GIVE UP YOUR
RIPARIAN RIGHTS, THOUGH?

MR. DUEY:  I BELIEVE I'M CORRECT.  NO.

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  AND YOU ARE RIPARIAN TO
THE STREAM?

MR. DUEY:  WE OWN THE STREAM, TWO FIFTHS OF THE
STREAM CROSSES OUR PROPERTY.  ALL OF OUR PINS ARE ON THE
WAIHEE SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, ALL THE WAY FROM THE BRIDGE.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE PLAN, THE UPPER PART OF THE PROPERTY
STARTS AT KEPANIWAI BRIDGE.  IF YOU CROSS THE BRIDGE LOOKING
MAKAI, THE STREAM RUNS ACROSS OUR PROPERTY.

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  SO AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO A
STORAGE TANK, YOU COULD ACTUALLY BUILD A CATCHMENT AND PUMP
WATER FROM THE STREAM FOR FIRE PURPOSES?

MRS. DUEY:  ONLY IF YOU GET APPROVAL FROM THE
CWRM.

MR. DUEY:  THE PROBLEM IS GETTING APPROVAL FROM
THE CWRM, AND THAT'S NOT AN EASY ISSUE.  WE'RE FIGHTING
ANOTHER ISSUE RIGHT NOW WITH THE STREAM.  I DON'T KNOW IF
YOU ARE FAMILIAR WITH THAT.  WE'RE FIGHTING A TOTALLY
DIFFERENT ISSUE ON THE STREAM.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  LET'S JUST KEEP ON THE
SUBJECT MATTER.  TOO MANY OTHER TERMS GET OUT THERE AND THEN
WE GET ALL CONFUSED.  KENNETH, YOU HAD A QUESTION.

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:  THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.  SO
ACTUALLY, YOU'RE SAYING THAT YOU DENIED THE REQUEST BASED ON
THE FACT THAT THERE WAS AN AGREEMENT BY THE SUBDIVIDER WITH
THE WATER DEPARTMENT THAT THEY WOULD HAVE -- THAT THE PERSON
WHO PURCHASES THE PROPERTY HAS TO FOLLOW THESE COVENANTS?

MR. NAKAMURA:  TO FOLLOW OUR STANDARDS.  I MIGHT
JUST ADD ONE MORE COMMENT.  A COUPLE OF DAYS AGO IN
ANTICIPATION OF THIS MEETING I HAD OUR GUYS GO AND DO A TEST
ON THE HYDRANTS ABOVE AND BELOW THIS PROPERTY.  THE HYDRANT
BELOW THE PROPERTY, AS FAR AS THE FLOW RATES, I THINK IT WAS
ABOUT 900-SOMETHING GPM, SO IT WAS OKAY.  BUT ON THE UPPER
END OF THE PROPERTY IT WAS VERY MARGINAL AND WOULDN'T MEET
THE FIRE FLOW REQUIREMENTS.  SO, YOU KNOW, THAT'S ONE THING
THAT WE TESTED A COUPLE OF DAYS AGO.

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:  THESE HYDRANTS ARE LIKE
WITHIN DISTANCE?

MR. NAKAMURA:  WELL, I DON'T EXACTLY REMEMBER WHAT
THE DISTANCE IS FROM THE PROPERTY, BUT I KNOW IT'S ON BOTH
EXTREME ENDS OF THE PROPERTY.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  MR. DUEY, I JUST WAS GOING TO
ASK YOU, ON THE MAP COULD YOU KIND OF PINPOINT WHERE WE'RE
REFERRING TO NOW AS FAR AS THE HYDRANTS ARE CONCERNED?

MR. DUEY:  THE FIRE HYDRANT IS RIGHT HERE.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  YOU'RE PUTTING IT RIGHT HERE?

MR. DUEY:  YES.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  NOW, WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT
THIS MAP, ALVA, WHICH IS UP AND WHICH IS BELOW?

MR. NAKAMURA:  WHICH ONE IS TOWARD THE TOWN NOW?
THIS WAY, RIGHT?

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  THIS IS THE BRIDGE HERE,
RIGHT, THE NARROW PART.  I KIND OF KNEW THAT.  THIS IS GOING
TOWARDS TOWN.

MR. NAKAMURA:  THE UPPER SIDE, WHICH IS CLOSER TO
THE SOURCE, BUT VERY MARGINAL.  BUT AS YOU GO FARTHER TOWARD
TOWN THE ELEVATION DROPS, SO THE PRESSURE IS GREATER AND THE
FLOW IS GREATER.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  OKAY.  THERE IS NO FIRE
HYDRANT FROM THIS POINT TO KEPANIWAI AND ABOVE?

MR. DUEY:  NO.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  HANG ON, WE'VE GOT TOO MANY
QUESTIONS.  LET KENNETH FINISH.  GO AHEAD, KENNETH.

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:  SO LET'S SAY ON ONE END OF
THE PROPERTY THE FIRE HYDRANT HAS ENOUGH PRESSURE.

MR. NAKAMURA:  THAT WAS THE LOWER END, TOWARD
TOWN, WHERE THEY TESTED IT.

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:  DO BOTH HYDRANTS HAVE TO
HAVE LIKE SUFFICIENT PRESSURE, OR CAN THEY BUILD CLOSE TO
ONE OF THE HYDRANTS THAT HAS SUFFICIENT PRESSURE?

MR. NAKAMURA:  THE ONE ON THE SOURCE END OF IT WAS
INSUFFICIENT, WAS VERY MARGINAL IN TERMS OF FLOW RATES.

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:  BUT YOU'RE SAYING THAT
THERE'S ONLY ONE HYDRANT?

MR. DUEY:  CORRECT.  THERE'S NOTHING ABOVE.

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:  YOU'RE SAYING THERE'S TWO
HYDRANTS?

MR. NAKAMURA:  WELL, THIS WAS TOWARD TOWN.  NOW, I
AM NOT SURE HOW FAR DOWN IT WAS, BUT THAT'S WHAT OTHER
PEOPLE TOLD US.  IT TOOK TWO READINGS.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  ONE QUESTION I HAVE FOR YOU,
MR. DUEY.  YOU GUYS TALKED ABOUT A 12-INCH PIPE, RIGHT, THAT
RUNS ALONG THE PROPERTY.  WHERE DOES THAT 12-INCH PIPE START
AND END?

MR. DUEY:  IT STARTS AT THE TUNNEL.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  SO IT STARTS ABOVE THAT.  SO
SHOW ME EXACTLY.

MR. DUEY:  THE PIPE STARTS WAY UP HERE BY THE
TUNNEL.  THE KEPANIWAI WELL IS RIGHT HERE.  THAT'S THE
COUNTY LOT.  THE WELL IS RIGHT HERE.  THE PIPE RUNS ALONG
THE ROAD ALONG THE WAIKAPU SIDE OF THE ROAD.  SO WE LIVE ON
THIS LOT RIGHT HERE.  SO THE FIRE LINE IS RIGHT HERE.

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:  THE HYDRANT IS I THINK
DIRECTLY TO THE 12-INCH PIPE.

MR. DUEY:  AS FAR AS I KNOW.  I HAVE TO ASSUME,
WHICH YOU SHOULD NEVER DO, BUT THAT'S THE ONLY WATER LINE
COMING DOWN THE ROAD.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  AND THAT'S THE ONE THAT YOU
WERE SAYING WAS MARGINAL?  IF THIS IS THE ONLY ONE, THE LAST
ONE, THAT'S GOT TO BE THE UPPER ONE, RIGHT?

NANI SANTOS:  EXCUSE ME.  IF I COULD CLARIFY,
MR. CHAIR.  I THINK HE'S TALKING ABOUT THE FIRE HYDRANT UP
AT KEPANIWAI PARK.  THERE'S A FIRE HYDRANT UP AT KEPANIWAI
PARK, AND THEN THERE'S A FIRE HYDRANT RIGHT IN FRONT OF OUR
PROPERTY IN THIS LOWER CORNER.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  THAT'S THE QUESTION I HAVE
RIGHT NOW, WHERE ARE THE FIRE HYDRANTS THAT WE'RE REFERRING
TO?

MRS. SANTOS:  I THINK HE'S TALKING ABOUT KEPANIWAI
AND THE ONE JUST BELOW OUR PROPERTY.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  SO THERE'S ONE UP AT
KEPANIWAI.  BECAUSE I ASKED, AND YOU SAID THIS IS THE LAST
ONE.  SO THIS WOULD BE UPPER IN MY MIND.  SO THERE'S ONE AT
KEPANIWAI AND THEN THIS IS THE LOWER ONE THAT YOU MADE
REFERENCE TO.

GO AHEAD, MISS PARSONS.  OKAY, DO YOU WANT TO
FINISH UP?  LET HIM FINISH AND THEN I'LL RECOGNIZE YOU.

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:  OKAY, THIS MORNING WE
RECEIVED THIS MARCH 29, 2005 MEMO FROM ED KUSHI REGARDING
ISSUANCE OF WATER METER FOR PROPERTY LOCATED IN PREVIOUSLY
APPROVED SUBDIVISION.  WAS THIS PASSED OUT IN RELATION TO
THIS PARTICULAR ITEM ON THE AGENDA, OR WAS THIS PASSED OUT
FOR --

MR. DUEY:  I HANDED THIS OUT.

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:  OH, YOU PASSED IT OUT.

OKAY, THANK YOU.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  MISS PARSONS?

MR. DUEY:  AND YES, IT WAS.

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:  BECAUSE ONE PAGE IS MISSING
ON THIS.

MR. DUEY:  MAY I RESPOND?

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  SURE, GO AHEAD, MR. DUEY.

MR. DUEY:  THE REASON I PASSED THIS OUT -- IN
FACT, THE WRITER IS RIGHT HERE.  THE REASON I PASSED THIS
OUT IS BECAUSE IT WOULD BE ON PAGE 5 -- I'M SORRY IF A PAGE
IS MISSING.

THE CONCLUSION IS, DWS MAY NOT REQUIRE AN OWNER OF
A VACANT LOT WHICH WAS CREATED BY A PREVIOUS DWS APPROVED
AND ACCEPTED SUBDIVISION TO UPGRADE AND IMPROVE THE
SUBDIVISION'S WATER SYSTEM TO CURRENT, EXISTING STANDARDS
AND REQUIREMENTS, AS A CONDITION TO THE ISSUANCE OF A WATER
METER FOR THE SUBJECT LOT.  THEN IT GOES AHEAD WITH A BUNCH
OF PROVISIONS.

IN IMPLEMENTING THE ABOVE-STATED INTERPRETATION,
WE ADVISE THAT DWS INVESTIGATE AND CONFIRM THE FOLLOWING
FACTS, UPON WHICH OUR CONCLUSIONS ARE PREMISED.

A.  THE DATE OF FINAL APPROVAL OF THE SUBJECT
SUBDIVISION.  AND IN THIS CASE IT WAS 1996.

B. THE APPLICABLE DWS STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS
AT THE TIME OF FINAL SUBDIVISION APPROVAL.  I DON'T KNOW
WHAT THEY ARE.

C.  WHETHER, PRIOR TO FINAL SUBDIVISION APPROVAL,
DWS APPROVED THE SUBDIVISION'S WATER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS,
AND WHETHER THE SUBDIVIDER OF THE PROPERTY DEDICATED SAID
IMPROVEMENTS TOGETHER WITH FEE SIMPLE TITLE OR PERPETUAL
EASEMENTS TO DWS.

D.  THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN DWS STANDARDS AND
REQUIREMENTS AT THE TIME OF FINAL SUBDIVISION APPROVAL AND
CURRENT DWS STANDARDS AND REQUIREMENTS, AND THE DWS RULE
AMENDMENTS THAT EFFECTUATED SAID DIFFERENCES.

LASTLY, WE ADVISE THAT IF MAINTAINING ADEQUATE
WATER PRESSURE IN THE NON-CONFORMING SUBDIVISION'S WATER
MAINS IS OF CONCERN TO DWS, AND IF THE SUBJECT LOT
REQUESTING A WATER METER IS SITUATED AT SUCH AN ELEVATION
THAT IT CANNOT BE ASSURED A DEPENDABLE SUPPLY FROM THE
DEPARTMENT OF DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM, REQUIRE THE LOT OWNER TO
ENTER INTO AN ELEVATION AGREEMENT, WHICH WE DID.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  BEFORE YOU GO ON.  FOR THE
RECORD, LET US SHOW THAT CORP COUNSEL ED KUSHI IS PRESENT TO
ASSIST IN THIS MATTER.  NOW, GO AHEAD, MR. OKAMURA.

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:  YOU HAVE ANOTHER CASE
WHERE, YOU KNOW, THIS WAS NECESSARY, BUT I WAS WONDERING
WHERE THIS CAME FROM.  BUT I THINK THEY'RE SAYING IF A
SUBDIVISION IS APPROVED, LET'S SAY IN 1955, WE CANNOT GO
BACK AND ASK THEM TO UPGRADE THE WHOLE SUBDIVISION.  SO I
DON'T KNOW HOW IT'S RELATED TO YOUR CASE.

MR. DUEY:  I AGREE.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  MISS PARSONS?

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  AND NOW THAT MR. KUSHI IS
HERE, I HAD ASKED A QUESTION PREVIOUSLY, THIS IS AN AG
PARCEL.  CAN A PRIVATE AGREEMENT SUPERSEDE THE RULES?  AND
THE RULES THAT WE WERE DISCUSSING PREVIOUSLY, AND THE TWO
DWELLINGS, TWO STRUCTURE VERSUS THE THIRD STRUCTURE, WHAT DO
YOU WANT TO CALL THAT?  THERE'S NO RULE, IT'S JUST KIND OF A
THIRD STRUCTURE POLICY THAT THEY'VE LOOKED AT.

SO WE'VE GOT TWO STRUCTURES.  THIS IS THE SECOND
STRUCTURE ON A PIECE OF AG PROPERTY.  AND THE RULE STATES,
MR. KUSHI, DO YOU REMEMBER HOW THE RULE GOES OR CAN WE LOOK
IT UP REAL QUICK?

MR. KUSHI:  WELL, MR. CHAIR, MEMBER PARSONS, WHAT
I THINK YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT IS THE TWO STRUCTURE EXEMPTION
FOR FIRE.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  YES, RIGHT.

MR. KUSHI:  THAT'S PART OF SECTION 3 OF THE RULES,
WATER SERVICE.  SECTION 2 OF THE RULES DEALS WITH
SUBDIVISIONS.  I THINK YOU NEED TO CLARIFY FIRST.  IF A LOT
WAS CREATED BY A SUBDIVISION, OKAY, THAT SUBDIVISION SHOULD
HAVE COMPLIED WITH ALL THE RULES AT THAT TIME.  THEN YOU GO
TO SECTION 3 IF THEY WANT TO APPLY FOR WATER SERVICE.
THAT'S WHERE THE TWO DWELLING EXEMPTIONS COME ABOUT.

I'M SORRY I'M LATE, I WAS AT ANOTHER MEETING.  BUT
HERE, I MEAN MR. DUEY CORRECTLY SITES THE OPINION I WROTE TO
ALVA, WHICH I THINK DEALT WITH THE MOLOKAI PROBLEM.

MR. NAKAMURA:  RIGHT.

MR. KUSHI:  AND THAT WOULD APPLY COUNTYWIDE.  BUT
AS I UNDERSTAND IT HERE, THE SUBDIVISION WAS CREATED WAY
BACK WHEN AVERY CHUMBLEY OWNED THIS PROPERTY.  AND AS PART
OF THAT APPROVAL, YOUR BOARD SAID OKAY WITH A MODIFICATION
AGREEMENT, AND IT STATED VARIOUS CONDITIONS.  SO THAT
AGREEMENT IS OUTSIDE OF THIS OPINION, OKAY.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  OKAY, BUT --

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  ONE CORRECTION, JUST BECAUSE
I LIKE TO KEEP THINGS CORRECTED.  WAILUKU AG WAS THE ENTITY,
NOT AVERY CHUMBLEY.  JUST BECAUSE I WANT TO TRY TO KEEP
THINGS IN PERSPECTIVE.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  BUT HE WAS THE CREATOR OF
THE DOCUMENT.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  WAILUKU AG WAS THE ENTITY.
GO AHEAD, MOVE ON.

MR. KUSHI:  SO THAT MODIFICATION AGREEMENT RAN
WITH THE SUBDIVISION.  NOW THE BUILDING PERMIT TRIGGERS
THOSE IMPROVEMENTS.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  OKAY.  MISS PARSONS?

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  SO WHAT YOU ARE SAYING THEN
IS THAT THIS ELEVATION AGREEMENT, WE'RE GOING TO MAKE
REQUIREMENTS ON THIS ELEVATION AGREEMENT AS IF IT WERE 1994
WHEN IT WAS --

MR. KUSHI:  AS FAR AS I KNOW, THE ELEVATION
AGREEMENT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  THAT'S WHAT IT'S CALLED.

MR. KUSHI:  THE ELEVATION AGREEMENT JUST BASICALLY
SAYS THAT THE DEPARTMENT AT THAT TIME DID NOT HAVE
SUFFICIENT PRESSURE TO PROVIDE DOMESTIC FIRE FLOW, DOMESTIC
WATER PRESSURE.  IT DIDN'T ADDRESS FIRE FLOW.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  IT DIDN'T ADDRESS FIRE
FLOW.  SO THEY DO HAVE SUFFICIENT WATER NOW, CORRECT,
BECAUSE WE HAVE --

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  NO, THERE'S A SEPARATE
AGREEMENT.  THERE'S THE MODIFICATION OF THE SUBDIVISION
AGREEMENT THAT ADDRESSES THE FIRE FLOW IN THE TANK, AND
THAT'S SEPARATE FROM THE OTHER AGREEMENT, WHICH IS THE
ELEVATION AGREEMENT.  THERE WERE TWO SEPARATE AGREEMENTS.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  ARE WE STILL LOOKING AT
THESE?  I MEAN WE'RE LEARNING NOW, I MEAN THIS IS ALL NEW
TECHNOLOGY AND SCIENCE, BUT WE'RE LEARNING NOW THAT THESE
TANKS HARBOR BACTERIA.  GEORGE, DON'T TIP YOUR HEAD AT US,
THIS IS THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH.  AND ARE WE STILL GOING TO
REQUIRE TANKS WHEN THE EPA AND THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH ARE
SAYING IT'S NOT PROBABLY A GOOD IDEA IN TROPICAL AREAS TO
HAVE STORAGE TANKS, EVEN IF IT'S NOT FOR POTABLE USE?

MR. KUSHI:  WELL, THE TANK WAS SUPPOSED TO BE FOR
FIRE FLOW.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  I KNOW.  BUT EVEN IF IT'S
NOT FOR POTABLE, THEY STILL HARBOR BACTERIA.

MR. KUSHI:  MR. CHAIR, I THINK THAT'S A SEPARATE
ISSUE.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  GO AHEAD, MR. OKAMURA.

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:  IF THERE ARE NO FURTHER
QUESTIONS, I WAS WONDERING IF WE COULD HAVE THE DEPARTMENT
GO OUT AND CHECK THE WATER PRESSURE AT THE LOCATION, AND
SORT OF GET THE FACTS ON THIS ISSUE.  AND MAYBE IN THE
MEANTIME SOME KIND OF POSSIBILITY WILL COME UP.  I DON'T
KNOW, THAT'S MY SUGGESTION RIGHT NOW.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  OKAY, THANK YOU.  MR. HOWDEN.
BOARD MEMBER HOWDEN:  THANK YOU.  MR. KUSHI, WITH
ELEVATION AGREEMENTS, ARE THEY INVARIABLY ENFORCED OR ARE
THERE EXCEPTIONS TO THEM?

MR. KUSHI:  THEY'RE BASICALLY ENFORCED WHEN
SOMETHING HAPPENS, MEANING THAT IF YOU CAN ENTER -- AN
ELEVATION AGREEMENT IS A CONSIDERATION OF THE DEPARTMENT
APPROVING YOUR SUBDIVISION, KNOWING THAT THE WATER PRESSURE
IS LOW.  THEN TEN YEARS FROM NOW MAYBE YOU SOLD IT TO KEN.
KEN COMPLAINS ABOUT THE WATER PRESSURE, OKAY.  AND MAYBE
SOMEBODY GOT INJURED OR IT'S DETRIMENTAL TO HIS PROPERTY.
WE'RE GOING TO SAY, HEY, HERE IS THIS WATER ELEVATION
AGREEMENT.  YOUR PREDECESSOR AGREED TO THE CONDITIONS OF
THIS SUBDIVISION.  THAT'S WHAT THE ELEVATION AGREEMENT IS.
ESSENTIALLY AN INDEMNIFICATION HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  BUT THE DUEYS ARE PREPARED TO
SIGN A HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY.

MR. KUSHI:  THEY'VE SIGNED IT ALREADY.  THEIR
PREDECESSOR SIGNED IT ALREADY, WAILUKU AG.  NOW, IF YOU ARE
TALKING ABOUT HOLD HARMLESS FOR FIRE PROTECTION, THAT'S
SOMETHING TOTALLY DIFFERENT.  THE DEPARTMENT USED TO DRAFT
FIRE PROTECTION AGREEMENTS, AND THAT PRACTICE WAS CUT OFF A
LONG TIME AGO.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  SO WE DO NOT DO THAT ANY
MORE?

MR. KUSHI:  NO.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUICK
QUESTIONS.  WHEN IT COMES TO THIS MAP, AND I'M GETTING TO
THIS WHERE THIS IS THE FIRE HYDRANT AND, MR. DUEY, THIS IS
YOUR LOT RIGHT HERE.

MR. DUEY:  CORRECT.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  SO FOR CONVERSATION PURPOSES,
LOT 3011, OKAY.  WHERE, NANI, ON THIS MAP, WHERE IS THE
HOUSE, YOUR HOUSE THAT YOU INTEND TO BUILD, ON THIS MAP?

NANI SANTOS:  DAD, DO YOU WANT TO POINT THAT OUT
FOR ME?

MR. DUEY:  IT WOULD BE APPROXIMATELY THERE.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  ABOUT THERE.  HOW FAR IS THAT
FROM THE FIRE HYDRANT?

MR. DUEY:  540 FEET.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  540 FEET.  FROM THE HOUSE TO
WHERE THAT FIRE HYDRANT IS, IS 540 FEET.  OKAY.  MISS
PARSONS?

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  WHERE IN THIS ELEVATION
AGREEMENT DOES IT ADDRESS FIRE FLOW?

MR. KUSHI:  IT DOESN'T.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  SO HOW CAN WE REQUEST A
60,000 GALLON TANK FOR FIRE FLOW AND FIRE PROTECTION BASED
ON THIS ELEVATION AGREEMENT?

MR. KUSHI:  MR. CHAIR, IT'S IN THE MODIFICATION TO
THE SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  WHERE IS THAT ONE?  I'M
MISSING THAT ONE.

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:  PAGE 8, EXHIBIT B.

MR. DUEY:  THE MODIFICATION WASN'T IN THE
SUBDIVISION FILE.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  THIS WASN'T IN YOURS, YOU
DIDN'T GET THIS?

MR. DUEY:  NO.  I HAVE A COPY OF THE SUBDIVISION
FILE RIGHT HERE.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  AND YOU NEVER GOT THIS
AGREEMENT.

MR. DUEY:  NOT THE MODIFICATION.  THE ORIGINAL
AGREEMENT FOR THE 48,000 GALLON TANK WAS IN HERE, BUT NOT
THE MODIFICATION AGREEMENT.  I WENT THROUGH THIS FOUR TIMES
LAST NIGHT TRYING TO FIND IT.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  WHO WAS YOUR ATTORNEY?

MR. DUEY:  WE DIDN'T HAVE AN ATTORNEY.

MR. KUSHI:  MR. CHAIR, FOR THE RECORD, IT WAS
DATED AUGUST 8, 1994.  IT WAS RECORDED.

MR. DUEY:  I'M NOT ARGUING THAT, ED, I'M JUST
SAYING WE DIDN'T HAVE A COPY OF IT.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  AND YOUR TITLE COMPANY
DIDN'T PROVIDE IT EITHER?

MR. DUEY:  NO.  WE HAVE THE AUGUST 4TH ONE, NOT
THE AUGUST 8TH.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  WELL, THEN YOU MAY HAVE A
TITLE COMPANY ISSUE.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  GO AHEAD, MR. DUEY.

MR. DUEY:  I WANT TO READ SOMETHING FROM THE
ELEVATION AGREEMENT.  IT SAYS, I'M NOT GOING TO READ IT ALL,
BUT "WHEREAS, THE PROPERTY IS SITUATED AT SUCH AN ELEVATION
THAT IT CANNOT BE ASSURED OF DEPENDABLE WATER SERVICE FROM
THE DEPARTMENT'S WATER SYSTEM."  THIS IS NOT TRUE.  I
ALREADY TOLD YOU MY GAUGE IS AS GOOD AS THE WATER
DEPARTMENT'S GAUGE.  THERE'S 51 POUNDS OF PRESSURE THERE.
I'M READING FROM THE AGREEMENT.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  PAGE 2 OF THE AGREEMENT.

MR. DUEY:  YES, PAGE 2 OF THE AGREEMENT.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  WHAT PART OF THAT NOW, AGAIN?

MR. DUEY:  ABOUT THE THIRD "WHEREAS."  "THE
PROPERTY IS SITUATED AT SUCH AN ELEVATION THAT IT CANNOT BE
ASSURED OF DEPENDABLE WATER SERVICE FROM THE DEPARTMENT'S
WATER SYSTEM."  THAT IS NOT TRUE.  AND EVIDENTLY THE PUMP AT
KEPANIWAI WAS PUT ON LINE AFTER THIS.  I ASKED THE
DEPARTMENT TO LET ME KNOW WHEN, AND NOBODY HAS TOLD ME WHEN.
BUT IN THE AGREEMENT, IN THE SUBDIVISION INFORMATION IT SAID
THE WATER IS COMING FROM IAO TUNNEL.  SO I'M ASSUMING,
WHICH YOU SHOULD NEVER DO, THAT THE WELL WASN'T ON LINE
THEN.  SO THE WELL WAS PUT ON LINE AFTER THAT.

I'M READING ON DOWN.  "IN CONSIDERATION," NUMBER
1.  AND WE ARE NOT THE SUBDIVIDER, WAILUKU AG WAS THE
SUBDIVIDER.  MY DAUGHTER JUST WANTS TO BUILD A HOUSE THERE.
"IT CANNOT BE ASSURED OF A DEPENDABLE SUPPLY OF WATER FROM
THE DEPARTMENT'S WATER SYSTEM."  AND SO FORTH.

AND THEN IT GOES OVER AND WE'RE SUPPOSED TO DO ALL
THESE THINGS.  AND THEN IN NUMBER 4 IT SAYS, "THE SUBDIVIDER
AGREES TO DEFEND, INDEMNIFY, AND HOLD HARMLESS THE COUNTY OF
MAUI."  SO IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.  IF YOU DO ALL THESE
THINGS YOU STILL CAN'T HOLD THE COUNTY HARMLESS.  IT LOOKS
LIKE IT SHOULD BE ONE OR THE OTHER.  IF YOU DO ALL THESE
THINGS THEN YOU CAN'T HOLD THE COUNTY HARMLESS.  AND THIS IS
SAYING IF YOU DO THESE THINGS YOU STILL CAN'T HOLD THE
COUNTY HARMLESS.

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:  I THINK THE REASON WAS THAT
WHENEVER THEY GO OUTSIDE OF THE RULES OR MAKE AN EXCEPTION
OR MAKE A DIFFERENT AGREEMENT THEY HAVE TO PUT THESE THINGS
IN.

MR. DUEY:  I'M A SIMPLE PERSON, I'M NOT A LAWYER,
AND IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO ME.  I SEE THINGS IN BLACK AND
WHITE.  GEORGE KNOWS, I'VE TALKED ABOUT THE WATER ISSUES
BEFORE.  THINGS TO ME AREN'T GREY, THEY'RE BLACK AND WHITE,
AND THIS IS A BLACK AND WHITE ISSUE.  WE SIGNED THIS
ELEVATION AGREEMENT, I'M NOT ARGUING THAT AT ALL.  BUT WE
ARE NOT THE SUBDIVIDER.  WE'RE NOT GOING TO BUILD 36 HOMES
ON THIS PROPERTY.

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:  I THINK THE SUBDIVIDER IN
THIS CASE IS WAILUKU AGRIBUSINESS.  I THINK IT'S WAILUKU
AGRIBUSINESS.  AND IN ORDER TO GET IT SUBDIVIDED THEY
PROBABLY COULDN'T GET IT DONE UNLESS THEY MADE THIS
AGREEMENT, BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T HAVE EVERYTHING IN PLACE OR
SOMETHING LIKE THAT, SO NOW EVERYBODY IS STUCK WITH THIS
AGREEMENT.  AND I THINK THAT'S WHY THE BOARD MEMBERS SAID
TRY NOT TO MAKE EXCEPTIONS AND MAKE SPECIAL AGREEMENTS,
BECAUSE WE END UP WITH PROBLEMS LIKE THIS.  BUT I THINK
THAT'S THE CASE.

MAYBE WE SHOULD, MR. CHAIR, MAYBE WE SHOULD HAVE
THE STAFF GO OUT AND CHECK THE SITUATION, THE CURRENT
SITUATION OVER THERE, AND SEE IF THERE'S SUFFICIENT PRESSURE
NOW.

MR. DUEY:  MAY I SAY ONE MORE THING?

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  SURE.

MR. DUEY:  THE OTHER THING IS, I CAN'T SEE WHY THE
PRESSURE IS ALSO AN ISSUE.  I CAN'T SEE WHY THE PRESSURE CAN
BE AN ISSUE, BECAUSE I MAY BE WRONG, BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT
WHEN THE TIRE TRUCK HOOKS UP TO A FIRE HYDRANT THEY HAVE THE
PUMP ON THE TRUCK.

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  I MIGHT COMMENT ON THAT.
CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  GO AHEAD, MR. ALDRIDGE.
BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  WELL, MAY I COMMENT ON
THIS ENTIRE THING?

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  YOU MAY.

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  I THINK THAT IT WAS AT THE
TIME NOT UNREASONABLE FOR THE WATER DEPARTMENT TO ENTER INTO
AN AGREEMENT WITH A SUBDIVIDER AND REQUIRE CONDITIONS SUCH
AS THE ONES THAT WERE IN THIS MODIFICATION OF SUBDIVISION
AGREEMENT.  BECAUSE AFTER ALL, WAILUKU AGRIBUSINESS COULD
HAVE DIVIDED THIS INTO A LARGE NUMBER OF LOTS, AND IT WOULD
HAVE REQUIRED A FIRE PROTECTION SERVICE.

SO I DON'T THINK THE AGREEMENT IS UNREASONABLE,
NOR IS THE ELEVATION AGREEMENT.  EVEN THOUGH THERE MAY BE
ADEQUATE PRESSURE AT YOUR LOT, WAILUKU AGRIBUSINESS COULD
HAVE DIVIDED IT IN SUCH A WAY THAT SOME OF THE UPPER LOTS
WOULD HAVE HAD MINIMAL PRESSURE, IF AT ALL.  SO WHAT YOU'RE
STRADDLED WITH IS AN AGREEMENT THAT RUNS WITH THE LAND THAT
IS ONEROUS TO YOU.  I THINK TO STRIVE FOR -- AND I DON'T
THINK IT'S APPROPRIATE FOR STAFF TO TRY TO WAIVE
REQUIREMENTS LIKE THIS.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  EXACTLY.

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  SO I THINK WHAT'S
NECESSARY IS FOR THE OWNERS TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THEY HAVE AN
ALTERNATIVE SOURCE OF SUPPLY THAT'S RELIABLE, PERHAPS TO
HOLD THE COUNTY HARMLESS IN TERMS OF FIRE FLOW, AND TO
ACTUALLY PERHAPS PREPARE A NEW AGREEMENT THAT WOULD OVERRIDE
THIS ONE.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  ALSO WITH SPRINKLERS THE
AMOUNT OF FLOW THAT YOU NEED DRASTICALLY DROPS.  SPRINKLERS
AREN'T THAT EXPENSIVE TO PUT IN ANYMORE.  AND YOU MIGHT BE
ABLE TO WORK WITH THE FIRE DEPARTMENT TO FIGURE OUT THAT
FORMULA, BECAUSE IT DOES DROP SIGNIFICANTLY.  YOU KNOW HOW I
FEEL ABOUT FIRE FLOW, AND I'VE FOUGHT THIS FOR FIVE YEARS
NOW.  I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD BE ON THE BACKS OF THE
RESIDENTS.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  MR. DUEY, GO AHEAD.

MR. DUEY:  COULD YOU ADDRESS THE FIRE TRUCK
SITUATION?

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  WELL, I UNDERSTAND THAT
FIRE TRUCKS HAVE PUMPERS THAT THEY BOOST THE PRESSURE OFF
THE HYDRANT.  HOWEVER, WHAT THEY ALSO DO, WHICH IS NEGATIVE
AND CAN IMPACT THE ENTIRE AREA SERVED BY A FIRE HYDRANT, IS
THEY CAN TAKE SO MUCH WATER OUT OF THE FIRE HYDRANT THAT
THEY ACTUALLY LOWER THE PRESSURE IN THE PIPELINE TO A
NEGATIVE.  THEY ACTUALLY SUCK WATER OUT OF THE PIPE.  AND
THAT CAN BE A VERY DANGEROUS SITUATION, BECAUSE YOU CAN
CONTAMINATE THE WATER SERVICES IN AREAS SURROUNDING THE MAIN
THAT'S CONNECTED TO THE HYDRANT.

MR. DUEY:  WELL, I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH THEY CAN
PUMP OUT OF ONE FIRE HYDRANT, BUT THE CAPACITY OF THE
12-INCH PIPE IS 1550 GALLONS A MINUTE.  SO I DON'T KNOW HOW
MUCH THEY CAN PUMP.

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  WELL, PUMPERS CAN PUMP
OVER 2000 GALLONS A MINUTE.

MR. DUEY:  WELL, OKAY, I'LL END WITH THIS THING.
NUMBER ONE IS THERE'S MORE CAPACITY THAN NEEDED FOR THE 400
GALLONS A MINUTE IN THE WATER LINE.  THAT'S A GIVEN.  THE
WATER IS THERE FROM THE TUNNEL AND/OR THE WELL.  THE WATER
IS THERE.  NUMBER TWO, IF THE PRESSURE -- IF SOMEBODY FEELS
THE PRESSURE IS NOT SUFFICIENT, THE FIRE TRUCK BOOST THE
PRESSURE IT THROWS AT THE FIRE.  SO TO ME, THE TWO THINGS IN
THIS ELEVATION AGREEMENT, LIKE I SAY, I'M BLACK AND WHITE.
THEY DON'T MAKE A BIT OF SENSE BEYOND THE MONEY THING.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  ONE MORE THING, MR. DUEY.  I
HEARD YOU SAY EARLIER, AND CORRECT ME IF I AM WRONG, BUT I
THINK IT'S ALSO A REQUIREMENT THAT IF THEY WERE TO BUILD A
HOUSE THERE, NANI, THAT A FIRE HYDRANT WOULD HAVE TO BE
APPURTENANT TO THE NEW STRUCTURE, BECAUSE IT IS A NEW
STRUCTURE.  I THINK THAT WAS A COUNTY FIRE CODE MANY YEARS
AGO.  IT HAS TO BE DONE.

MR. DUEY:  OUR FAMILY HAS TALKED.  I DON'T KNOW
WHAT THE LAW IS AS FAR AS THE FIRE HYDRANT.  SOMEBODY SAID
250.  I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE DISTANCE IS.  IF THE FIRE
HYDRANT IS REQUIRED, WE WILL PUT A FIRE HYDRANT IN.  THAT'S
MONEY, BUT IT'S NOT A PROBLEM.  IT'S NOT INTRUSIVE.  OR TWO
FIRE HYDRANTS, IF IT'S REQUIRED FOR THE PROPERTY.  WE ARE
NOT A SUBDIVIDER, AND I THINK THAT'S THE WHOLE THING.

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:  I THINK THIS WORDING IS
RELATED TO WAILUKU AGRIBUSINESS, WHO WAS THE SUBDIVIDER AT
THAT TIME.

MR. DUEY:  YES.  AND THE OTHER THING AND I'LL
FINALLY SHUT UP.  BUT THE OTHER THING IS THAT BEING ABLE, I
KNOW IT'S NOTHING WE CAN DO HERE, BUT FOR A SUBDIVIDER, ANY
SUBDIVIDER TO BE ABLE TO DEFER COST TO SOMEBODY ELSE IS
UNREASONABLE.  IN THIS CASE THE WATER, THE ELEVATION
AGREEMENT, OR ANYTHING ELSE, TO BE ABLE TO DEFER THAT COST
TO THE NEXT PERSON IS JUST RIDICULOUS, BLACK AND WHITE.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  THAT REQUIRES A NEW RULE
THAT I THINK WE REALLY SHOULD CONSIDER WRITING, BECAUSE I
DON'T THINK ANY OF THESE AGREEMENTS SHOULD BE ACCEPTED AND
BE ABLE TO BE PASSED ON.  I THINK IF A SUBDIVIDER WANTS TO
SUBDIVIDE HIS PROPERTY -- I WAS JUST WRITING THIS -- IF HE
WANTS TO SELL OR DISPOSE OF THE PROPERTY PRIOR TO COMPLETING
THE REQUIREMENTS, THAT SHOULD BE JUST TOTALLY DISALLOWED.
IF YOU HAVE GOT REQUIREMENTS, YOU HAVE TO DO IT, THEN YOU
SELL IT.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  YES, MRS. DUEY.

MRS. DUEY:  I WANT JUST ONE MINUTE, BECAUSE I WANT
TO CLEAR UP A PERCEPTION YOU MAY HAVE IN REGARDS TO THE
48,000 GALLON TANK.  AT THE TIME WE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY,
WHEN WE GOT THE TITLE AND WE SAW IT IN THERE, WE WERE REALLY
EXCITED ABOUT THE PURCHASE OF THE PROPERTY FOR OUR FAMILY.
WE DID NOTICE THAT THE 48,000 GALLONS WAS IN THERE.  AND OUR
CONSENSUS WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT IT WAS WE WERE NOT THE DOJO.
THE DOJO WAS GOING TO BE BUILDING, THEY HAD CLEARED THE
LAND.  AND WE FELT THAT THE DOJO, BEING THE FIRST PERMITTED
PERSON WHO WAS CLEARING THE LAND WAS THE ONE THAT WAS GOING
TO BE DOING IT.  BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THE WHOLE SUBDIVISION
WAS BUILT ON, GETTING THE LAND DIVIDED SO THE DOJO WOULD BE
ABLE TO DO SOMETHING UP THERE.

SO OUR FAMILY REALLY, TRULY BELIEVED THE DOJO WAS
GOING TO BUILD, AND THEY WERE GOING TO BE PUTTING IN THE
48,000 GALLON TANK.  WE DID NOT THINK IT WOULD FALL ON AN
INDIVIDUAL FAMILY, LIKE OUR DAUGHTER AND HER HUSBAND, OR OUR
SON, TO BE DOING SOMETHING LIKE THAT.  AND BECAUSE THEY WERE
YEARS AWAY FROM PLANNING THIS, YOU KNOW.

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:  I THINK THEY MIGHT HAVE
GIVEN THE LAND TO THE DOJO.

MR. DUEY:  THEY DID, THEY GAVE THE LAND TO THE
DOJO.

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:  SO THE PERSON WHO BOUGHT
THE SECOND PROPERTY WOULD HAVE BEEN THE BUILDER, AS STATED
IN THE AGREEMENT.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  MR. KUSHI, MY QUESTION TO YOU
IS THIS.  HAVING ALL OF THIS IN FRONT OF US, IS THERE
SOMETHING THESE PEOPLE CAN DO OR WE CAN DO TO HELP THESE
PEOPLE IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES?  I THINK ALL OF US HAVE
REVIEWED IT.  NOBODY IS DISPUTING ANY OF THE AGREEMENTS THAT
WERE MADE.  BUT I THINK IS THERE SOME METHOD WE CAN -- AND
AGAIN, I HATE TO USE THE WORD WAIVER.  BECAUSE ONCE YOU
START WAIVING THINGS YOU ARE GOING TO OPEN PANDORA'S BOX,
AND I'VE ALWAYS BEEN ONE OF THOSE THAT DON'T LIKE TO OPEN
PANDORA'S BOX.  AND ALSO I WANT TO USE COMMON SENSE.  WHAT
RECOMMENDATIONS COULD WE MAKE TO MR. DUEY, MR AND MRS.
SANTOS IN THIS KIND OF SITUATION?

MR. KUSHI:  MR. CHAIR, NOT SPEAKING FOR THE
DEPARTMENT, BUT I JUST HEARD MR. DUEY VOLUNTEER TO PUT
ANOTHER HYDRANT FURTHER TOWARDS THIS NEW HOUSE.  I'M NOT
SURE IF THE PRESSURE WILL BE ADEQUATE.  THAT'S AN
ENGINEERING ISSUE.  BUT IN LIEU OF THIS 60,000 GALLON
RESERVOIR TANK.  OR MOVE THE HOUSE CLOSER TO THE EXISTING
HYDRANT.  BUT THAT WOULD THEN TAKE ANOTHER AGREEMENT TO MAKE
SURE.  BUT AGAIN, IT IS WHAT IT IS.  HIS PREDECESSOR SIGNED
THIS AGREEMENT.

AND I UNDERSTAND WHAT MRS. DUEY WAS SAYING,
BECAUSE I WAS INVOLVED IN THAT DOJO TOO, AND THEY NEVER
BUILT ANYTHING YET.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  MR. TENGAN?

DIRECTOR TENGAN:   YES, MR. CHAIR.  I'D LIKE TO
OFFER ONE COMMENT TOO.  YOU HEARD MR. DUEY TALK ABOUT WATER
IS ALWAYS IN THE PIPE.  AND YOU HEARD MR. ALDRIDGE TALK
ABOUT -- WELL, MR. DUEY STATED THAT THE FIRE TRUCKS CAN PUMP
THE WATER OUT OF THE LINE.  AND YOU HEARD MR. ALDRIDGE ALSO
SAY THAT THE PUMPER TRUCKS CAN PUMP AT A RATE OF 2000
GALLONS PER MINUTE.

NOW, WE TAKE ABOUT 1.8 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY MAX
OUT OF THE IAO TUNNEL, SO THIS IS A CONSTANT FLOW THROUGH
THE PIPE, AND IT RARELY FLUCTUATES IN THE CAPACITY.  SO IF
YOU ARE TAKING OUT 2000 GALLONS PER MINUTE, WHAT YOU ARE
REALLY DOING IS IF YOU PROJECTED THAT OUT YOU WOULD BE
TAKING OUT 2.8 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY, WHICH INDICATES THAT
THE PUMPER TRUCKS WOULD BE PULLING MUCH MORE WATER THAN
WHAT'S AVAILABLE IN THE LINE.  SO THAT'S ONE OF THE CONCERNS
THAT THE BOARD SHOULD CONSIDER WHEN IT'S COMING UP WITH ITS
RECOMMENDATIONS.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  THANK YOU.  AND AGAIN, I HOPE
THAT --

DIRECTOR TENGAN:   I WOULDN'T REFUTE THE FACT OF
WHAT MR. DUEY IS SAYING, THAT YES, WATER IS IN THE LINE.
THE TUNNEL HAS, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, NEVER FAILED, YOU KNOW.
BUT WE HAVE GOT TO LOOK AT HOW MUCH WATER CAN REALLY BE
PUMPED OUT OF THAT LINE IN CASE THERE'S A FIRE.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  AND AGAIN, BEFORE YOU ANSWER,
MR. DUEY, I WOULD SAY I AGREE WITH WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, MR.
TENGAN.  HOWEVER, HOPEFULLY AND WE PRAY THAT NO FIRE EVER
OCCURS.  AND IF A FIRE DOES OCCUR, HOW LONG WOULD THEY TAKE
TO FIGHT THAT FIRE.  IF IT'S A STRUCTURAL FIRE, I'M NOT AN
EXPERT IN STRUCTURAL FIRES AND HOW LONG THEY LAST, BUT IN
INSURANCE TERMS WE FIGURE BETWEEN 5 TO 12 MINUTES, AND THE
FIRE HAS TO BE PUT OUT OR PUT INTO A POINT WHERE IT IS
CONTROLLABLE OR IT'S TOTALLY GONE ALREADY AT THAT POINT.

NOW, HOW MANY MINUTES OF 2000 GALLONS OF WATER
WOULD FLOW AT THAT POINT TO PUT OUT THE FIRE, I AM NOT AN
EXPERT IN THAT AREA, BUT JUST WHAT I CAN COME UP WITH, I
DON'T THINK -- IT MY HAVE A SPIKE FOR THAT DAY OR --

DIRECTOR TENGAN:   WHAT I'M DRIVING AT, MR. CHAIR,
IS WITH THE TANK YOU WILL HAVE THAT TWO HOUR DURATION THAT'S
REQUIRED BY OUR STANDARDS.  WITHOUT THE TANK WE HAVE TO
DEPEND ON THE FLOW THROUGH THE PIPELINE AND WHETHER THAT
WATER IS AVAILABLE.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  AGAIN, LOOK AT THE
SPRINKLER SYSTEM.  IT DOES TAKE IT DOWN SIGNIFICANTLY, THE
NEED, AND YOU CAN WORK RIGHT WITH THE FIRE DEPARTMENT ON
GETTING THOSE FIGURES.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  MR. DUEY?

MR. DUEY:  TO ANSWER GEORGE'S QUESTION, THE LATEST
FIGURES WE HAVE FROM THE PUMP IS AUGUST.  I DON'T KNOW WHAT
THE CURRENT FIGURES ARE.  IT WAS 835,000 GALLONS.  AT THAT
FLOW WITH THE 1.8 FROM THE TUNNEL THAT GEORGE JUST
CONFIRMED, THAT'S 1830 GALLONS A MINUTE.  THAT'S 170 GALLONS
A MINUTE SHORT OF THE 2000 GALLONS THAT MR. ALDRIDGE SAID
THE PUMPER HAS.

I AGREE WITH YOU, THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT A MAXIMUM
OF TWO HOURS FIGHTING THE FIRE.  BUT AFTER TEN MINUTES YOU
WANT THE HOUSE TO BURN DOWN ANYWAY.  YOU DON'T WANT TO SAVE
THE HOUSE, BECAUSE YOU HAVE JUST GOT TO CLEAN IT UP.  SO
AFTER TEN MINUTES IF YOU CAN'T SAVE THE HOUSE, LET THE THING
BURN.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  THE ONLY THING IS THAT TRY TO
CONTROL THE REGION SO NO ONE ELSE CATCHES FIRE.

MR. DUEY:  I APPRECIATE GEORGE'S THOUGHTS AND
ALVA'S THOUGHTS, BUT THIS IDEA OF A 60,000 GALLON TANK IS
STILL -- THERE'S WORD I DON'T LIKE TO USE, BUT IT'S
RIDICULOUS.  THERE'S A WORD THAT STARTS WITH AN S, BUT I
WON'T USE THAT.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  IT'S JUST ONE OF THE ISSUES
RIGHT NOW THAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT.  EVEN THE EPA AND THE
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH ARE NOT HAPPY WITH TANKS.  AND WHETHER
OR NOT YOU ARE USING IT FOR FIRE FLOW OR WHATEVER, WHEN YOU
HAVE PATHOGENS GROWING IN IT AND YOU START SPRAYING YOUR
HOUSE WITH IT, YOU ARE GOING TO BREATHE IN PATHOGENS.  SO
IT'S NOT JUST POTABLE WATER ISSUES.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  KUI?

BOARD MEMBER LESTER:  I HEARD FOR THE FIRE
PREVENTION OR WHATEVER THAT THEY RECOMMENDED ALSO YOU COULD
DO A SWIMMING POOL.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  THAT'S ANOTHER ALTERNATIVE,
YEAH.

MR. DUEY:  PUMP WATER OUT OF THE POOL.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  THAT HAS BEEN AN ALTERNATIVE
IN SOME AREAS.

MR. DUEY:  WE DON'T NEED A POOL, WE HAVE THE RIVER
THERE.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  THERE YOU GO.  ANY OTHER
DISCUSSION?  MR. KUSHI?  ALVA?

MR. NAKAMURA:  NO, NOTHING MORE.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  I OPEN THE FLOOR NOW TO SOME
KIND OF MOTION IN WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO HELP RESOLVE THIS
MATTER.  I MEAN WE'VE ALL SEEN THE FACTS.  AND AGAIN, I
REPEAT, NO ONE IS DISPUTING ANY OF THE AGREEMENTS THAT ARE
IN FRONT OF US, INCLUDING THE DUEYS AND THE SANTOS'.  I
THINK A LOT OF THIS WAS DONE, AND TODAY WE ARE IN A
DIFFERENT ENVIRONMENT.  AND I AM NOT WANTING TO WAIVE
THINGS, BUT I WANT TO SEE A JUSTIFIABLE CHANGE TO MAKE THIS
SOMEHOW WORK FOR EVERYBODY.  KENNETH?

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:  I JUST HAD A QUESTION.  WE
STILL DON'T KNOW THE CAPACITY OF THE WATER LINE IN FRONT,
LET'S SAY, TO PUT FIRE HYDRANTS.  WOULD THAT BE INSUFFICIENT
RIGHT OFF THE BAT, OR IS IT WORTHWHILE TO TAKE A LOOK AT
THAT ALTERNATIVE?

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  IT'S A 12-INCH LINE.  WHAT
YOU'RE SAYING KENNETH IS --

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:  IN OTHER WORDS, DO WE NEED
MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THAT?

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  I DON'T THINK SO, BECAUSE
HE'S SAYING THIS LOWER ONE, WHICH IS WHAT I'M READING FROM
YOU, IS SUFFICIENT AND THIS UPPER ONE, WHICH IS ABOVE
KEPANIWAI IS MINIMAL, THEN IF THIS ONE IS COMING SOMEWHERE
IN BETWEEN I WOULD NOT SEE IT BEING A PROBLEM AS FAR AS
PRESSURE IS CONCERNED AND WATER FLOW.  BUT THAT'S WHAT I
SEE, YOU KNOW.  I DON'T THINK THAT'S A MAJOR ISSUE.  AND I
THINK THEY'VE DONE THAT RESEARCH AS FAR AS THEY'RE
CONCERNED, SENT THE GUYS UP TO CHECK.

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:  SO IF HE PUT UP A HYDRANT
IT WOULD HAVE SUFFICIENT PRESSURE.  AND LIKE MR. ALDRIDGE
SAID, IF THAT WOULD MEET THE REQUIREMENTS WE COULD HAVE
MAYBE THE AGREEMENT, ANOTHER AGREEMENT DRAWN UP BASED ON THE
HYDRANT, AND THEN DELETE THE FIRST AGREEMENT.

DIRECTOR TENGAN:  MR. CHAIR?

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  YES, MR. TENGAN.

DIRECTOR TENGAN:   MAY I ASK THAT YOU CALL A
RECESS SO I CAN TALK TO CORP COUNSEL?

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  I'LL CALL FOR A 10-MINUTE
RECESS.

(WHEREUPON A BRIEF RECESS WAS HAD)

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  I WILL RECONVENE THE MEETING.
MR. TENGAN?

DIRECTOR TENGAN:   YES, MR. CHAIR.  I JUST HAD A
DISCUSSION WITH MR. DUEY, AND IT SEEMS LIKE WE HAVE
SOMETHING THAT WE CAN WORK OUT.  SO IF THE BOARD WOULD GIVE
US THE OPPORTUNITY TO MEET WITH MR. DUEY AND HIS FAMILY, AND
TRY TO WORK OUT A RESOLUTION TO THIS SITUATION HERE AND
REPORT BACK TO THE BOARD AT THE NEXT MEETING OF OUR
FINDINGS.  AND IF WE CAN COME UP WITH SOME KIND OF AN
AGREEMENT OR LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING, MAYBE WE CAN WORK
SOMETHING OUT.  SO I WOULD SUGGEST THAT THE BOARD DEFER THIS
MATTER.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  OKAY.  MR. DUEY, ARE YOU OKAY
WITH THAT?

MR. DUEY:  YES, SIR.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  OKAY.  IS THE BOARD OKAY WITH
THE DIFFERENCE?

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:  I MOVE THAT WE DEFER UNTIL
THE NEXT MEETING.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  IT'S BEEN MOVED.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  SECOND.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED.  OKAY, WE WILL DEFER ANY ACTION TO THE NEXT
MEETING SUBJECT TO WHATEVER THEY COME UP WITH.  ALL THOSE IN
FAVOR SAY "AYE."

(A CHORUS OF AYES)

OPPOSED?

(NONE)

THANK YOU, MR. DUEY, THE SANTOS'.  THANK YOU VERY
MUCH.  TAKE CARE NOW.  AND THANK YOU, GEORGE, FOR YOUR
ASSISTANCE IN THIS MATTER, AND ED.  I'M ALWAYS PLEASED WHEN
WE CAN ALL SIT DOWN AND WORK OUT A SOLUTION AND NOT HAVE TO
GO ANY FURTHER THAN THAT.

OKAY, MOVING ON.  SO WE DEFER COMMUNICATION 06-06.
MOVING ON TO, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, IF THE BOARD WILL INDULGE ME,
I HAVE A COUPLE OF IMPORTANT PEOPLE THAT I KNOW THEIR TIME
IS VERY VALUABLE, AND THEY WANT TO DISCUSS CERTAIN MATTERS
WITH US.  AND I'M REFERRING TO UNDER OTHER BUSINESS, A
DISCUSSION WITH CORP COUNSEL'S OFFICE REGARDING PENDING
MATTERS, ISSUES AND CASES BEFORE THE STATE COMMISSION ON
WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT, AND PROPOSAL TO HIRE SPECIAL
COUNSEL TO REPRESENT THE INTERESTS OF THE COUNTY OF MAUI.

FOR THIS MATTER, THE BOARD MAY CONVENE IN
EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSUANT TO HRS 92-5(A) SECTION 4 IN ORDER
TO CONSULT WITH THE BOARD'S ATTORNEY ON QUESTIONS AND ISSUES
PERTAINING TO THE BOARD'S POWERS, DUTIES, PRIVILEGES,
IMMUNITIES, AND LIABILITIES.

SO IF IT'S ALL RIGHT WITH THE BOARD, I'D LIKE TO
MOVE INTO THAT AREA.  AND IN PURSUANCE WITH THAT, I WILL ASK
MR. KUSHI, DO YOU THINK WE NEED EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS
THIS MATTER?

MR. KUSHI:  MR. CHAIR, I WILL REFER TO MY BOSS,
BRIAN MOTO AND MY COLLEAGUE JANE LOVELL, WHO WILL DO THE
PRESENTATION.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  MR. BRIAN, DO YOU THINK WE
NEED TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR THIS MATTER?

MR. MOTO:  GOOD MORNING MR. CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS.
MY NAME IS BRIAN MOTO.  I'M THE CORPORATION COUNSEL FOR THE
COUNTY OF MAUI.  I'M HERE TODAY WITH MY CHIEF OF LITIGATION,
MISS JANE LOVELL, WHO IS A DEPUTY CORPORATION COUNSEL, AND
SHE WILL ADDRESS THE BOARD ON MOST OF THE POINTS ON TODAY'S
AGENDA ITEM.

I WILL, FIRST OF ALL, PREFACE BY THANKING THE
BOARD FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY.  WE WANTED TO COME TO YOU TO
GIVE YOU AN UPDATE ON THE MATTERS THAT WE THINK ARE VERY
IMPORTANT AND THAT RELATE TO ISSUES PENDING BEFORE THE STATE
COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT.  I SEE THAT THERE
IS A NOTICE ON THE AGENDA THAT PROVIDES FOR AN EXECUTIVE
SESSION, HOWEVER I DON'T ANTICIPATE THAT BEING NECESSARY.
WE TRY TO DISCUSS AS MUCH AS WE CAN IN OPEN SESSION.
HOWEVER, IF SOME OF YOUR QUESTIONS GET INTO PARTICULAR
LITIGATION STRATEGIES OR TACTICS, THEN AT THAT POINT WE
MIGHT HAVE TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.  HOWEVER, MOST OF
OR ALL OF MISS LOVELL'S REMARKS ARE FINE IN OPEN SESSION.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  OKAY.  SO JUST BEFORE I GET
STARTED, IT WILL BE WHERE YOU WILL SAY, MR. CHAIR, I THINK
THIS MATTER SHOULD GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION.  EITHER WE CAN
DEFER IT AT THAT POINT AND GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR
THAT MATTER OR MATTERS, OR IF NOT, THEN WE WILL JUST
CONTINUE ON.

MR. MOTO:  YES.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  IS THAT FAIR ENOUGH FOR THE
ENTIRE BOARD?  YES, MR. OKAMURA.

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:  I WAS WONDERING WHETHER THE
PRESENTATION WOULD INCLUDE A BRIEF BACKGROUND AT THE
BEGINNING SO WE KNOW WHAT THE SUBJECT MATTER IS ABOUT.
THANK YOU.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  SO WITH NO FURTHER ADO, MISS
LOVELL, I WELCOME YOU.  FIRST OF ALL, I'D LIKE TO THANK YOU
ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD FOR COMING HERE TODAY.  I THINK WE'VE
BEEN LONG, LONG WAITING FOR THIS.  AND THE THREE NEW
MEMBERS, YOU GUYS ARE REALLY BLESSED, BECAUSE WE HAVE BEEN
WAITING A FEW YEARS FOR THIS.  SO YOU GUYS ARE LUCKY THE
FIRST MEETING YOU COME TO AND YOU GET THEM ALL.  THEY'RE
VERY NICE PEOPLE AND I THANK YOU.

MISS LOVELL:  THANK YOU CHAIR AND MEMBERS.  THANK
YOU FOR INVITING ME HERE TODAY.  I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE YOU
SOME BACKGROUND ON WHAT IS HAPPENING WITH THE DESIGNATION OF
THE IAO AQUIFER AS A GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT AREA UNDER THE
STATE WATER CODE.  IS MY VOICE COMING THROUGH OKAY?

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  IT'S BEING RECORDED IN THE
BACK, SO NO PROBLEM.

MISS LOVELL:  AS YOU PROBABLY KNOW, ON JULY 21ST,
2003 THE STATE WATER COMMISSION DESIGNATED THE IAO AQUIFER
AS A GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT AREA.  WHAT THIS MEANS UNDER THE
STATE WATER CODE IS THAT THE STATE COMMISSION ON WATER
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT TAKES OVER THE MANAGEMENT OF THE
AQUIFER.  IN OTHER WORDS, IT BECOMES A STATE RESPONSIBILITY
TO SAY WHO CAN PUMP HOW MUCH GROUNDWATER FROM THE AQUIFER.
UNDER THE STATE WATER CODE, EVERYONE WHO IS PUMPING
GROUNDWATER, EXCEPT FOR PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS WITH A SINGLE
WELL FOR A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE, MUST APPLY FOR A WATER
USE PERMIT.

SO THE DEPARTMENT OF WATER SUPPLY, ON BEHALF OF
THE COUNTY, APPLIED FOR WATER USE PERMITS FOR ALL OF ITS
WELLS IN THE IAO AQUIFER.  THOSE APPLICATIONS HAD TO BE IN
WITHIN ONE YEAR OF DESIGNATION OR JULY 21, 2004.  ALL OF THE
APPLICATIONS WERE SUBMITTED BY THAT TIME, ALTHOUGH THERE WAS
A TECHNICAL GLITCH WITH ONE OF THEM, NAMELY THE APPLICATION
FOR THE WAILUKU SHAFT 33.  THAT'S THE ONE THAT'S JUST RIGHT
OUT HERE.  YOU CAN SEE RIGHT OUT THE WINDOW.  THAT HAPPENS
TO BE THE BIGGEST SOURCE, THE BIGGEST SINGLE SOURCE OF ANY
PUMP, WELL WATER THAT'S PUMPED FROM THE IAO AQUIFER.

THE APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED IN A TIMELY FASHION
BY THE WATER DEPARTMENT.  HOWEVER, THE LANDOWNER, WHICH WAS
-- I CAN'T REMEMBER, KEHAULANI MAUKA IS I GUESS THE
CORPORATE NAME OF THE ENTITY.  IT'S A STANFORD CARR
DEVELOPMENT ENTITY.  THEY OWN THE GROUND ON WHICH THE SHAFT
IS LOCATED, AND THEY DECLINED OR REFUSED TO SIGN OFF ON THE
DEPARTMENT'S APPLICATION.

EVENTUALLY THEY DID AGREE TO SIGN, BUT THEY SIGNED
AFTER THE DEADLINE.  AND THEREFORE, THE WATER COMMISSION
HELD THAT THE APPLICATION WAS LATE, AND THEREFORE THEY
DETERMINED THAT THE DEPARTMENT'S USE FROM THAT SOURCE WOULD
BE DEEMED A NEW USE, NOT AN EXISTING USE, AND IT WOULD HAVE
TO BE DECIDED AFTER ALL OF THE EXISTING USES WERE DEALT
WITH.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  IF I MAY ASK A QUESTION.  HOW
MUCH WATER ARE WE TALKING ABOUT GALLONS PER DAY WITH THE
WAILUKU SHAFT.  I GUESS THAT'S THE QUESTION.

MISS LOVELL:  THE WAILUKU SHAFT, THE APPLICATION
WAS FOR 5.771 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY.  IT'S A VERY
PRODUCTIVE SOURCE.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  OKAY.

MISS LOVELL:  THE DEPARTMENT CHALLENGED THAT
FINDING THAT THEY WERE LATE AND SO FORTH, BUT THAT WAS HEARD
BY THE COMMISSION AND THE COMMISSION UPHELD ITS STAFF'S
RECOMMENDATION, AND SO WE WENT INTO THIS PROCESS NOW WITH
ALL OF THE OTHER SOURCES DEEMED AS EXISTING USES, THE
WAILUKU SHAFT DEEMED AS A NEW USE.

THE PARKS DEPARTMENT ALSO HAD A NUMBER OF
APPLICATIONS.  EVEN THOUGH MANY OF THEIR WELLS ARE IN THE --
THAT THEY USE FOR IRRIGATING VARIOUS PARKS ARE IN THE
KAHULUI AQUIFER, THOSE DIDN'T NEED APPLICATIONS, BUT THEY
DID NEED TO APPLY TO PUMP FROM A NUMBER OF CAP ROCK SOURCES.
THESE DON'T REALLY COUNT IN TERMS OF THE SUSTAINABLE YIELD
OF THE AQUIFER, BUT TECHNICALLY THEY HAD TO GET THEIR
APPLICATIONS IN.

SO WHAT HAPPENED FIRST WAS ABOUT SIX MONTHS AGO
THE COMMISSION MET AND CONSIDERED ALL OF THE PARKS
DEPARTMENT'S APPLICATIONS AND THEY GRANTED THEM ALL.  THOSE
WERE NOT AT ALL CONTROVERSIAL.  THE AMOUNTS WERE RELATIVELY
SMALL, AND THE PARKS DEPARTMENT WAS ABLE TO SATISFY THE
COMMISSION THAT THEY HAD IN PLACE GOOD CONSERVATION
MEASURES, INCLUDING SEPARATE LITTLE WEATHER STATION KIND OF
THINGS THAT TELL THE PARKS DEPARTMENT WHEN NOT TO WATER.  IN
OTHER WORDS, NOT TO HAVE THE SPRINKLERS ON WHEN IT IS
RAINING, THAT KIND OF THING.  SO THOSE WERE THE FIRST
APPLICATIONS THAT WERE GRANTED.

THEN ON FEBRUARY 15TH OF THIS YEAR, 2006, THE
WATER COMMISSION GRANTED THE APPLICATIONS FOR ALL OF THE
LOWER LEVEL SOURCES, EXCEPT THE WAILUKU SHAFT.  AND SO THOSE
APPLICATIONS THAT WERE GRANTED RESULTED IN ALLOCATION OF
11.227 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY TO THE DEPARTMENT OF WATER
SUPPLY, AND THAT IS EXACTLY THE FIGURE THAT THE DEPARTMENT
ASKED FOR.

SO NOW THE ONLY ONE OF THE BASAL SOURCES, AS
THEY'RE CALLED, THAT'S LEFT TO BE DETERMINED IS THE WAILUKU
SHAFT.  THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF A CONTESTED CASE HEARING,
BECAUSE KEHAULANI MAUKA PUT IN ITS OWN APPLICATION FOR THAT
WATER.  KEHAULANI MAUKA, THE LANDOWNER, AND THE DEPARTMENT
ARE TRYING TO COME TO SOME KIND OF AN AGREEMENT OVER WHO
WILL USE THAT WATER AND HOW IT WILL BE USED.  BUT IN THE
MEANTIME, THE WATER COMMISSION HAS THESE TWO COMPETING
APPLICATIONS FOR THE SAME SOURCE.

SO ON APRIL 19TH, JUST LAST WEEK, A CONTESTED CASE
HEARING WAS HELD AND THE PARTIES PUT IN THEIR EVIDENCE AND
TESTIMONY AND EXHIBITS.  NOW THERE IS A BRIEFING SCHEDULE,
AND THE DECISION WILL BE MADE BY THE HEARING OFFICER
PROBABLY SOMETIME IN JULY.  AFTER THAT, HE WILL MAKE HIS
RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE COMMISSION ITSELF, AND I WOULD
IMAGINE IN AUGUST OR SEPTEMBER THEY WILL VOTE.

AT THE HEARING KEHAULANI MAUKA CLARIFIED THAT THEY
WERE NOT ASKING FOR 5.77 MILLION GALLONS OF THEIR OWN, THAT
THEY WERE ASKING INSTEAD FOR 1.45 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY TO
SERVE THE REST OF THEIR PROJECT, WHICH YOU CAN SEE JUST
RIGHT OUT THE WINDOW IN THE EVENT THAT NO AGREEMENT IS
REACHED WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF WATER SUPPLY.  SO WE DON'T
KNOW EXACTLY HOW THAT ONE IS GOING TO COME OUT.  BUT FROM
WHAT THE HEARING OFFICER INDICATED, IT SOUNDS TO ME THAT AT
THE VERY LEAST THE DEPARTMENT OF WATER SUPPLY WILL BE
ALLOCATED WE HOPE 5.771 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY.  THERE'S A
SUGGESTION THAT POSSIBLY THAT NUMBER MIGHT BE SLIGHTLY
LOWER.  BUT IN ANY EVENT, THOSE ARE THE BASAL SOURCES.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  AM I CORRECT IN UNDERSTANDING
THAT RIGHT NOW YOU ARE STILL IN NEGOTIATIONS WITH KEHAULANI
AS FAR AS THE USE OF THE WATER, THE COUNTY AND KEHAULANI?

MISS LOVELL:  YES.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  IT'S ONGOING NEGOTIATIONS.

MISS LOVELL:  YES.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  SO YOU'RE WAITING FOR THE
RECOMMENDATIONS AND THE COMMISSION.  BUT IF IN THE MEANTIME
A RESOLUTION COMES TOGETHER BETWEEN KEHAULANI AND THE
DEPARTMENT, THEN WE ARE NOT GOING TO WORRY ABOUT THAT
DECISION?

MISS LOVELL:  WELL, I THINK WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IS
IF AN AGREEMENT IS REACHED WE WOULD GO BACK TO THE WATER
COMMISSION, WE WOULD ADVISE THEM THAT AN AGREEMENT HAD BEEN
REACHED, WE WOULD PROBABLY GIVE THEM A COPY OF THE
AGREEMENT, AND THEN WE WOULD SEE IF ANY FURTHER PROCEEDINGS
IN THE CONTESTED CASE WERE NECESSARY.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  OKAY, THANK YOU.  YES, MISS
PARSONS?

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  DIDN'T WE DISCUSS THE
REDEVELOPMENT OF THAT SHAFT?

MISS LOVELL:  YES.  THAT IS IN FACT PART OF WHAT
IS BEING DISCUSSED IN TRYING TO COME TO SOME AGREEMENT WITH
KEHAULANI MAUKA, AND THAT IS TO EVENTUALLY CLOSE THE SHAFT
AND SINK NEW WELLS THAT WOULD REPLACE THAT SOURCE.  AND I
THINK TECHNICALLY IT'S NOT FEASIBLE TO DRILL A SINGLE WELL
AND GET OVER 5 MILLION GALLONS A DAY OUT OF IT.  THE SHAFT
IS REALLY A MARVEL IN TERMS OF HOW MUCH WATER IT'S CAPABLE
OF PRODUCING.  BUT A SINGLE MODERN WELL WOULD NOT GIVE YOU
THAT KIND OF CAPACITY.

SO THE DISCUSSIONS ARE HOW MANY WELLS, WHAT THE
PUMPING CAPACITY WOULD BE, WHERE THEY WOULD BE PLACED.  AND
I KNOW THAT THE COMMISSION WOULD PREFER IF THE PUMPING IN
THE AQUIFER COULD BE SPREAD OUT TO HAVE SOME WELLS OVER MORE
TOWARDS THE WAIKAPU END OF THE AQUIFER, SAY, AS OPPOSED TO
CONCENTRATING EVERYTHING IN THE CENTER.  THEY THINK THAT
WILL BE BETTER FOR THE HEALTH OF THE AQUIFER.  AND POSSIBLY
IF PUMPING WERE SPREAD OUT IT MIGHT BE POSSIBLE TO INCREASE
THE SUSTAINABLE YIELD OF THE AQUIFER TO MORE THAN THE 20
MILLION GALLONS A DAY, WHICH IS WHERE IT HAS BEEN SET.

SO NOW WHAT REMAINS TO BE DONE ARE THE HIGH LEVEL
SOURCE WATER APPLICATIONS.  THESE ARE FOR HIGH LEVEL DIKE
IMPOUNDED WATERS.  AND FROM A GENTLEMAN LOGICAL STANDPOINT
THESE ARE DEEMED TO BE DIFFERENT THAN THE BASAL SOURCES
WHICH ARE LOWER DOWN.

THE DEPARTMENT HAS TWO APPLICATIONS THAT FIT INTO
THAT CATEGORY.  THE FIRST IS FOR KEPANIWAI, WHICH IS AN
APPLICATION TO USE 1.042 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY.  THE OTHER
IS FOR THE IAO TUNNEL, AND THE APPLICATION IS TO USE 1.418
MILLION GALLONS PER DAY.  WAILUKU WATER COMPANY, FORMERLY
KNOWN AS WAILUKU AGRIBUSINESS, HAS A NUMBER OF SOURCES FOR
WHICH THEY HAVE REQUESTED PERMITS.  THESE INCLUDE WAIKAPU
TUNNEL NUMBER ONE, WAIKAPU TUNNEL NUMBER TWO, BLACK GORGE
TUNNEL, IAO NEEDLE TUNNEL, AND IAO NEEDLE TUNNEL NUMBER TWO.

HOWEVER, WE DO NOT HAVE GOOD DATA ON THE ACTUAL
AMOUNT THAT THEY ARE APPLYING FOR, BECAUSE THESE SOURCES
DON'T HAPPEN TO HAVE ANY GAUGES OR METERS ON THEM.  SO IT'S
DIFFICULT FOR THEM TO DETERMINE HOW MUCH THEY WERE ACTUALLY
USING ON THE DATE THAT THE AQUIFER WAS DESIGNATED.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  THESE ARE SURFACE SYSTEMS
NOW?

MISS LOVELL:  WELL, THESE ARE THE WATERS THAT ARE
KIND OF, THEY'RE UP HIGH IN THE MOUNTAINS AND THEY ARE --
INSTEAD OF PUTTING YOUR WELL SHAFT DEEP DOWN AND DRILLING A
HOLE, SAY, A THOUSAND FEET DOWN AND THEN PUMPING WATER UP,
THESE CAN BE ACCESSED BY PUTTING A TUNNEL RIGHT INTO THE
SIDE OF THE MOUNTAIN AND THE WATER JUST RUSHES OUT.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  OUT OF THE MOUNTAIN.

MISS LOVELL:  SO IT'S INTERESTING.  THEY ARE A
LITTLE BIT LIKE GROUNDWATER, BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO TUNNEL OR
DIG TO GET TO IT, BUT MANY PEOPLE SEE IT AS MORE AKIN TO
SURFACE WATER, BECAUSE THIS IS WATER THAT WOULD BE FLOWING
IN A STREAM WERE IT NOT FOR A DIKE OR A WALL.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  A DIVERSION?

MISS LOVELL:  ACTUALLY, A NATURAL ROCK WALL THAT
WAS FORMED WHEN THE MOUNTAINS THEMSELVES WERE FORMED.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  BUT IT IS CLEANER BECAUSE
IT DOESN'T RUN THROUGH THE FIELDS, CORRECT?

MISS LOVELL:  WELL, I THINK THAT'S AN ENTIRELY
DIFFERENT SET OF ISSUES.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  IT'S A DIFFERENT TYPE OF
SURFACE WATER.

MISS LOVELL:  WELL, IT'S NOT EVEN TECHNICALLY
SURFACE WATER.  TECHNICALLY, FROM THE WATER CODE STANDPOINT,
IT IS GROUNDWATER.  BUT MANY PEOPLE FEEL THAT THAT WATER
WOULD BE GOING INTO STREAMS AND WOULD BE STREAM WATER, IF IT
WERE NOT FOR THE LAVA DIKES.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  WHO OWNS THE PROPERTY WHERE
THESE WAILUKU WATER COMPANY PERMITS ARE LOOKING TO PUT IN
AND THE ONES WE'RE LOOKING TO PUT IN?

MISS LOVELL:  THEY OWN SOME, WE OWN SOME, AND
THERE IS SOME QUESTION AS TO WHO OWNS SOME.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  DO THEY HAVE CLEAR TITLE ON
SOME OR IS IT QUESTIONABLE TITLE ON ALL OF IT?

MISS LOVELL:  THAT I CANNOT SAY.  I'VE NOT DONE A
TITLE SEARCH ON THEIR APPLICATIONS.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING WHEN
YOU GET UP TO A CERTAIN HEIGHT THAT MOST OF THAT HASN'T BEEN
CLEAR TITLED.

MISS LOVELL:  THAT I'M REALLY NOT PREPARED TO
ADDRESS.  THAT'S NOT AN ISSUE THAT HAS COME UP YET.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  WOULDN'T IT BE AN ISSUE IF
WE WERE LOOKING AT -- I MEAN ARE YOU LOOKING AT THE WAILUKU
WATER COMPANY AS BEING IN COMPETITION TO WHAT WE WANT TO DO,
IS THAT GOING TO BE A PROBLEM?

MISS LOVELL:  IT MAY BE A PROBLEM.  IT HAS NOT
BECOME ONE YET AS TO THESE PARTICULAR APPLICATIONS.  IT MAY
IN THE FUTURE, AND WE ARE CERTAINLY LOOKING INTO THE
QUESTION OF THE OWNERSHIP OF THE PROPERTY IN AND AROUND THE
IAO TUNNEL, BECAUSE THAT'S A VERY IMPORTANT SOURCE FOR US.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  DOES THAT SOURCE COUNT
AGAINST THE IAO AQUIFER'S AMOUNT?

MISS LOVELL:  THE SUSTAINABLE YIELD?

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  THE SUSTAINABLE YIELD.  DOES
THAT COUNT AGAINST IT?

MISS LOVELL:  THAT'S A VERY INTERESTING QUESTION,
BECAUSE WHEN THE AQUIFER WAS DESIGNATED, THE COUNTY
UNDERSTOOD THAT WE WERE ONLY ABLE TO PUMP FROM ALL OF THESE
SOURCES, WHETHER THEY WERE IN THE BASAL PART OF THE AQUIFER
OR THE HIGH LEVEL SOURCES, ONLY UP TO 90 PERCENT OF THE
SUSTAINABLE YIELD.  BUT AS IT TURNS OUT, OVER THE COURSE OF
THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, WITH ALL OF THE LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
THAT HAVE GONE ON, THE COMMISSION HAS NOW DECIDED TO TREAT
THESE HIGH LEVEL SOURCES SEPARATELY.

SO IF YOU TAKE THE 11.227 MILLION GALLONS PER DAY
AND YOU ADD TO THAT 5.771, YOU GET ABOUT 17 MILLION.  SO
IT'S POSSIBLE THAT THERE IS A LITTLE MORE THAT WE COULD BE
TAKING OUT OF THE GROUNDWATER AS A RESULT OF THESE RULINGS.

ALL RIGHT, NOW --

BOARD MEMBER HOWDEN:  MAY I ASK A QUESTION?

MISS LOVELL:  CERTAINLY.

BOARD MEMBER HOWDEN:  WHEN YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT
THE WATER, THE WATER, THAT THE DIKE IMPOUNDED WATER, THAT
DOESN'T DOWN AS RUNNING WATERS IN TERMS OF LIKE MCBRIDE
ROBINSON, LIKE THAT?

MISS LOVELL:  THAT'S WHAT I WAS SAYING BEFORE.
SOME PEOPLE TAKE THE POSITION THAT THAT SHOULD BE TREATED
LIKE SURFACE WATER.  FOR THE PURPOSE OF THESE PROCEEDINGS,
THE COMMISSION IS TREATING IT AS GROUNDWATER.  IT IS
MANAGING IT AS A PART OF THE GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT AREA.
BUT MAYBE FROM A PHILOSOPHICAL AND EVEN A HYDRO-GEOLOGICAL
STANDPOINT, YOU COULD PROBABLY ARGUE BOTH WAYS.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  BUT IT'S WATER QUALITY THAT
DETERMINES THAT, ISN'T IT?

MISS LOVELL:  NO, I DON'T THINK THE WATER QUALITY
HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH IT WHATSOEVER.  IT'S MORE A QUESTION
OF HOW YOU GET TO IT, YOU KNOW, DO YOU HAVE TO DRILL A HOLE
TO GET TO IT.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  THE SOURCES.

MISS LOVELL:  BY DIKE IMPOUNDED WATERS I DON'T
MEAN A MAN-MADE DIKE OR DAM OR DIVERSION, I'M TALKING ABOUT
A GEOLOGICAL DAM.  AND MY GEOLOGY 101 DAYS ARE RATHER FAR IN
THE PAST, BUT AS I RECALL, WHEN YOU ARE DEALING WITH
VOLCANIC STRUCTURES WHAT HAPPENS IS THAT THERE WILL BE A
CREVASSE OR A FISSURE THAT WILL DEVELOP, AND THEN HOT MOLTEN
LAVA WILL BE SQUEEZED UP THROUGH THAT NARROW OPENING AND IT
FORMS A LAVA WALL OR A ROCK WALL THAT IS CREATED BY NATURE.
IT'S NOT CREATED BY MAN-MADE MEANS.  SO THOSE ARE THE WATERS
THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT.

BOARD MEMBER HOWDEN:  IF THIS WERE LITIGATED, WHAT
WOULD BE YOUR JUDGMENT LEGALLY IN TERMS OF HOW THEY WOULD BE
SEEN?

MISS LOVELL:  THAT IS A QUESTION I THINK THAT
WOULD GET US INTO STRATEGY, AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I
WOULD PREFER NOT DISCUSS THAT.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  I WOULD RATHER NOT GO INTO
THAT AREA YET, PLEASE.

MISS LOVELL:  BUT I MUST SAY ALSO THAT I AM NOT
SURE THAT I'M PREPARED TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION TODAY,
BECAUSE I WOULD WANT TO LET THE PROCESS PLAY OUT A LITTLE
BIT LONGER BEFORE REACHING THAT.

SO NOW TO RETURN TO THE SUBJECT OF THE WATER USE
PERMIT APPLICATIONS, THE WATER COMMISSION DECIDED THAT IT
WOULD PLACE THREE DIFFERENT PROCEEDINGS IN ONE CONTESTED
CASE.  ONE PART OF THAT WILL BE THE WATER USE PERMIT
APPLICATIONS FOR THESE HIGH LEVEL SOURCES, IN THE CASE OF
DWS KEPANIWAI AND IAO TUNNEL.

THE TWO OTHER THINGS THAT ARE FOLDED  INTO THE
SAME CONTESTED CASE ARE A PETITION TO AMEND THE INTERIM
INSTREAM FLOW STANDARDS FOR THE FOUR MAJOR STREAMS IN THE
AREA, THE HUI O NAWAIEHA, AND THAT WAS FILED ON JUNE 25,
2004 BY EARTH JUSTICE ON BEHALF OF A HUI OF LOCAL CITIZENS.

THERE IS ALSO A CITIZENS COMPLAINT FOR WASTE THAT
WAS FILED BY MANY OF THE SAME PARTIES ON OCTOBER 19, 2004,
ALLEGING THAT WAILUKU, THEN WAILUKU AG, NOW WAILUKU WATER,
IS TAKING MORE WATER THAN IT CAN AND IS USING IN A
REASONABLE AND BENEFICIAL WAY.  UNDER OUR WATER LAWS, BOTH
COMMON LAW AND THE STATE WATER CODE, PEOPLE ARE ENTITLED TO
USE WATER IF IT'S FOR A REASONABLE AND BENEFICIAL PURPOSE.
AND THERE ARE MANY THINGS THAT ARE REASONABLE AND
BENEFICIAL.  CERTAINLY A PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY IS REASONABLE
AND BENEFICIAL, AGRICULTURE IS REASONABLE AND BENEFICIAL,
AND SO FORTH.  BUT THE ALLEGATION WAS THAT THEY WERE
DIVERTING WATER FROM THE STREAMS AND THEN NOT USING ALL OF
IT AND THEN JUST DUMPING IT.

THE PETITION WHICH I BROUGHT HERE TO SHOW YOU HAS
ALL OF THESE ATTACHMENTS, AND THESE ARE PHOTOGRAPHS,
APPARENTLY THERE'S ALSO A VIDEO, WITNESS STATEMENTS, AND SO
FORTH TO SUPPORT THE ALLEGATION THAT WATER IS BEING WASTED.
THE WATER COMMISSION HAS BEEN LOOKING INTO THAT ALLEGATION
NOW FOR YEARLY TWO YEARS.  THERE HAVE BEEN SOME INTERIM
REPORTS FROM STAFF OF THE WATER COMMISSION.  THEY HAVE NOT
BEEN ABLE TO REACH A CONCLUSION IN PART BECAUSE NOT ALL OF
THE WATER IS METERED.

SO FOR INSTANCE, HC&S TAKES SOME OF THE WATER
THAT'S DIVERTED THROUGH DIVERSIONS SET UP BY WAILUKU SUGAR
COMPANY, YOU KNOW, MAYBE A CENTURY AGO.  HC&S TAKES SOME OF
THAT WATER TO WATER THEIR FIELDS.  HC&S KNOWS HOW MUCH WATER
IT IS TAKING AND HC&S HAS REPORTED THAT FIGURE TO THE STATE
WATER COMMISSION.  BUT HC&S'S FIGURES DON'T JIVE WITH
WAILUKU AG'S FIGURES.  AND PART OF THE PROBLEM IS THAT THERE
IS WATER THAT IS DIVERTED FOR KULEANAS THAT'S NOT MEASURED,
AND THERE ARE VARIOUS PLACES ALONG THE STREAM AND THE DITCH
SYSTEM WHERE THERE IS NO GAUGING OR MEASURING DEVICE.

SO IN ANY EVENT, THE CITIZENS GROUP THE HUI O
NAWAIEHA AND THE MAUI TOMORROW FOUNDATION HAVE REALLY BEEN
PUSHING FOR RESOLUTION.  WAILUKU AG HAS TAKEN THE POSITION
THAT IT IS NOT WASTING ANY WATER WHATSOEVER.  THE MAYOR HAS
APPEARED BEFORE THE WATER COMMISSION AND HAS ASKED THEM TO
PLEASE TAKE ACTION AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE, BECAUSE THIS IS
OF IMPORTANCE TO ALL OF US.

SO NOW WE HAVE THIS CONTESTED CASE IN WHICH ALL
THREE OF THESE ITEMS ARE GOING TO BE ROLLED INTO ONE.  THE
HEARING OFFICER HAS JUST BEEN CHOSEN, IT'S GOING TO BE DR.
LARRY NAIKI (PHONETIC), WHO WAS ALSO THE HEARING OFFICER FOR
THE OTHER CONTESTED CASE HEARING THAT WE HAD OVER WAILUKU
SHAFT.  HE'S A MEMBER OF THE COMMISSION.  HE IS BOTH A
MEDICAL DOCTOR AND A LAWYER, AND HE IS ALSO THE PERSON WHO
HAS PRESIDED OVER THE WAIHOLI DITCH CASE, WHICH HAS BEEN IN
LITIGATION NOW FOR SOME 14 YEARS.  SO AT THE VERY LEAST, WE
CAN SAY HE IS EXPERIENCED IN THIS AREA.

SO NOW WE ARE GOING TO BE PREPARING FOR THIS
TRIPARTITE PROCEEDING BEFORE, IN FRONT OF THE HEARING
OFFICER, DR. NAIKI, ON THESE THREE ITEMS.  AND IT IS AT THIS
POINT THAT WE IN CORP COUNSEL FEEL THAT IT WOULD BE PRUDENT
TO ENGAGE OUTSIDE COUNSEL TO ASSIST US.  I HAVE BEEN DOING A
LOT OF THE LITIGATION TYPE WORK ON THIS TO DATE.  ED KUSHI
AND I HAVE BEEN WORKING VERY CLOSELY TOGETHER ON THIS
SUBJECT.  WE HAVE HAD EXCELLENT SUPPORT FROM THE STAFF OF
THE WATER DEPARTMENT, PARTICULARLY FROM THE PLANNING BRANCH.
THESE ARE THE PEOPLE, ELLEN AND EVA IN PARTICULAR, WHO HAVE
WORKED UP ALL OF THE PERMIT APPLICATIONS.  THEY'VE ALSO
PROVIDED ALL THE INFORMATION TO THE COMMISSION THAT IT
NEEDS, AND SO FORTH.  THEY HAVE DONE A REALLY GREAT JOB.

SO FAR WE HAVE DONE OKAY JUST DOING IT ALL IN
HOUSE, BUT NOW IT SEEMS THAT THE STAKES ARE VERY HIGH.  WE
ARE LOOKING AT TWO SOURCES BETWEEN KEPANIWAI AND IAO TUNNEL
THAT PROVIDE TWO-AND-A-HALF MILLION GALLONS ROUGHLY PER DAY.
WE HAVE THE PETITION TO AMEND INTERIM INSTREAM FLOW
STANDARDS, WHICH IS WHAT WILL DETERMINE HOW MUCH, IF ANY,
WATER WILL GO BACK INTO THE STREAMS, AND HOW THE STREAM
WATER SHOULD BE FAIRLY ALLOCATED AS BETWEEN NEEDS OF THE
COUNTY FOR ITS PUBLIC DRINKING WATER SUPPLY, NEEDS OF
AGRICULTURE, AND NEEDS OF THE STREAM ITSELF, NOT TO MENTION
ALL OF THE TRADITIONAL AND CUSTOMARY USES THAT MIGHT BE MADE
OF THAT WATER AND THAT WERE MADE OF THAT WATER IN THE PAST,
AS WELL AS KULEANA NEEDS.

SO AT THIS POINT THE CORPORATION COUNSEL IS
RECOMMENDING AND IS PREPARED FOLLOWING CONSULTATION WITH
THIS BODY TO REQUEST FROM THE COUNTY COUNCIL AUTHORIZATION
TO ENGAGE EXPERT OUTSIDE COUNSEL.  NOT TO TAKE OVER THE
WHOLE CASE, BUT TO ASSIST US WITH SOME OF THE VERY
INTERESTING AND THORNY QUESTIONS OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAW AND
WATER LAW, NATIVE HAWAIIAN RIGHTS, ENVIRONMENTAL LAW, AND SO
FORTH.  IT'S KIND OF BEYOND THE POINT WHERE ONE DEPUTY CORP
COUNSEL, EVEN WORKING VERY DILIGENTLY, CAN MANAGE.
PARTICULARLY GIVEN THAT WE DON'T HAVE ANYONE IN OUR
DEPARTMENT WHO IS ABLE TO DEVOTE FULL TIME TO IT.  IT'S ONLY
ONE OF MANY ASSIGNMENTS.

SO THAT IS OUR RECOMMENDATION, THAT IN PROCEEDING
WE HAVE THE ASSISTANCE OF OUTSIDE COUNSEL, AND WE ARE
PREPARED TO GO TO THE COUNTY COUNCIL TO REQUEST FUNDS FOR
THAT PURPOSE.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  BRIAN, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING
ELSE YOU WOULD LIKE TO ADD?

MR. MOTO:  NO.  I WANT TO THANK JANE FOR HER
SUMMARY.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  VERY THOROUGH.  THANK YOU
VERY MUCH.  AGAIN, I'D LIKE TO OPEN UP FOR QUESTIONS.
AGAIN, KEEPING IN MIND THAT WE ARE ADVISORY, AND THE
QUESTIONS YOU ASK WE WANT TO TRY TO STAY FROM -- I GUESS
AGAINST OR STAY AWAY FROM TRYING TO GET ANSWERS LIKE WHAT
WILL HAPPEN IF THIS HAPPENS.  BECAUSE AGAIN, TO BE HONEST
WITH YOU, MICHAEL, A LOT OF THIS WON'T EVER BE DETERMINED
UNTIL WE ACTUALLY GO TO COURT OR HAVE CASE HEARINGS.  AND TO
SPECULATE, ESPECIALLY IN A MEETING LIKE THIS, WOULDN'T BE
APPROPRIATE AT THIS POINT, AND MAYBE WILL PUT THEM IN AN
UNCOMFORTABLE POSITION, ALL OF THE MEMBERS HERE.

BUT QUESTIONS AS FAR AS -- AND THIS IS SUCH, AS
YOU GUYS HAVE JUST HEARD, A CUMBERSOME SITUATION.  THERE ARE
MANY ENTITIES THAT ARE GOING TO BE INVOLVED IN THIS WHOLE
THING.  GO AHEAD, MICHAEL.

BOARD MEMBER HOWDEN:  I JUST HAD ONE QUESTION.
EARTH JUSTICE, OHA, ET CETERA, ARE THESE GROUPS ALLIED WITH
THE QUESTIONS THAT THE COUNTY WILL BE RAISING, ARE THEY
RESOURCES FOR THE COUNTY?

MISS LOVELL:  YES, MOSTLY.  ORIGINALLY WHEN THE
DEPARTMENT PUT IN ITS WATER USE PERMIT APPLICATIONS, BOTH OF
THOSE GROUPS OBJECTED TO OUR APPLICATIONS.  THEY FILED
WRITTEN OBJECTIONS.  BUT THEN WE HAVE BEEN WORKING TOGETHER,
WE HAVE DISCOVERED THAT WE HAVE MORE SIMILARITIES THAN
DIFFERENCES IN OUR APPROACH AND IN WHAT WE WANT TO ACHIEVE.

SO THEY EVENTUALLY WITHDREW THEIR OBJECTIONS TO
THE BASAL SOURCE WELLS AND TO THE WATER USE PERMITS FOR
THOSE, THE 11.2 MILLION GALLONS THAT HAVE BEEN GRANTED.  AND
THE MAYOR FOR HIS PART PLEDGED TO USE HIS BEST EFFORTS TO
GET SOME WATER BACK INTO SEVERAL OF THE STREAMS,
PARTICULARLY THE IAO.

NOW, THE MAYOR CANNOT DO THAT ALONE, HE NEEDS THE
COOPERATION AND THE SUPPORT OF THE COUNTY COUNCIL.  BUT THE
MAYOR LISTED A NUMBER OF STEPS THAT HE WAS WILLING TO TAKE,
AND HE IS METHODICALLY WORKING THROUGH THOSE STEPS TO TRY TO
GET MORE COUNTY CONTROL OVER THE WATER SOURCES, PARTICULARLY
THE STREAMS.

AND AS A PART OF THAT, TO PUT SOME OF THE WATER
BACK INTO SOME OF THESE STREAMS WHICH HAVE DRY REACHES MANY
MONTHS OUT OF THE YEAR, TO SEE IF A MORE NATURAL FLOW CAN BE
RETURNED WITHOUT UNDULY HARMING AGRICULTURE OR HARMING THE
COUNTY'S NEED FOR DRINKING WATER FOR ITS PEOPLE.

SO WE HAVE, I THINK, A VERY GOOD AND FRUITFUL
ALLIANCE.  THERE IS A LOT OF EXPERTISE THERE, PARTICULARLY
KAPUA SPROAT, WHO IS THE ATTORNEY FOR EARTH JUSTICE, WHO HAS
BEEN THROUGH THE WAIHOLI DITCH CASE.  SHE SPENT MANY YEARS
OF HER LEGAL CAREER WORKING ON PRECISELY THOSE ISSUES, AND
SHE HAS BEEN EXTREMELY HELPFUL TO US.

THERE ARE A FEW MATTERS IN WHICH THE COUNTY HAS
NOT FORMALLY TAKEN A POSITION.  ONE IS THE CITIZENS
COMPLAINT ON WASTE AND THE OTHER ONE IS THE PETITION TO
AMEND THE INTERIM INSTREAM FLOW STANDARDS.  WE WILL BE A
PART OF THOSE PROCEEDINGS, BUT TO DATE WE HAVE NOT TAKEN A
FORMAL POSITION.  WE ARE VERY INTERESTED IN THE OUTCOME; WE
WILL PARTICIPATE ACTIVELY.  BUT WE HAVE NOT PUBLICLY STATED
WHETHER WE THINK, FOR INSTANCE, THAT WAILUKU WATER COMPANY
IS ACTUALLY WASTING WATER.  WE DO WANT TO GET TO THE BOTTOM
OF THAT ISSUE AND DO WANT IT RESOLVED.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  MISS PARSONS?

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  IS WAILUKU WATER COMPANY
REGULATED BY THE PUC?

MISS LOVELL:  NOT AT THIS TIME.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  SO IS THE ENTITY REAL?

MISS LOVELL:  I HAVE SEEN DOCUMENTS THAT INDICATE
THAT THERE WAS A SORT OF A STOCK -- I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE
EXACT TERM IS, STOCK SWAP OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THAT THE
STOCKHOLDERS OF WAILUKU AG BECAME STOCKHOLDERS OF WAILUKU
WATER COMPANY.  SO FROM WHAT I'VE SEEN, I WOULD SAY THAT
IT'S SET UP AS A CORPORATION.  BUT I HAVE CHECKED WITH THE
PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION, AND I HAVE NOT SEEN ANY
APPLICATION TO BECOME A PUC REGULATED WATER COMPANY.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  YES, MR. OKAMURA.

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:  A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS,
MR. CHAIR.  SO THE UPPER LEVEL SOURCES, THE CONTESTED CASE
HEARING IS WITH WAILUKU AG BECAUSE THEY WANT SOME OF THE
WATER TOO?

MISS LOVELL:  YES, MOSTLY WAILUKU AG.  HC&S IS
INVOLVED, BUT ONLY VERY MINIMALLY.  THEY HAVE ONLY ONE VERY
SMALL SOURCE, IT'S ABOUT 1.1 MILLION GALLONS A DAY.  SO THEY
THEMSELVES DID NOT REQUEST A CONTESTED CASE, BUT THEY
PROBABLY WILL INTERVENE AND WILL PARTICIPATE.

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:  SO THERE'S TWO CONTESTED
CASE HEARINGS GOING ON.  ONE REGARDING THE WAILUKU SHAFT AND
THE OTHER WITH THESE THREE THINGS?

MISS LOVELL:  YES.

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:  I WANTED TO KNOW LIKE THE
INSTREAM FLOW STANDARDS WOULD COVER HOW MANY STREAMS?

MISS LOVELL:  THE PETITION IS FOR -- GOSH, I DON'T
HAVE THE PETITION.  I BELIEVE IT'S EIGHT STREAMS IF YOU
COUNT THE VARIOUS FORKS, LIKE NORTH WAIEHU.

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:  AND DOES THE COUNTY, THE
COUNTY DRAWS ABOUT HOW MUCH WATER FROM THESE STREAMS NOW,
WOULD YOU KNOW OFFHAND, MR. TENGAN?

DIRECTOR TENGAN:   AT THE PRESENT TIME WE JUST
HAVE THE TREATMENT PLANT UP AT THE IAO TANK SITE UP THERE,
AND WE WERE PROCESSING ABOUT 1.5 MILLION GALLONS A DAY.

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:   BUT THE IDEA WOULD BE TO
TRY TO RESTORE THE INSTREAM STANDARDS, AND POSSIBLY GET MORE
WATER FOR PUBLIC USE?

DIRECTOR TENGAN:   CORRECT.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?
MICHAEL.

BOARD MEMBER HOWDEN:  AND IF IT CAN'T BE ANSWERED,
I'LL DEFER IT.

MISS LOVELL:  I'LL LET YOU KNOW.

BOARD MEMBER HOWDEN:  THANK YOU.  GIVEN THAT THE
RUNNING WATERS IN THE STATE UNDER THE HAWAII STATE
CONSTITUTION ARE PUBLICLY OWNED FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE
PUBLIC, HOW IS A PRIVATE ENTITY ABLE TO DRAW UNLIMITED,
UNMETERED USE OF WHAT ARE CONSIDERED LEGALLY TO BE PUBLIC
WATERS?

MISS LOVELL:  WAILUKU AG, LIKE MANY OTHER OF THE
PLANTATIONS, WAS IN EXISTENCE AND HAD DIVERSIONS THAT WERE
IN EXISTENCE BEFORE THE STATE WATER CODE WAS ADOPTED.  THAT
CAME INTO EFFECT I WANT TO SAY IN 1978, 1979, SOMEWHERE IN
THAT TIME FRAME.  SO A LOT OF THE RULES AND REGULATIONS
DEALING WITH STREAM DIVERSIONS GRANDFATHERED IN PEOPLE WHO
WERE ALREADY DIVERTING.  AND AS LONG AS THEY DON'T CHANGE
THEIR DIVERSION IN ANY WAY, RE-ENGINEER IT, DIVERT MORE
WATER THAN THEY HAD IN THE PAST, OR MOVE THEIR DIVERSION TO
SOME OTHER LOCATION, AS LONG AS THEY'RE STILL DOING WHAT
THEY WERE DOING A HUNDRED YEARS AGO, THEY'RE ALLOWED TO
CONTINUE.  BUT THEY MAY NOT DO SO, THEY MAY NOT DIVERT WATER
IF IT'S NOT GOING TO BE USED BENEFICIALLY AND IN A
REASONABLE MANNER.

SO YOU CAN'T HAVE A DIVERSION -- LET'S SAY YOU HAD
A DIVERSION A HUNDRED YEARS AGO TO WATER SUGARCANE AND NOW
THAT YOU DON'T HAVE ANY CANE LAND ANYMORE YOU CAN'T DIVERT
ALL THAT WATER, RUN IT THROUGH YOUR DITCHES, AND THEN DUMP
IT INTO THE OCEAN.  THAT WOULD NOT BE DEEMED A REASONABLE
AND BENEFICIAL USE.  AND THAT IS WHY THE HUI O NAWAIEHA
FILED THIS PETITION.  THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT THEY ALLEGE IS
BEING DONE.

I MUST SAY THAT IT'S HARD TO FIGURE OUT THE
             NUMBERS, BECAUSE WAILUKU AG IS SAYING ON THE ONE HAND TO THE
             WATER COMMISSION THAT EVERY DROP IS BEING USED.  THEY'RE
             TELLING THE COUNTY, HOWEVER, THAT THEY'D BE HAPPY TO DELIVER
             MORE WATER TO US, MORE SURFACE WATER FOR USE AS DRINKING
             WATER AT A SOMEWHAT HEFTY PRICE.

AND THE MAYOR DID NOTE THAT IN HIS REMARKS TO THE
WATER COMMISSION, THAT HE'S HAVING TROUBLE PUTTING TOGETHER
THE PROPOSAL THAT WAS MADE TO THIS BODY IN 2003, WHERE THEY
WANTED TO SELL THEIR WATERSHED LANDS, AND THE IDEA WAS THAT
THERE WOULD BE SOME, I THINK, 17 MILLION GALLONS A DAY OF
SURFACE WATER THAT THE COUNTY WOULD BE ABLE TO USE AFTER
EVERYONE ELSE THAT THEY HAVE CONTRACTS WITH WAS TAKEN CARE
OF.  IT'S A LITTLE HARD TO BALANCE THOSE STATEMENTS AGAINST
THE MORE RECENT STATEMENTS BEFORE THE WATER COMMISSION THAT
EVERY SINGLE DROP IS USED AND THERE'S NO EXTRA, AND
THEREFORE NOTHING IS BEING WASTED.

THERE HAVE BEEN A NUMBER OF CITIZENS WHO HAVE GONE
OUT AND WHO HAVE BEEN CHECKING OUTFALLS, THEY HAVE BEEN
CHECKING RESERVOIRS, THEY HAVE BEEN CHECKING STREAMS,
THEY'VE BEEN TAKING VIDEO AND PHOTOGRAPHS, AND I THINK
PERSONALLY THEY'VE MADE A PRETTY STRONG CASE.  SOMETHING IS
AMISS.  BUT WHETHER IT'S A QUESTION OF JUST NOT BEING ABLE
TO MAKE THESE FIGURES MATCH UP BECAUSE OF NO METERING, OR
WHETHER THERE IS SOMETHING GOING ON THAT SHOULDN'T BE GOING
ON, AT THIS POINT WE DON'T KNOW.  BUT THAT'S WHAT PART OF
THE PROCEEDINGS WILL BE ABOUT.

BOARD MEMBER HOWDEN:  THANK YOU.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  SO JUST TO CLARIFY, WAILUKU
AG SWAPPED STOCK.  AND I HEARD IT WAS LIKE 150.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  WELL, LET US NOT SPECULATE.
WE ONLY WILL STICK WITH FACTS, PLEASE.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  THIS WAS TESTIFIED TO IN
FRONT OF COUNCIL.  BUT IT BECAME WAILUKU WATER COMPANY.  HOW
DOES  -- HOW DO THEY MAINTAIN THE WATER  -- IT'S A DIFFERENT
ENTITY, IT'S A WHOLE DIFFERENT ENTITY, IT'S NOT THE SAME
ENTITY ANY MORE, CORRECT?

MISS LOVELL:  IT'S A SUCCESSOR ENTITY.  AND IF
WHAT YOU'RE ASKING IS HOW DID THEY GET GRANDFATHERED IN ON
THEIR DIVERSIONS, I ASSUME THAT THEY SET THEIR COMPANY UP
WITH THAT IN MIND, SO THAT THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO.  THEY'VE
GONE THROUGH SEVERAL ITERATIONS OVER THE YEARS.  IT WAS
WAILUKU SUGAR COMPANY, AND THEN IT WAS WAILUKU AGRIBUSINESS,
AND NOW IT'S WAILUKU WATER COMPANY, BUT IT'S BASICALLY STILL
ALL THE SAME PEOPLE.  BUT I HAVE NOT DELVED ENOUGH INTO
THEIR CORPORATE STRUCTURE TO KNOW EXACTLY HOW ALL OF THAT
WAS DONE.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  IS THIS OUTSIDE COUNSEL THAT
YOU ARE REQUESTING FOR GOING TO DO SOME STUDIES ALSO IN
THOSE AREAS, OR IT'S A COMPREHENSIVE ADVISORY TO YOU, TO THE
COUNTY OF MAUI?

MISS LOVELL:  WELL, WE WOULD LIKE THE OUTSIDE
COUNSEL TO HELP US WITH AS BROAD AN AREA AS POSSIBLE.  WE
WOULD LIKE TO WRITE THE RESOLUTION IN SUCH A WAY THAT IT'S
NOT SO NARROWLY WRITTEN THAT IF WE HAVE QUESTIONS OUTSIDE OF
THAT SCOPE THAT WE CANNOT GO TO THIS OUTSIDE COUNSEL.

I CERTAINLY WILL MYSELF KEEP WORKING HARD ON ALL
OF THIS.  I'M VERY INTERESTED IN IT.  I'VE BEEN WORKING ON
IT NOW FOR THREE YEARS, AND I'M NOT GOING TO JUST HAND ALL
THE FILES OVER TO SOMEBODY ELSE OUTSIDE WHO CAN START
BILLING US BY THE HOUR FOR ALL OF THAT WORK.  BUT IT WOULD
BE VERY HELPFUL TO HAVE AN EXTRA SET OF HANDS AND TO HAVE
SOMEONE WHO HAS EXPERTISE IN THE VERY TRICKY AND INTERESTING
ISSUES OF CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, NATIVE HAWAIIAN RIGHTS, WATER
RIGHTS, AND SO FORTH.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  YOU MENTIONED AT THE VERY TOP
OF THIS THAT WE COULD, I GUESS FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM,
MAKE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND OUTSIDE COUNSEL BE HIRED TO
ASSIST YOU, BUT I ALSO HEAR THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THE
RESOLUTION AS COMPREHENSIVE AS POSSIBLE.  GO AHEAD, BRIAN, I
DON'T WANT TO PUT THE CART BEFORE THE HORSE.

MR. MOTO:  AS JANE SAID, THE SPECIAL COUNSEL IS
BEING RETAINED TO REPRESENT THE COUNTY OF MAUI AND TO ADVISE
THE COUNTY OF MAUI ON ALL MATTERS PERTAINING TO THE FOUR
ITEMS THAT ARE PENDING BEFORE THE STATE WATER COMMISSION,
AND THAT ARE EITHER ALREADY IN CONTESTED CASE HEARING OR
ABOUT TO GO TO CONTESTED CASE HEARING.  WE ANTICIPATE THAT
THAT LAWYER WILL ASSIST IN THE PROCEEDINGS THEMSELVES, AND
ALSO ADVISE COUNTY OFFICIALS AS THE CONTESTED CASE
PROCEEDINGS GO ALONG.

THE ISSUES PROBABLY WILL BE COMPLICATED.  THERE'S
A CHANCE THAT MANY DIFFERENT SORTS OF LAWS WILL BE BROUGHT
UP.  IT'S POSSIBLE THAT THE CONTESTED CASE HEARING MAY BE
QUITE LONG, ESPECIALLY GIVEN THE CONTENTIOUS NATURE OF SOME
OF THE ISSUES RAISE AND THE IMPORTANCE TO THE PARTIES.

CERTAINLY THE WAILUKU WATER COMPANY, AMONG OTHERS,
HAS SOME VERY STRONG INTERESTS AT STAKE IN THE OUTCOME OF
THESE PROCEEDINGS, SO THEY PROBABLY WILL END UP BEING
VIGOROUSLY CONTESTED.  WE ALSO HAVE IN THESE PROCEEDINGS THE
OFFICE OF HAWAIIAN AFFAIRS, WHICH IS A PARTY, AND ALSO EARTH
JUSTICE ON BEHALF OF ITS CLIENTS.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  SO I GUESS MY QUESTION, AND
FIRST OF ALL, I'D LIKE TO THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THIS, IT'S
VERY COMPREHENSIVE.  IT'S REALLY BROUGHT TO LIGHT.  AND FOR
THE THREE OF US WHO HAVE BEEN AROUND FOR A LONG TIME, THIS
IS GREAT NEWS BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN WAITING TO HEAR SOMETHING
LIKE THIS.  FOR THE THREE OF YOU WHO ARE BRAND NEW, LUCKY
YOU GUYS COME IN, AND BAM, YOU'VE GOT ALL THE INFORMATION
HERE.

FROM OUR BOARD RECOMMENDING TO THE COUNCIL AND TO
THE MAYOR THE HIRING OF A SPECIAL COUNSEL, IS THAT WHAT YOU
WOULD LIKE US TO DO, STRONGLY RECOMMEND?

MR. MOTO:  YES.  WE CAME BEFORE YOU BECAUSE WE
THOUGHT IT WAS IMPORTANT THAT YOU KNOW THE STATUS OF THESE
LEGAL MATTERS BECAUSE THEY WILL HAVE -- THEY COULD HAVE
SIGNIFICANT CONSEQUENCES FOR THE COUNTY OF MAUI AND THE
PEOPLE OF MAUI COUNTY.  AND WE ALSO CAME HERE BEFORE YOU
BECAUSE BY CHARTER AS INTERPRETED BY THE HAWAII SUPREME
COURT, THE COUNCIL MUST APPROVE OF THE RETENTION OF ANY
SPECIAL COUNSEL, OF ANY OUTSIDE COUNSEL THAT WORKS FOR THE
COUNTY.  THE CHARTER ALSO SAYS THAT YOU SHOULD BE CONSULTED
AND ADVISED ABOUT SIGNIFICANT MATTERS RELATING TO OTHER
MATTERS.

SO WE'RE DOING THIS IN STEPS.  WE HAVEN'T GONE TO
COUNCIL YET ON THE ISSUE OF OUTSIDE COUNSEL, BUT WE
CERTAINLY INTEND TO.  BUT BEFORE WE DID THAT, WE WANTED TO
COME TO YOU AT A MEETING FIRST TO GIVE YOU THIS OPPORTUNITY
TO LEARN WHAT'S HAPPENING, AND TO SEE IF YOU WOULD SUPPORT
THIS RECOMMENDATION TO OBTAIN OUTSIDE COUNSEL.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  OKAY, THANK YOU, BRIAN.  THEN
I WILL OPEN THE FLOOR TO A MOTION TO SUPPORT AND REQUEST
VERY VIGOROUSLY THAT SPECIAL COUNSEL BE BROUGHT IN FOR THESE
MATTERS TO ASSIST THE CORPORATION COUNSEL ON ALL THESE WATER
ISSUES.  SO IF SOMEBODY WOULD KIND OF PUT IT IN WORDS.  I
DON'T WANT TO BE THE ONE TO MAKE THE MOTION.  LEE?

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  MAY I ASK ONE QUESTION?  I
HAVE ONE QUESTION FIRST.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  SURE, SURE.

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  THAT IS THAT CLEARLY THERE
IS A LAW FIRM THAT HAS THE TYPE OF EXPERTISE THAT YOU ARE
LOOKING FOR.

MR. MOTO:  MR. CHAIRMAN, YES, UNDER THE STATE
PROCUREMENT LAW WE ARE REQUIRED TO FOLLOW VARIOUS PROCEDURES
TO OBTAIN THE SERVICES OF A PROFESSIONAL, INCLUDING
PROFESSIONAL LEGAL SERVICES, AND WE HAVE DONE THAT.  AND THE
PERSON THAT WE HAVE SELECTED AND WHOSE NAME WE WILL PUT
FORWARD FOR RECOMMENDATION IS PROFESSOR JOHN VAN DYKE.
PROFESSOR VAN DYKE IS A PROFESSOR AT THE UNIVERSITY OF
HAWAII LAW SCHOOL.  HE'S TAUGHT THERE FOR MANY YEARS.  HE IS
QUITE EXPERT ON HAWAII LAW, HAWAII WATER LAW, AND
CONSTITUTIONAL MATTERS, AND HE'S REPRESENTED THE COUNTY OF
MAUI BEFORE ON OTHER LEGAL MATTERS AND HAS ALWAYS PERFORMED
SATISFACTORILY.  ONE OF HIS FORMER CLIENTS INCLUDES THE
COUNTY COUNCIL.

SO WE BELIEVE THAT BASED UPON HIS QUALIFICATIONS
AND EDUCATION AND EXPERIENCE THAT HE'S MORE THAN QUALIFIED
TO ASSIST US IN THESE MATTERS.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  AND LET ME ADD TO THAT THAT
I'VE HAD A FEW OCCASIONS TO DISCUSS AND SIT DOWN AT SOME
WATER MEETINGS WITH THE PROFESSOR, AND I THINK I'VE ALWAYS
ENJOYED HIM, AND HE'S VERY COMPREHENSIVE, AND I THINK HE
WILL DO A GOOD JOB FOR US.  SO I WOULD PUT MY PERSONAL
FEELINGS IS THAT, YES, THIS IS A GOOD SELECTION ON YOUR
PART, BRIAN.  SO AGAIN, I OPEN THE FLOOR FOR A MOTION.
MICHAEL?

BOARD MEMBER HOWDEN:  I WOULD MOVE THAT WE ACCEPT
THE CORPORATION COUNSEL'S REQUEST AND SUPPORT THEIR DESIRE
TO HIRE SPECIAL COUNSEL TO REPRESENT THE COUNTY.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  DO I HEAR A SECOND?

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  I'LL SECOND.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED.  ANY DISCUSSION?

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:  I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT,
BECAUSE THE SOURCES OF WATER FOR THE CENTRAL MAUI AREA IS
SORT OF GETTING LOW NOW, AND IT'S GETTING LESS, AND IT'S
IMPORTANT TO FIND NEW SOURCES.  AND THE POTENTIAL FOR
SOURCES FROM THESE STREAMS ARE GOOD RIGHT NOW, FOR SURFACE
WATER ARE GREATER THAN THE AMOUNT THAN WE'RE GETTING NOW.
OR ARE THERE ANY PLANS TO GET MORE LIKE SOURCES OF SURFACE
WATER FROM SOME OF THESE STREAMS?

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  I THINK THAT'S NOT AN
APPROPRIATE QUESTION ONLY BECAUSE WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO
DISCUSS IS THE SUPPORT OF THAT, AND I THINK SOME OF THIS
WILL ALL COME OUT IN WHAT THEY'RE PLANNING TO DO.  I THINK
TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION IN A SIMPLE MANNER, WHEN ALL THIS IS
SAID AND DONE, I THINK THE PEOPLE OF THE COUNTY OF MAUI WILL
BE BEST SERVED IN ALL OF THIS.

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:  BECAUSE WATER IS IMPORTANT
TO THE CENTRAL MAUI DISTRICT RIGHT NOW.  BECAUSE EARLIER I
WAS GOING TO ASK THE QUESTION, BUT I WAS GOING TO TRY TO
SQUEEZE IT IN, BUT I'LL ASK IT LATER.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  SINCE THERE IS NO OTHER
DISCUSSION, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY "AYE."

(A CHORUS OF AYES)

OPPOSED?

(NONE)

WE WILL DRAFT A LETTER NOW AND MAKE SURE THAT
LETTER IS FORWARDED TO THE COUNTY COUNCIL.  THANK YOU,
BRIAN.  APPRECIATE YOU FOLKS BEING HERE.

MR. MOTO:  THANK YOU.

MISS LOVELL:  NICE TO MEET YOU.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  NOW, I GUESS IF WE'RE OKAY
WITH THIS, LET'S GO BACK TO THE ORDER, WHICH I'VE BEEN OUT
OF ORDER ALL DAY, SO I APOLOGIZE.  LET US GO BACK.  WE'VE
DISCUSSED 06-05, AND 06-06 HAS BEEN DEFERRED.  SO WE WILL
MOVE DOWN TO DIRECTOR'S REPORT 06-02, FISCAL YEAR 2006
WRITE-OFFS.  AND THOSE ARE ON PAGES 130 TO 132.

GEORGE, WHO WILL TAKE THIS DISCUSSION?  MISS
HOLLY.  MISS PERDIDO, GO AHEAD.

MS. PERDIDO:  GOOD MORNING.  ALMOST AFTERNOON.
THIS IS A STANDARD WRITE-OFF THAT WE EVERY YEAR BRING BEFORE
THE BOARD, AND WE'RE JUST RECOMMENDING WRITING OFF FOR THIS
YEAR IT WOULD BE $11,481.  WE DO WRITE IT OFF, BUT WE DO
SEND IT TO COLLECTION, SO IT'S CONTINUED TO BE PURSUED.  AND
ONCE THIS IS WRITTEN OFF, IF IT IS PURSUED AND WE DO GET THE
MONIES, THEN WE PUT IT BACK IN.  IT'S A VERY LOW PERCENTAGE
OF OUR TOTAL ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE.  IT'S LESS THAN ONE
PERCENT.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  FOR THE THREE NEW MEMBERS,
JUST A QUICK OVERVIEW.  EACH AND EVERY YEAR THE DEPARTMENT
COMES TO US AND BRINGS US LIKE THIS LIST THAT YOU SEE IN
FRONT OF YOU OF THOSE UNCOLLECTABLE BILLS, OKAY.  THERE ARE
MANY REASONS, AND WE CAN GET INTO A LONG DISCUSSION, BUT
MOST OF THE REASONS ARE EITHER THE PEOPLE HAVE MOVED ON,
SOLD LAND, THE METER WAS LEAKING AND THEY DISAGREED THAT
THEY OWE THE MONEY, CONTESTED OR WHATEVER.  THERE'S A WHOLE
BUNCH OF OTHER REASONS THAT EXIST.  SO THEY BRING IT SO THEY
CAN WRITE IT OFF AND MOVE ON.

AND HOLLY, IF YOU WOULD, ONCE YOU WRITE THIS OFF,
LET'S SAY OVER THE NEXT TWO YEARS IS THERE KIND OF LIKE A
PERCENTAGE THAT MAY, THROUGH COLLECTION, BE COLLECTED BACK,
DO YOU HAVE ANY KIND OF IDEA.

MS. PERDIDO:  IT'S REALLY LOW.  I MEAN I WOULD SAY
OUT OF THIS 11,000, MAYBE A THOUSAND DOLLARS.  SO IT'S NOT
THAT MUCH THAT WE DO.  BUT THEY DO CONTINUE TO PURSUE IT
UNTIL THEY DEEM IT IS UNCOLLECTABLE.  OUT OF THIS THERE'S A
CERTAIN PERCENTAGE, $1,900 IS BANKRUPTCY, AND WE DO HAVE
THAT PROBLEM ON A FEW.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  GO AHEAD, LEE.

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  THE ONLY QUESTION I HAD
IS, IF THIS IS DONE EVERY YEAR, HOW COME THERE ARE SOME THAT
DATE BACK TO 1998?

MS. PERDIDO:  WE KEEP THEM ON OUR BOOKS AND WE TRY
TO COLLECT THEM FIRST.  AND THEN ONCE WE HAVE NO -- THE
COLLECTION AGENCIES SEND THEM BACK AND SAY, "WE CANNOT
COLLECT THEM," THEN WE BRING IT TO THE BOARD.  BUT WE STILL
DO GET SOME PAYMENTS AFTER THIS TIME.

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  SO THERE'S A FEW OF THEM
THAT JUST LINGER FOR QUITE SOME TIME, BUT THEY STAY ON YOUR
BOOKS AS ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE.

MS. PERDIDO:  THEY STAY ON OUR BOOKS UNTIL WE
FINALLY WRITE THEM OFF.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  KEN?

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:  SO THIS IS PRESENTED FOR US
FOR INFORMATION, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE CANNOT ACT TO WRITE IT
OFF, RIGHT?  SO YOU'RE JUST PRESENTING IT FOR INFORMATION,
OR WE WOULD RECOMMEND TO SOMEBODY THAT THEY WRITE IT OFF, OR
WHAT WOULD WE DO?

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  GEORGE, WOULD YOU LIKE TO
ANSWER THAT?

DIRECTOR TENGAN:   MR. CHAIR, I WOULD SAY THAT
THIS ITEM HERE IS TO SERVE TWO PURPOSES.   ONE IS TO PROVIDE
INFORMATION TO THE BOARD, AND THE OTHER WOULD BE TO OBTAIN
THE CONCURRENCE OF THE BOARD THAT THESE ACCOUNTS WOULD BE
WRITTEN OFF.

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:   I SO MOVE.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  WAIT, HANG ON.  MISS PARSONS,
YOU HAD A QUESTION?

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  I WAS JUST LOOKING.
MARRIOTT GROUP, WHY WOULDN'T YOU COLLECT IT?  I WAS JUST
CURIOUS, WHEN IT'S A MAJOR COMPANY LIKE THAT.

BOARD MEMBER HOWDEN:  WHEN PEOPLE DON'T PAY THEIR
BILLS ARE THEIR WATER METERS SHUT OFF?

MS. PERDIDO:  WE DO SHUT THEIR WATER METERS OFF.
A LOT OF THESE HAPPEN PRIOR TO WHEN WE WERE COLLECTING
DEPOSITS, BUT WE COLLECT A SMALL DEPOSIT, AND THEN AFTER ONE
YEAR THE DEPOSIT IS REFUNDED TO THE INDIVIDUAL.  BUT A LOT
OF TIMES AFTER -- NOW IT'S AFTER 90 DAYS, WHICH IS LIKE
BEFORE THE SECOND BILLING COMES OUT, WE GO OUT AND LOCK
METERS.  AND SOMETIMES THE TIME PERIOD CHANGES.  IT DEPENDS
ON SITUATIONS.

BUT WE LOCK METERS, AND ONCE WE LOCK METERS TO ASK
TO REOPEN THEY HAVE TO PAY THEIR BILL.  BUT THERE'S A FEW
THAT STILL HAPPEN THAT DO NOT GET LOCKED, OR THEY GET LOCKED
AND THEN THEY DON'T PAY.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  WHEN SOMEBODY SELLS A HOUSE
AND THEY GET LOCKED, DOES THE NEW OWNER HAVE TO PAY IT TO
GET IT UNLOCKED?

BOARD MEMBER LESTER:  ESCROW WOULD USUALLY TAKE
CARE OF THAT.

MS. PERDIDO:  UNFORTUNATELY, THAT'S A PROBLEM.
FOR NEW OWNERS, WE CAN'T HOLD THE NEW OWNERS RESPONSIBLE FOR
PRIOR BILLS, AND IT WOULD BE NICE.  WE DO HAVE SOME REALTORS
WHO CALL US AND GET IT ALL CLEARED UP.  BUT POSSIBLY SOME OF
THESE ARE PAST SOLD PROPERTIES THAT HAVE NOT PAID THE
BALANCE FROM THE CLOSING BILL AND HAVE MOVED ON.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  SO DURING ESCROW.  WE HAVE
ALL THESE PARTICULAR EXPERTS IN MANY AREAS.  WHEN YOU DO AN
ESCROW AND TITLE SEARCH, IS SOME OF THESE THINGS PART OF
THAT TITLE SEARCH?

BOARD MEMBER LESTER:  YES, THEY ARE, IF THERE'S A
LIEN.  BUT A LOT OF TIMES PEOPLE CHANGE NAMES, AND WE WILL
FIND IT THERE, AND THAT'S WHEN WE USUALLY LET ESCROW KNOW.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  SO SHOULD WE BE PUTTING IT
SO THEY CAN FIND IT IN A TITLE SEARCH NOW, BECAUSE THERE'S
SO MUCH REAL ESTATE TURNING OVER?  AFTER A CERTAIN PERIOD OF
TIME SHOULD YOU LOOK AT MAYBE FILING?

BOARD MEMBER LESTER:  IT WOULD MAKE TOO MUCH WORK
FOR THE AMOUNTS THAT ARE SHOWING.

MR. KUSHI:  IF MAUI ELECTRIC DOES IT, THEN WE CAN
DO IT.  I DON'T THINK THEY DO IT.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  JUST A NICE RECOMMENDATION.
BUT I HAVE TO AGREE WITH KUI, THAT IT STARTS TO BECOME TOO
MUCH COST BEARING, IF YOU ARE TALKING $125.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  SOME OF THESE ARE 8 AND 9.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  BUT SOME OF THESE HAVE FILED
BANKRUPTCY, SO THAT'S AGAIN ANOTHER ISSUE.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  MAYBE OVER A CERTAIN AMOUNT
YOU LOOK AT DOING THAT.  THERE'S SO MUCH REAL ESTATE BEING
SOLD, IT'S TOO BAD SOMEBODY CAN WALK AWAY.

MS. PERDIDO:  IF I AM NOT MISTAKEN, A FEW YEARS
AGO A LETTER WAS SENT TO THE REALTORS ASKING THEM TO TRY TO
GET REALTORS TO WORK WITH US.  MAYBE WE CAN PURSUE THAT
AGAIN.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  THAT'S A GOOD IDEA, HOLLY.

MS. PERDIDO:  AT LEAST THE TITLE COMPANIES.  THAT
WAY THEY NOTIFY US WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE.  YOU CAN SAY, "DO
THAT ON YOUR LIST OF DOCUMENTS THAT NEEDS TO BE CHECKED."

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  LET'S LOOK INTO THAT.  AND
MAYBE IF YOU CAN COME BACK AT THE NEXT MEETING AND SEE WHAT
YOU HAVE COME UP WITH.  NOT THAT YOU HAVE NOTHING ELSE TO
DO, I KNOW THAT.  I APOLOGIZE.

OKAY, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?  I WILL ENTERTAIN A
MOTION THAT WE ACCEPT THE REPORT.  GO AHEAD, MR. OKAMURA.

BOARD MEMBER OKAMURA:   I MOVE THAT WE RECOMMEND
THAT THE DEPARTMENT WRITE OFF THESE ACCOUNTS.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  THE $11,000, WHATEVER THE
AMOUNT IS.  $11,481.58.  DO I HEAR A SECOND?

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  SECOND.

HEARINGS OFFICER:   IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND
SECONDED.  ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY "AYE."

(A CHORUS OF AYES)

OPPOSED?

(NONE)

OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

MOVING RIGHT ALONG, DIRECTOR'S REPORT 06-03, WATER
TEST RESULTS FOR UPCOUNTRY AND HANA WATER SYSTEMS.  THEY
WILL BE FOUND ON PAGES 133 AND 134.  I THINK THAT'S A
SEPARATE ATTACHMENT AGAIN, BUT THAT'S THE NUMBERS I WAS
GIVEN.  AND WHO WILL SPEAK ON THAT?

DIRECTOR TENGAN:   MR. CHAIR, WE HAVE JOE MENDONCA
AND CARI SUMABAT.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  WE HAVE THE REPORT IN FRONT
OF US.  AND JOE AND CARI, BETWEEN THE TWO OF YOU, WHOEVER
WANTS TO ENLIGHTEN US ON THIS REPORT.

MR. MENDONCA:  MY NAME IS JOE MENDONCA.  HELLO
EVERYONE.  I GUESS THIS IS A CONTINUATION FROM LAST MONTH'S
REPORT.  I DON'T HAVE LAST MONTH'S REPORT IN FRONT OF ME
RIGHT NOW.  THIS DATA HERE WOULD BE THE THM DATA AND THE
HA-5 DATA.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  DISINFECTION BY-PRODUCTS.

MR. MENDONCA:  DISINFECTION BY-PRODUCTS FOR
SURFACE WATER.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  MAYBE BEFORE YOU START, JOE,
A REAL QUICK OVERVIEW.  WHAT DOES THIS MEAN?  BECAUSE,
AGAIN, WE HAVE THREE NEW BOARD MEMBERS THAT RIGHT NOW YOU
JUST THREW IN ALL THOSE TERMS.  SO A REAL QUICK OVERVIEW,
WHAT DOES THIS MEAN TO US AND TO THE PUBLIC AND TO THE
DEPARTMENT, A REAL QUICK OVERVIEW.

MR. MENDONCA:  WHAT HAPPENS IS WHEN YOU ADD
CHLORINE TO A SURFACE WATER SYSTEM YOU PRODUCE CERTAIN
BY-PRODUCTS, AND TWO GROUPS OF BY-PRODUCTS THAT WE'RE
LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW ARE THE THM'S, WHICH IS THE
TRIHALOMETHANES, AND THE HAA5'S, WHICH ARE HALOACETIC ACIDS.
BOTH GROUPS HAVE MAXIMUM CONTAMINANT LEVELS.  THE THM'S
WOULD HAVE MAXIMUM CONTAMINANT LEVELS OF 80 PARTS PER
BILLION.  THE HAA5'S WOULD HAVE MCL LEVELS OF 60 PARTS PER
BILLION.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  AND WHAT AFFECT, AGAIN,
BECAUSE WE HAVE NEW MEMBERS, WHAT AFFECT DO THESE HAVE ON
THE DRINKING WATER AND THE PERSON WHO IS CONSUMING THE
WATER?  WHAT WOULD BE AN OVERVIEW OF WHAT AFFECTS WOULD THAT
HAVE ON US IF THESE LEVELS WERE EXTREMELY HIGH?

MR. MENDONCA:  IT WOULD BE A CHRONIC PROBLEM, AND
WE WOULD HAVE SOME ADVERSE EFFECTS ON CANCEROUS REPRODUCTION
ISSUES, MISCARRIAGES.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  ARE WE CLEAR WITH THAT,
LADIES AND GENTLEMEN?  OKAY, GO AHEAD, CONTINUE.  I'M SORRY,
I DIDN'T MEAN TO PUT YOU ON THE SPOT, JOE.

MR. MENDONCA:  THAT'S OKAY.  WHAT WE HAVE HERE, WE
HAVE THE MAKAWAO RESULTS AND WE HAVE THE UPPER KULA SYSTEM
RESULTS, AND HANA DISTRICT, MAKAWAO, LOWER KULA.  AND THE
UPPER KULA WOULD BE -- THE 247 WOULD BE THE LOWER KULA,
SYSTEM.  15 WOULD BE THE UPPER KULA SYSTEM.

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  CAN I ASK A QUESTION?

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  SURE.

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  FOR COMPLIANCE FOR 247,
ARE THESE THE INDIVIDUAL QUARTERLY SAMPLE RESULTS, NOT THE
RUNNING QUARTERLY?

MR. MENDONCA:  YES, THOSE ARE THE INDIVIDUAL
REPORTS.  SO WHAT HAPPENS IS EACH ONE OF THESE LOCATIONS ARE
AVERAGED, AND THEN THEY'RE AVERAGED AGAIN ANNUALLY.

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  RIGHT.  AND THEN YOU DROP
THE OLDEST ONE AND ADD THE NEWEST QUARTERLY SAMPLE?  IT
LOOKS LIKE IT'S SLIGHTLY OVER 80 IF YOU AVERAGE ALL OF THOSE
80.1'S TO BE EXACT.

MR. MENDONCA:  WE COULD HAVE OVER 80, BUT IF YOU
WENT ON AN ANNUAL BASIS THEN YOU WOULD BE LOWER THAN 80.

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  YOU WOULD BE LOWER.  IT'S
VERY CLOSE.

MR. MENDONCA:  IT'S VERY CLOSE.

BOARD MEMBER ALDRIDGE:  SO IT WOULD BE A PROBLEM
IN STAGE TWO DISINFECTION BY-PRODUCTS WHEN YOU START DOING A
LOCATIONAL RUNNING AVERAGE?

MR. MENDONCA:  EXACTLY.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  JOE, A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.
WHEN WE HAD THE HAA5 NOTIFICATION, WAS THAT FROM 2004?
REMEMBER WHEN WE WENT BACK TO THE CHLORAMINES, WERE THE HIGH
HAA5'S IN 2004 AND NOT IN 2003?  BECAUSE WE DIDN'T CHANGE
BACK TO CHLORAMINES UNTIL 2005 FEBRUARY.  SO IT WASN'T
JANUARY, IT WAS LIKE BEFORE THAT, CORRECT, BECAUSE IT'S NOT
SHOWING UP IN HERE.

MR. MENDONCA:  NO, IT IS NOT SHOWING UP.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  AND THAT UPPER SYSTEM WHERE
E WENT BACK TO CHLORAMINES ON, AS I'M LOOKING AT THIS IN
2005, IS THIS IN CHLORAMINES AND WE'RE STILL UP THIS HIGH?

MR. MENDONCA:  WELL, THE 215 WE'RE ON CHLORAMINES,
AND IT'S PRETTY LOW, ACTUALLY.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  THE SECOND QUARTER IS 4 AND
WE'RE ON CHLORAMINES, RIGHT?  FEBRUARY OF '05 WE WENT BACK
TO CHLORAMINES.  SO ON THE SECOND QUARTER WE'RE GOING UP,
AND ON THE THIRD QUARTER WE'RE GOING UP, AND ON THE THM'S.
AND WE'RE UP ON THE FOURTH QUARTER AS WELL IN A COUPLE OF
SPOTS ON CHLORAMINES.  NOW, I DON'T UNDERSTAND IT AS WELL AS
YOU DO, BUT I KNOW WITH FREE CHLORINE WHEN WE MIX IT IN AND
WE'RE HIGH.  WHEN WE GO TO CHLORAMINES AND WE'RE MIXING,
WHAT DOES THAT MEAN WHEN IT GOES HIGH?

MR. MENDONCA:  WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE 215?

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  I'M LOOKING AT THE THM'S IN
THE 247 RANGE.

MR. MENDONCA:  OKAY, 247 IS A CHLORINE SYSTEM.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  THAT IS A CHLORINE SYSTEM.
I THOUGHT YOU SAID THAT 247 WAS THE UPPER KULA.  215, OKAY.

CHAIRMAN VICTORINO:  HE DID SAY THAT.  HE
CLARIFIED THAT.

MR. MENDONCA:  SINCE WE'RE ON CHLORAMINES, I MEAN
WE HAVE PRETTY GOOD NUMBERS.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS:  SO WHAT ARE WE DOING THEN?
WHAT DID WE DO TO BRING THESE DOWN IN THE LOWER SYSTEM, AND
WHY DO YOU THINK -- BECAUSE I NEED WE'VE GOT A LOT OF
IN-HOUSE PROBLEMS ON NAALAE, AND WE HAD SOME REALLY HIGH, WE
HAD LIKE 9400 CFU IN THE HOUSEHOLDS OVER THERE ON NAALAE.

AND I HAVE ANOTHER ONE, JUST YESTERDAY, THAT I WAS
OVER THERE THAT'S GOT SOME HIGH IN-HOUSE HPC.  SO WHY DO YOU
SUPPOSE THIS AREA IS SO HIGH?  WHY IS IT -- IN THE FREE
CHLORINE SYSTEM WE'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO HAVE SO MUCH PROBLEM,
RIGHT?

MR. MENDONCA:  NO, IT'S THE OPPOSITE.  IN A FREE
CHLORINE SYSTEM THAT'S WHERE WE HAVE THE PROBLEMS.

BOARD MEMBER PARSONS