Zoning & Planning - Regular Meeting

you

Aloha and good morning, everyone. It is Tuesday, June 23, 2026, and the time is 10.03 a.m. Will the Committee on Budget please come to order? Welcome to the committee members who are present in the chamber today. We'd like to welcome Committee Vice Chair Nishimoto, Council Members Cordero, Kia Aina, Tolva, Council Chair Waters, and also joining us, Council Member Tupoula. Although remote oral testimony is being permitted, this is a regular in-person meeting and not a remote meeting by Interactive Conference Technology under HRS section 92-3.7. Therefore, the meeting will continue not withstanding loss of audio-visual communication with remote testifiers or loss of the public broadcast of the meeting. Members of the public will be allowed to provide oral testimony on all items on the agenda in two ways, in person in the council chamber and remotely via video conference or phone. Remote and in person oral testimony will be allowed when each agenda item is taken up. Before testifying, each person shall state their name. Each speaker may not have anyone else read their statement and is limited to a one minute presentation on each item. As both English and Hawaiian are official languages of the state of Hawaii, pursuant to Article 15, Section 4 of the Hawaii State Constitution and Section 1-13 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes, members of the public may testify in either language. For oral testimonies offered in Ololo, Hawaii, additional time, as may be necessary, will be allowed for the testifier to provide an English translation of their testimony. All persons who have registered to testify in person will be called upon first. When your name is called, please come up to the testifier podium. Persons who have not registered will be given an opportunity to testify following the registered testifiers. After in-person testimony has concluded, I will proceed to remote testimony via video conference or phone. When I call your name, please monitor your screen and follow the prompt to unmute. For those who are joining us by telephone only, Please press star nine if you wish to testify, and I will identify you by the last three digits of your phone number. When your number is called, please listen for the prompt to unmute and press star six. Some friendly reminders and tips. Video conference from a quiet location if possible. If you are also watching the proceedings on Olelo, please mute your television at the time you are called to testify. When the timer on screen reaches zero, please conclude your remarks promptly. Written testimonies including the testifier's address, email address, and phone number will be available to the public as described on the posted agenda. As a courtesy, please turn off or silence all cell phones for the duration of this meeting. Members, moving on to agenda item number one for action, Bill 2020-25. This bill relates to funds. Members, we have posted to the agenda a proposed CD1 OCS 2026-0152-3-24-2026 at 2.27 p.m. submitted by Councilmember Tupola. For your information, the amendments are listed on the agenda. Members, we also have distributed a hand-carried proposed CD1 OCS 2026-0396-6-22-2026 at 2.47 p.m. submitted by Council Member Tupola. I will now defer to Council Member Tupola to explain her amendments.

Thank you so much and mahalo chair for hearing this bill. So there was a chart passed out to the members and I think instead of reading word for word all the changes I will summarize high level. So first off there is a small clarification on the purpose but it's still to provide loans to prospective homebuyers. The AMI Income limit is now at 140. We started at 120, went to 160. 140 is a more defensible amount of AMI for affordable housing. There also is a filing deadline and documentation required. It states that all loans must explicitly be supported by a mortgage. It allows and mandates that BFS have mandatory rulemaking for the administration of this, and it gives a sunset date. So those are kind of the summary of the amendments for the current version of the CD that was most recently dropped. And as we move through the hearing, I can answer more questions.

Thank you, Council Member Tupola. Before we call up the administration, we'll proceed first with in-person oral testimony in the Council Chamber. Clerks, do we have any in-person testifiers for this item? Chair, there are none. Thank you. Proceeding now with remote testimony. Clerks, do we have any remote testifiers for this item?

Chair, there are none.

Thank you. We'd like to welcome with us in the chamber today, the Director of Budget and Fiscal Services, Andy Kawano. Good morning, Director Kawano.

Good morning, Budget Chair Okimoto, Vice Chair Nishimoto, Chair Waters, Honorable Council Members, Andy Kawano, Director of Budget and Fiscal Services. I want to thank Council Member Tupola for reviewing at a high level the changes in the hand carry. With regard to this bill, We think we need to work with the introducers to further clarify the requirements of the administration. The bill's effective July 1st, 2026. And there really isn't any funding for it at this time. And the bill also, when I checked, I believe will file in February of 2027. We have some time. My suggestion is that we defer and work on this together. and figure out where we are going into 28 to see if there is funding for something like this. The budget for 27 is very constrained currently, and I think the timing's not the best for this. I totally understand what we're trying to achieve, and it is, I think, something that we should look at, but I think the provisions to execute it have to be discussed, especially if there's gonna be mandatory rulemaking. I think we need to understand the details better.

Okay, thank you, Director Kawano. Before we do call up Director Kirkey, members, do we have any questions for Director Kawano, Councilmember Tupoula?

Yeah, thank you so much, Director, for your thoughts. We did actually hear this bill months ago and we had sent out emails for interest from either your department or DCS on any edits and we received none. So we are still open to working together, but the comments and the different versions we're doing is because other people have given us feedback, people that are concerned if know dhhl lessees can participate as you know hhf dc already has a program like this we've been working with them to provide a program that kind of fills the gap so we've been moving forward with stakeholders of which unanimously there's 32 testimonies in support we know that it's needed as far as home ownership and that that can provide a lot of longevity for families in the county but we haven't received a lot of interaction from the administration so again moving forward still open to working together but you guys will need to respond to emails and give us more feedback because everyone is very interested in giving us feedback hence the reason why we've been moving through different drafts thank you thank you chair thank you councilmember may i comment on that our focus since uh the latter part of 25 has been the budget

And this year's budget has been challenging because of the fact that we have constrained the budget going in and we've had to work positively and sometimes not so positively with council changes that we'll deal with going forward. So that was a focus. We definitely can take a look at this bill, But the way it's currently written, and again, if we have to make rules to execute it properly and be able to administer it correctly, I think we need to have more discussion on the provisions. The other, and again, the other issue, the reason why I said I think it should be deferred until we have a better feel as to how 27 is shaping up and what 28 is gonna look like is the funding, the initial seed funding for this kind of program. I don't know where it's gonna come from.

Thank you, Director Kawano. Council Member Cordero. Thank you, Chair Okamoto. Director Kawano, when different programs that require funding, whether it be something like the Transit Construction Mitigation Fund, which was set up maybe about six years before we implemented any funding structure into the budget or future budgets, as well as any charter amendment changes, whether it be any requirements for setting aside funding for affordable housing and whatnot, a lot of them often set the structure up through bills first, right? And then we can,

figure out funding sources through other legislation and that's the council's role is that correct thank you council member thank you for the question that's not always correct because the transit construction mitigation fund of which i was very involved with our you know a couple of our staff to roll it out we had to implement quite quickly. The year that it passed, we had to implement it. And as you know, we made rules. We did the public hearing. There was almost no feedback. I think maybe one or two possible parties interested in the program testified.

But we set up the program prior to implementing or adding funding to the fund itself, correct? So in this sense, something as important as further loan assistance for those at a certain AMI, in this case, in the newest version, 140% AMI and below, is following that type of a structure. So we're hoping, and since this gives rulemaking to the administration, this hopefully allows for further, I guess, hands-on back and forth between council and administration as well as during admin's role making process.

I think I do agree with you that there definitely needs more hands-on working on the bill. And again, it's good that the 160 AMI got reduced to 140 because my understanding of AMI levels is that at 160 you're above market, right? And we're really not hitting the target. potential homeowner that we want to help. And again, with regard to this, I really believe that we're not as far along as we were with the Transit Construction Mitigation Fund. We did have to roll it out quickly. And I think that fund, that program itself was too restrictive. And if you look at the two years we've worked on it, We've gotten fewer and fewer applications. Perhaps as the rail moves closer to town, there's gonna be more. But if you look at where we are, the amount that we funded that program has decreased every year as well. So that's why we do this, let's do it right. So we impact as many people as we can within our financial constraints.

Thank you, Director. I do think we are able to pass out this program and program, sorry, bill as we move forward. And I do hope that we could look at the frameworks through rulemaking. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Council Member Cordero. Any further questions for the Director at this time? Okay, seeing no further questions. Thank you, Director Kawano. We also have with us from the Department of Community Services, Director Anton Crocky. Good morning, Director Crocky.

Good morning, Budget Chair Okamoto, Honorable Council Members, Anton Krucke, Director of the Department of Community Services. I concur with Director Kawano on deferring this and working on this some more. I do believe we've given testimony and such. If we've had lack of email interactions, then we'll need to pick that up, but I would like to work on this a bit more. There are Other programs in the community both with the ATH FDC and with the Department of Community Services So we want to see if we're tasked with administering this You know really understanding the rules and what it would take for us to be able to to do this for you know It's a population 140 is much better than 160 but you know we're talking generally about a population that doesn't qualify for loans or they would have been getting loans and at the market and that has its own implications for responsibility for the city. So I think those are heavy things that should be weighed and worked out. And so I would hopefully we can defer this and work on it some more.

Thank you, Director Krecke. Members, questions for the Director, Councilmember Tupoula.

Yeah, thank you so much. This bill was introduced in February 20th, 2025. So unfortunately, as far as more time to work on it, we've actually given more than a year and a half. I've emailed, I've asked your office, I've worked with HHFDC, I've worked with multiple stakeholders who all made the time to discuss it, give their thoughts. As you mentioned, HHFDC does have a program, so it's not like we're shooting in the dark here. We ask them the pros and cons, how they're rolling it out, what suggestions they have. We've met with other realtor groups asking what is the biggest barrier for home ownership which is always down payment. We have issues in my community with some of the different lawsuits going on and people not being able to get VA loans and so this is a huge help and I think that on the side of the city that it's something that we can do that's part of our goal of helping more locals own homes for generations to come. So I think moving forward, we're still open to more conversations, but please take a look at all the different versions. These versions have happened because of conversations going on with stakeholders who have responded to emails. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Council Member Tupoula.

Members, any further questions for Director Krahke? Seeing no further questions, members. Thank you, Director. Members, we are in discussion.

Council Member Topola followed by Chair Waters. I'll let Chair Waters go first, thank you. Chair Waters.

Thank you so much. No, I just wanted to thank the introducers for working hard on this. It's a great, great idea. People in Hawaii and Oahu especially need help to buy a home. It's super expensive and if the city can do a little bit more to help, I think we should. So thank you both for working hard on this and you got my 110% support.

Thank you, Chair Waters. Council Member Tupola. Yeah, I will say thank you to Council Member Cordero. Some of her points that were made are clear, which is that we are not allocating funds as of right now. We want to get the funds set up, how we fund it, what it will be funded at. And like Chair Waters said, whatever little bit we can help with, let's help. HHFDC does have a program, but will everyone qualify under theirs? Will everyone apply under theirs? Probably not. So I think on the city side, because we are so involved with affordable housing, this is a way for us to touch constituents directly that might need this help. There are so many people that pay just as much as they would have paying a mortgage but they could never get into a mortgage because that down payment is not something that's realistic. So thank you for hearing this bill and thank you everyone. I look forward to continuing to work with different stakeholders because we want to make it the best that it can be. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Tupola.

Members, any further discussion? Seeing no further discussion, I would like to agree. And I do appreciate the departments coming and expressing your concerns on making this bill the best that it can be. And we definitely, as a council, we've worked really hard. And I want to thank the co-introducers, Council Member Cordero and Tupola for all of their efforts. As was stated, I did notice also that this bill started February 20, 2025. So we are past, it's going to expire soon and we want to make sure that in the time that we have left of its duration that we don't lapse and have it sunshine. So I do encourage the departments to continue. It seems like Council Member Tupola and Cordero have worked really hard over the last almost a year and a half and this bill is still, it will go to, it's not, in its third reading stage yet, but there is time, so I would really encourage the departments to continue working with Council Member Tupola. This handout was very helpful. It gave updates, because as we can see, there's different versions that have come through the past year and a half. We're on version three, the latest CD1, and it does have a date, as was mentioned, the effective date will be July 1st, 2027, so we have given a little bit more time versus having it start this year. That being said, I will recommend that we proceed with this. So the Chair recommends that Bill 2020-25 be amended to the hand-carried CD1 identified as OCS 2026-0396 slash 6 slash 22 slash 2026 at 2.47 p.m. Any discussion, any objections, any reservations to the amended CD1, hand-carried CD1? Hearing none, the bill has been amended to a CD1. The chair then recommends that Bill 2025, CD1 be reported out for passage on third reading. Any discussion? Any objections? Any reservations? Hearing none, so ordered. Moving on to agenda item number two, Bill 78. 2025, this bill relates to parking. Members, we have posted to the agenda a proposed CD1 OCS 2026-0300-6-5-2026 at 1244 p.m. submitted by myself. For your information, the amendments are listed on the agenda. Before we call up the administration, we will proceed first with in-person oral testimony. Clerks, do we have any in-person testifiers for this bill? item.

Yes, Chair, we have one standing by.

In person, I do have on my list Mariah Yoshizu from Ulupono Initiative. If you could please come to the testifier podium, press the on-off button located at the base of the microphone, and begin by stating your name for the record.

Aloha Chair Okimoto and Council Members, Mariah Yoshizu on behalf of Ulupono Initiative. We strongly support Bill 78 as it creates a modern, data-driven parking management system that benefits all of Oahu's residents. We do, however, respectfully express concerns with the proposed CD1, which we believe alters the intent of the original bill's goals. Bill 78 is a thoughtfully designed approach that creates a simpler, more equitable system utilizing modern technology and data-driven decisions to serve our community's transportation needs, including reducing the general burden on taxpayers and ensuring that Oahu's limited land is used more effectively for housing, jobs, and schools rather than underutilized parking spaces. The amendments proposed in the CD1 would weaken these goals and limit the city's ability to deliver the same benefits to our communities. For these reasons, we respectfully ask the committee to advance Bill 78 in its original form. Thank you so much for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you. Members, do we have any questions for the testifier? Seeing none, clerks, do we have any further in-person testifiers? Anyone here in the chamber?

Chair, there are none.

Seeing none, we will not proceed with remote testimony. Clerks, do we have any remote testifiers for this item?

Chair, there are none.

Okay. Seeing no further testifiers, we would now like to welcome from the administration and the Department of Transportation Services Director Roger Morton. Good morning, Director Morton.

Good morning, Chair Okamoto, Vice Chair Nishimoto, members of the Budget Committee. My name is Roger Morton. I'm Director of Transportation Services. You know, we appreciate the committee's work on Bill 78 and its efforts to address stakeholder concerns. However, CD1 removed several key provisions that formed the foundation of the department's proposal, particularly those related to flexible parking pricing and tiered parking rates. As a result, the bill is significantly less effective as a parking management tool. Even if the measure advances to second reading, DTS would welcome the opportunity to work with the chair and the council members on a revised approach that better addresses the long-term needs of the city parking systems while addressing council concerns. Honolulu's municipal parking system is one of the jewels in our transportation network, supporting residents, visitors, businesses, and access to government services. over current parking fees do not generate sufficient revenue to fully cover the operating and maintenance costs of the city-wide program. And now the city also faces tens of millions of dollars in deferred maintenance across parking facilities, structures, equipment, and related infrastructure. Without a substantial, sustainable funding model, that backlog will continue to grow. Parking prices should be viewed as a management tool, not simply as a revenue source. Good parking policy supports customer access, business activity, parking turnover, and reduced congestion. Modern parking systems use demand-based pricing and occupancy management strategies to ensure parking is available when and where people need it. The city's current rate structure is largely fixed in ordinance and does not provide sufficient flexibility to respond to changing demand patterns Today a customer parking during peak demand time pays the same rate as one parking during less demand periods DTS believes a more flexible and proactive management system would improve customer access support local businesses and make more efficient use of limited parking resources Our path forward, we're not advocating for unreasonable rate increases, or for that matter, removing council oversight from the process. A reworked bill could provide DTS with greater operational flexibility while preserving the council's authority to establish rates. This approach would allow parking to be managed more effectively while maintaining appropriate legislative oversight and public accountability. We look forward to working collaboratively with the committee to develop a proposal that balances affordability, customer access, operational sustainability, and the long-term preservation of this important asset. In closing, the fundamental question is how we preserve and improve our parking system that residents rely upon every day. DTS remains committed to working with the Council to find the right balance between affordability, effective management, and financial sustainability. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Director Martin. Members, do we have any questions for DTS Director Martin? Seeing no further questions, thank you, Director. Members, we are in discussion. Council Member Kea-Aina?

No, no, I'm just gonna make some comments. Okay. Chair, I expressed concerns in the last hearing. I continue to have concerns despite your CD1 because all you did was you took out the on-street parking and I was worried about that because the easiest hypothetical is one of us going down to Chinatown going into any of the establishments there and overstaying more than two hours. And we're there three hours and come to find out that we have to pay $24 for street parking because it's up to $8 per hour that DTS would be allowed to increase the rate depending on demand. Or it could be going to a store and the restaurants. What your CD1 does is it still applies. You took out the street parking and you narrowly tailored it to garages. Well, I would say the same thing because I use that garage in Nu'uanu, on Nu'uanu Street in... uh in chinatown and so demanding and demand same thing would happen i go out how many people go go to a restaurant and their maximum is two hours right i'm just saying i would come back and be and then so that's all i'm just uh i i saw some of the testimony expressing concerns for working families and i just think that um there needs to be a better solution on how we try to find revenues for DTS to be able to allow reasonable rates for our taxpayers to be able to park on the street or go to any of the garages. I know for a fact that if this applied to parking lots that were not in garages like mine in Kailua, we would meet the 80% demand like that in the Cinnamon's parking lot, for example, right? It's a city parking lot. And the majority of people who go there are kupuna because of the doctor's buildings there and they take care of all of their appointments in the area. So I don't need them to be charged $8 per hour. The current rate is $4 per hour. So I just have grave concerns of this measure moving forward.

Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Kaya Aina. Members, any further discussion? Council Member Cordero.

Chair, I would like to hear more and have discussions moving forward. And I know that this bill is up for action and I was wondering if you're open to looking to allow for more time, whether it be talking to other stakeholders like Ulupono, but also looking at your proposal and working with DTS too. That's just my standpoint.

Thank you. I do appreciate the discussion. And you guys know consistently I have been one to try to find that balance of how can we make sure that we're not overburdening our residents, but also ensuring that we have the right resources to run our departments. I think this measure, and we did propose the CD1. I do appreciate the input. I am hearing input from both sides. And so it does concern me. I feel like we're not quite there yet. We know that all of us, including our constituents and ourselves, are faced with... the struggles with the economy right now. And so I do feel at this time that we're not quite there, Director Morton. I know that there are pros and cons. Again, I have been consistent about ensuring that we provide the right resources for our facilities and our resources for our city to run. But I do feel like this time it's not, I am inclined to to postpone this measure. Does anybody have, members, do you have any concerns with that at this time? I think Council Member Kitaino brought up really valid points, and so I hope that in further discussion, like Council Member Kitaino, Cordaro mentioned, that we can find some kind of balance to ensure that We have the department's needs, but we have to really consider, like Council Member Kiana mentioned, the needs of the constituents who are going to be using these facilities and will be overburdened if it goes through and we're not taking into account what happens after the hypothetical two hours that the residents will be using the parking facilities. So members, do we have any further discussion at this time? Seeing no further discussion, the Chair does recommend that action on Bill 78-2025 be postponed to a date and time to be determined by the Chair. Any discussion, any further discussion, any objections, any reservations? Hearing none, so ordered. Moving on to agenda item number three, Bill 29-2026. This bill relates to real property taxation. I do see Council Member Dos Santos-Tam who is the introducer of this measure. I think he is online. Aloha, good morning Council Member Dos Santos-Tam. I will now defer to you for further explanation.

Thank you. Bill 29 along with Bill 40, which is also on the agenda, both deal with the treatment of affordable housing projects in different ways. With regard to Bill 29, what it does is it helps to streamline some of the ongoing filing requirements for affordable housing projects to maintain their property tax breaks. These projects are regulated by regulatory agreements, either with the city or state, and in some cases with the federal government. And yet we as a city continue to ask for tons of paperwork in order for them to continue to qualify. And the thought was with this, we could help to streamline the process and also deal with some of the issues that a specific affordable housing project in Kaka'ako has dealt with in regard to their property tax treatment. So thanks for hearing this bill.

Thank you, Council Member Dos Santos-Tam. And just to verify, you spoke on both bills. Did you want me to give you time to get to the next one as well? We can. Yeah, I'll take some time on Bill 40 if possible. Sounds good. Before we call up the administration, we'll proceed first with in-person oral testimony in the Council Chamber. Clerks, do we have any in-person testifiers for this item? Chair, we have one standing by. Okay, thank you. If you could please come to the podium and state your name for the record and also press the on-off button.

Good morning. Thank you for allowing me to testify. My name is Yvonne Almeida. My husband and I helped our 25-year-old daughter purchase a home at Alana Ward Village Reserve Housing Program. She, like the rest of the 696 owners, are facing the same issues, high tax valuations, a slow appeals process, and not qualifying for the homeowner's exemption. Currently, in Res A category, her bill is $6,300, about $526 a month. That's a lot for a 25-year-old adult starting her life and wanting to stay in Hawaii. 453 out of 697, or 65% of the owners filed an appeal because of high property taxes. I currently support Bill 40 in its original format. I'm awaiting clarification to questions and concerns I have related to draft CD1 to the bill. As I read CD1 a few times and the proposed remission as opposed to the homeowner's exemption. If you could, I'm sorry, if you could, we're testifying on Bill 29 at this point.

Oh, okay, I'm sorry, I'm for 40. Okay, thank you. Anyone else here in person who would like to testify on Bill 29? Okay, seeing no further in-person testifiers, clerks, do we have any remote testifiers for this item?

Chair, there are none. Thank you.

Seeing no further testimony, we do have with us from the Department of Budget and Fiscal Services, Director Andy Kawano. Good morning, Director Kawano.

Good morning, Budget Chair Okimoto, Andy Kawano, Director of Budget and Fiscal Services for the record, again. With regard to our testimony on Bill 29, we submitted written testimony tagged as Department Communication 42126. We strongly oppose the bill. The crux of the matter is the fact that the bill would substitute the regulatory agreement with regard to satisfying low-income housing with mortgage documents, which essentially are financing documents The requirement of a regulatory agreement is a reasonable provision for obtaining 100% real property tax exemption for these projects. And some of them are larger. And the exemption can be significant amounts of taxes that are not collected on an annual basis. Our suggestion is that if the driver of the bill is a project or two, let us work with the project to see what we can do on a go-forward basis. We don't believe that this kind of change would be good for the program.

Thank you, Director Kawano. Questions for the director? Councilmember Dos Santos-Tam, I just want to make sure, did you have any questions for Director Kawano?

I don't. I understand where the department is coming from. I think it's important that we continue moving this bill forward so we can keep having these discussions. With regard to the regulatory agreement, this is what sets up the affordability. This is what sets up the ongoing compliance requirements. But to have this ongoing paperwork that needs to be avail themselves of this property tax relief seems to be quite burdensome. And so I'd like to be able to make sure that these projects can, simply based on their regulatory agreements, simply based on the fact that they continue to comply with this, be able to have these property tax benefits without having to continually for here. So I look forward to working with the department on this, as well as with the affected project. And I'm sure there are others out there that are affected or have encountered this in the past.

Okay. Thank you for your comments, Council Member Dos Santos-Tam. Members, any further questions for Director Kawano, Council Member Kia'aina?

Thank you. Director? You know, the RPT exemption is important and I just want to find out what are your recommendations for easier ways for people to be able to seek the RPT exemption instead of what is being proposed. Are there alternative ways to make it easier? Because I do have concerns all the way around for a lot of the exemptions, yeah? And I think our job should be to make it easier for people to file the exemptions. So what are your recommendations instead of what is being recommended here?

So Councilmember, I just want to, If you're talking about the owner of a project specifically, the projects, from what I've seen, could have 200 units, 300 units, 500 units. And some of the amount of taxes that are not collected because of the exemption by project can be $300,000, $400,000, and more than that a year. So it's big dollars. The regulatory agreement is not a complicated agreement. I don't understand why quote unquote so much paperwork because it's not that much considering the benefit that the owner of the project receives if they qualify for the exemption that we're talking about.

Okay, so in your view this is one of the easier ways and to try to find an alternative easier way is quite complicated given that all the projects are different, yeah?

Yeah, and keep in mind that when you talk about 200 units, you're filing one, the owner of the project or property manager is filing one document for the project as defined by ordinance. So all of these renters, a lot of them at affordable rental rates benefit.

Okay, thank you for your clarification.

Thank you, Council Member Kiyaini. Members, any further questions for the director? Seeing no further questions, members, we are in discussion. Council Member Cordero.

Thank you, Chair. I understand both sides. I do think that it is a discussion worth having. I know the first committee that we're hearing it in, I do look forward to hopefully having more of the stakeholders come, whether it be at Council, but also maybe at another committee. So I'm at the perspective that we can continue the conversation and moving it forward. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Cordero.

Members, any further discussion? Okay, seeing no further discussion, I do appreciate again the input and testimony from the department. I do think that we can continue the conversation. I will be at this time recommending that Bill 29-2026 be reported out for a second reading and scheduling of a public hearing. Any discussion, any objections, any reservations? Hearing none, so ordered. Members, moving on to agenda item number four, Bill 40-2026. This bill relates to real property taxation. Members, we have posted to the agenda a proposed CD1-OCS-2026-0384-6-16-2026 at 9.03 a.m., submitted by Councilmember Dos Santos-Tam. For your information, the amendments are listed on the agenda. I will once again now defer to the introducer of the bill, Councilmember Dos Santos-Tam for further explanation on this bill and his amendments.

Thank you much, Chair Okimoto. Again, this, similar to Bill 29, deals with the property tax treatment of affordable housing projects. One specific affordable housing project that opened up in Kaka'ako recently, which is Ulana. You're going to hear from a number of the residents and buyers there. It's an owner-occupied building, and through no fault of their own, They opened up their property tax bills for this year and had enormous sticker shock because they got their keys after the deadline to file for the owner-occupied exemption. By the state law and the regulatory agreement, every single unit is supposed to be an owner-occupied unit. And so they should... not have had the sticker shock and should have been able to avail themselves of the same owner occupant benefits that everybody else gets. As a result of not being considered as owner occupants for this year, they got the additional sticker shock of being pushed into the residential A category, which for many people created a huge, huge tax burden. what the proposed city one does, and it's not perfect. I think we can continue to work on the specifics here. It would create a process to remit the difference back to these owner occupants who are just trying to get by and get started with their lives with a young professional or a family trying to downsize from perhaps a larger house somewhere else. These are the kinds of things that we need to be doing to deal with these affordable housing situations as they come up and also really respond to the needs of people who are just trying to get by and make it in these affordable housing units here in town.

Thank you, Council Member DeSantis. Tam. Members, before we call up the administration, we'll first proceed with in-person oral testimony in the council chamber. And I believe we do have with us again, this is the correct one for the testifier, Ms. Yvonne Almeida. If you could once again come up to the podium, push the on-off button, and state your name for the record.

Hello? Hi, I'm Yvonne Almeida again. Sorry about before. Again, I won't repeat what I said earlier. I think you know the situation of the folks at Ulana. But as it pertains to CD 1 of Bill 40, I read through that and I sent some questions on awaiting clarification. But the way I understand CD 1 to Bill 40, is that the proposed remission, as opposed to the homeowners exemption, will not provide any tax relief for the current tax year when it's most needed. Under item F, when a tax remission may be made, a tax remission under this section may be made only after the real property taxes for the first year have been paid in full. So If I understand that, we pay this year's extremely high property taxes. Next year we file for the remission and we get the remission next year. As I understand this, this means the high 2026, 27 tax liabilities must be paid and relief will not come. The other issue is an eligibility list. As proposed, we'll add additional administrative complexity by requiring a current non-dedicated entity to provide the eligibility list by a specific date. Much of that required documentation should have already been collected and maintained by either the developer itself, the city or state agency responsible for overseeing the respective housing program.

Thank you very much, and just for the record, so are you in support, in opposition, or just in comments?

I am in support of Bill 440 and its original submission, but I am not in support of CD1. Thank you. Members, do we have any questions for the testifier?

Seeing no questions for this testifier, is there anyone else here in person who would like to testify on this measure? Seeing none, proceeding now with remote testimony, clerks, do we have any remote testifiers for this item? Yes, Chair, we have one standing by. Okay, I have on my list Christine Otozaa. Christine, if you could unmute and just state your name for the record and you can proceed with your testimony.

Good morning, council members. My name is Christine Otozaa. I strongly support

Excuse me, I'm getting a notice popping up on my phone, sorry.

I strongly support Bill 40. The issue is personal to me. My son, his fiance and their baby recently purchased an affordable housing unit at Ulana. So I've had the opportunity to see this situation up close. Unlike many developments that mix affordable and market rate units, Ulana consists entirely of owner occupied affordable housing units that allowed the project to be designed for affordability from the finishes that were selected to the decision not to include a swimming pool. The goal is to keep both purchase prices and ongoing costs manageable for local families. Although these also these affordable housing programs are negotiated, years in advance with the involvement of both the state and the city. From the beginning, everyone understood that the units would be 100% owner occupied, so there are no surprises for the city. Bill 40 acknowledges that, and it helps ensure the program works as intended. To qualify for affordable housing, there are income and asset limits. Many buyers rely on help from family just to make home ownership possible. My son and his fiancee paid a substantial down payment, closing costs, three months of maintenance fees, and the cost of furnishing their first home. Like many first-time homebuyers, they budgeted carefully and relied on the information provided during the application process. In the ULANA application materials, their unit was listed with an appraised value of approximately $691,000.

Ms. Adelzada, if you could wrap up your testimony just so we could be respectful of everyone's allotted time.

The estimated annual property taxes was $2,100. What no one anticipated was an assessment of $1.3 million in taxation at Resi, which resulted in a tax bill of nearly $7,500 versus in the 2000 range.

Thank you very much. So you're in support? Yes, thank you. Okay, thank you very much. Members, do we have any questions for this testifier? Thank you for being with us online and for your testimony. Okay, next I have with us Jocelyn Doan, registered online. Is that testifier? Testifier is not logged on. Not logged on, okay. Are there any other remote testifiers who would like to testify on Bill 40 at this time? Seeing no further testimonies, we'd like to welcome back with us in the chamber, Director Kawano from the Department of Budget and Fiscal Services.

For the record, Andy Kawano, Director of Budget and Fiscal Services. Again, with regard to Bill 40, we've submitted our department communication making comments about Bill 40, Department Communication 42226. Essentially, the CD1 that includes the remission would, you know, if the homeowner qualifies, provide a payment back, a refund of taxes paid that is the taxes paid as a residential A class homeowner versus residential. So essentially, the remission would get the homeowner back to residential in terms of the classification. We feel that it's the most efficient way to make things right. We recommend that all homeowners ensure that they go into the real property tax assessment platform to register for their home exemption going forward. They should do that, especially if they qualify. With regard to situations that happened like Ulana in the future where you have initial sales closing right after the September 30 deadline for the exemption, this bill would also address those situations going forward. So there's future benefit as well. You know, we're going to continue to work with Councilmember Dos Santos-Telma, as he mentioned, to continue to improve the bill as we go through the readings. And we think something like this makes sense.

Thank you, Director Kawano. Members, questions for the director, Council Member Keeya Aina.

Thank you, Director. I actually had a series of questions relating to the residential and property assessments, but I don't know if it's moot. Are you in support of Bill 40 and the CD1?

Yes, yes, I should have stated it in my testimony. Definitely, we're gonna work with Council Member Dos Santos Town to continue to make it better.

Okay, with regard to the remission, the CD1, then maybe you can explain it to me. Is it addressing the concerns by homeowners about the property assessments and the valuations, or do I need to go through my line of questions here?

It materially addresses the concern of the homeowners because... Based on the valuations that they're questioning, correct? And the classification. So it'll bring them back to residential from Res A. Also, it gives them a year to apply for their exemption so that going forward... they not only remain in residential, but if they qualify, they'll have their home exemption as well.

Okay, so I don't need to go through this line of questionings with regard to your comparables on how you came to the assessments because it is being remedied, is that correct?

That's right, we're trying to make things right for this, for the situation we're working on, and then if similar situations happen in the future, this bill can help to remedy the situation. We would work with the developer. The developer would provide us a list of homeowners that qualify for residential class.

Thank you, well, this is music to my ears. And I'm hoping that perhaps we should be able to entertain other circumstances that we always bring up with regard to maybe someone whose husband just died and other dire circumstances that a homeowner has found themselves in rather than them having to go miss it. and go to the appeals process. So I'm just saying that thank you for working on this issue. It affected a lot of people and it's a bellwether for other projects moving forward. But I think we can't forget individual families and individuals who find themselves in similar circumstances where they didn't know that they were the one who were supposed to because their husband was the one who previously filed for the homeowner's exemption, for example.

Okay, so if I may say this, thank you, Council Member, for clarifying your thoughts. So this situation impacted, as you mentioned, many people, right? More than 400 people, perhaps. When you go into one-off situations, like even for me, like I think I've testified a number of times, I didn't have my home exemption for a number of years. I just... never focused on it until we did our refinance. Then the broker that we're working with said, hey, you don't have your home exemption. So that's how I got it. I think once you get into specific situations, we gotta be careful so that if we modify ordinance to address them, we're being fair with everyone else.

Oh, absolutely. And I think- But it's, yeah. I agree with you, and many of us would look at that to ensure that it would be under extraordinary circumstances. So thank you for that. I also wanted to thank you and your team and the Honolulu Board of Realtors for having booths set up in our communities. I went to go visit them at the Kailua Farmers Market. and they're going to be there this weekend as well. I hope you guys do that in Kaneohe as well, because a lot of those falling in the cracks, a lot probably are in Kaneohe. So just want to highly thank you guys, but also extend your outreach to all areas in our communities.

Yeah, and I want to add that they continue to look for avenues to do outreach, including working with mortuaries, because typically when you have a death, there's typically a property transfer. So they're looking at different avenues to do outreach you know, train about how homeowners should, what they need to do to maintain their residential class if they qualify. Also, the team, there's a bunch here as well in the back. There's three of them. They're very open to also work. So we talk about a list in this bill. They will work with the developer and set a table up to answer questions directly with homeowners. so that they understand exactly what's going on. So they're willing to definitely put in the time.

Appreciate the update. Don't forget AARP, okay? Because they're a wonderful resource to be able to help Kupuna.

Thank you, Council Member Kia'aina. Chair Waters.

Thank you, Chair, and thank you to the introducer. I'm happy to support this bill. But I'm curious, Director, the page nine, subsection G, talks about the condominium units. But my understanding is that homeowners sometimes experience the same catch-22, right, where they buy a property and it closes after their ability to file for a homeowner's exemption. Would this bill help those similarly situated who are homeowners and not condominium owners?

It would not because then you get into specific situations, you know, by a person. So it's going to, you know, that's why our team does a lot of training with brokers so they can share what homeowners have to do, you know, single family homeowners need to do to ensure that they're in the residential class.

Yeah, but if they purchase the home after the deadline to file a homeowner's exemption, Aren't they then Res A? Because they couldn't file a homeowner's exception.

They could be, but don't you think that if they're aware of the ordinance law, the price they negotiate should factor in? The fact that, hey, for one year, I may have to pay a little more, so maybe the price goes down a little? you know, as a part of the deal, so to speak. So we believe that education really pays off, and that's why our team continues to do training for the Board of Realtors, bankers, and other financial types, because if you know that's going to happen, you can impact the price.

Well, part of the problem is a lot of people don't know that's gonna happen, right? And we get complaints about it every year, similar to what Council Member Quijano was talking about, where people die and the surviving spouse doesn't know that they weren't on the homeowner's exemption. But in this case, we're talking about homeowners who are buyers You're saying that tough luck to them, we can't help them, and they should negotiate that with the buyer?

I think we are helping them, but when you get down to single family owners, everybody has a specific situation.

But clearly it's the same situation, where you purchase a home in September, the time to file a homeowner's exemption is already passed, and you don't have a homeowner's exemption, right?

I think it's different because you're dealing with hundreds of people when you're dealing with a condo project. I mean, there's huge impact.

But do you agree that these people who purchase a home after the deadline for homeowner's exemption they're out of luck other than negotiating with the seller to lower the price. And we already know that's not going to happen.

You need a broker that's going to do what's right and inform you of the real property tax impact so that when you negotiate the sale price, you can factor that in.

But what about us thinking of a way to help these people rather than relying on a broker who may or may not know that, or a homeowner who may or may not know. I mean, it'd be nice to just put off closing till later so that you could apply for the homeowner's exemption, but I don't know if people are willing to do that.

I think we're talking about the program structure. That's why, as I've stated before, let's do a pig. Let's look at the whole thing. Let's figure it out. because keep in mind there's, if I have my numbers right, 280,000 residential lots, about 100 to 155,000 with home exemptions. So there's a lot. And I think if we're gonna talk about changing ordinance, real property tax law, to address specific situations, we're gonna have to run the numbers and understand what the impact could be. but it probably would be better to look all at everything in unison globally and figure out what's best for the community.

I mean, I think a simple solution is giving you, the director of the Department of Budget and Fiscal Services, a little bit of leeway. to understand that when this happens, you can take care of this situation, right? But I've introduced that bill before and you testified against it. You do not want the discretion to do that.

That was a $10,000 discretion, right? Going from $500 to 10,000. I was just thinking about going forward. You may have, well, not you, but in the future, the council members down the road may have a director that's not upfront, who may play favorites and stuff like that. When you give a person too much discretion, it's not good. And that's why we go through council. when we ask for a tax compromise and we put a packet together and we explain why we're doing it. And typically there's a public benefit impacting a lot of people.

I mean, I guess each council member could put forward a resolution asking for a tax compromise for singular files, filers. Is that what you're suggesting we do?

I, No, I think we should fix the law. I mean, if you're saying that you don't like the way, because we follow the law, if you don't like the way it's currently written, we should get together to fix the law.

Again, we have the opportunity with Bill 40 to extend not just to condominium owners, but homeowners who are similarly situated. So I think the time is now. So do you have any amendments suggested where we could take care of this group of people that we can include in Bill 40?

I got to do more homework if we're talking about individuals. We're specifically looking at condominiums. Right.

Okay. Thank you, Chair.

Chair Waters, Councilmember, any further discussion or questions for Councilmember Keaino?

Yeah, I just wanted to say something since you raised the pig. I think we should reconsider it. For those of us who are term limited through 2028, I do think it's worthwhile, if we're going to do a PIG, to do it in the near future so that we could work on the rest of the time that we have left to be able to get to the finish line. So I guess I'm open to that. So since he raised it, I just wanted to share with the chair and my colleagues that I'm open to that. Thank you.

Thank you, Council Member Kiyaina. Members, any further questions for Director Kawano? Seeing no further questions for the administration members, we are in discussion. Council Member Cordero.

Thank you, Chair Okamoto. I just want to say I support this bill. It's a great discussion leading to other ways we can help our constituencies in all of our districts, but especially since with condominiums, More projects like this coming up in the urban core, especially whether it be mine, Councilmember Dos Santos-Tams, or Councilmember Nishimoto's district, timing isn't always right when it comes to turning over the keys for these projects, and we're looking at, if we're just looking at this bill specifically, I think it's a great bill, and I hope that we can continue to move it forward. Mahalo. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember Cardero. Members, any further questions? Any comments from Council Member Dos Santos-Tam on the measure?

Thank you again, Sharon, and I thank my colleagues for having a robust discussion on this measure. I look forward to working with VFS to continue solving this particular issue, which again is because this entire building is covered by a regulatory agreement with HCDA that regulates the affordability. And I think that's something that kind of distinguishes this from some of the other situations that come up from taxpayers across the island. One issue that still is unresolved that I would like to work on is one that was raised by Council Member Kia Aina, which is the ways that affordable projects, which are covered by regulatory agreements, do get their valuations done. You know, in the Ward area, some of the comparables are these mega luxury towers with, you know, acrylic glass pools and all kinds of other fancy things. But this project's not one of them. And so, you know, I think in a future version, we can look at how we can do that. But I really want to make sure that at the end of the day, you know, these folks who are just trying to get by, who were shocked, who got the sticker shock from their property tax bills, get made whole. And this doesn't happen to any other situation in the future. So thanks again for hearing this bill.

Thank you, Council Member Dos Santos-Tem. Members, any further discussion? I do want to thank once again the introducer, Council Member Dos Santos-Tem, and thank you for being here with us virtually. I think this is a great start. Dr. Kawano, as you may have heard, I think we all in our districts have had someone or multiple people come with the same or similar situations where they fell under this puka or the exemption lapse and there were some kind of situation where they were not able to get their tax exemption. So we're hoping that this will address that. And I do want to thank the department for your input and your comments in written form as well as being here in person to provide testimony and answer questions. I do think that we, are on the right track. I do encourage the department to continue working with Council Member DeSantos-Tam, both on this one and the previous one, and any others that will, especially when it comes to real property taxes, but this subject specifically, because we have many people in our districts who have been impacted by it. Seeing no further discussion, the Chair recommends that Bill 40-2026 be amended to a posted CD1 identified as OCS 2026-2022. 0384 slash 6 slash 16 slash 2026 at 9.03 a.m. Any discussion, any objections or reservations? Hearing none, the bill has been amended to a CD1. The chair then recommends that Bill 40, 2026, CD1 be reported out for a second reading and scheduling of a public hearing. Any further discussion, any objections or reservations? Hearing none, so ordered. Thank you, Council Member DeSantos-Tam. Moving on to agenda item number five, resolution 26-145. This resolution authorizes the director of budget and fiscal services to issue and sell in one or more series not to exceed $205 million in principal amount of general obligation bonds of the city and county of Honolulu for financing the amounts appropriated in the certain capital budget ordinances of the City and County of Honolulu specified in such capital budget ordinances. Before we call up the administration, we'll proceed first with in-person oral testimony in the Council Chamber. Clerks, do we have any in-person testifiers for this item?

Chair, there are none.

Thank you. Proceeding now with remote testimony, clerks, do we have any remote testifiers for this item?

Chair, there are none.

Thank you. We'd now like to welcome back with us Director Andy Kawano from the Department of Budget and Fiscal Services.

Andy Kawano, again for the record, Director of Budget and Fiscal Services, Budget Chair and Chair Waters, thank you for posting this resolution. It provides a request to authorize a not to exceed amount of general obligation bonds to issue for this year, 2026, to fund our capital improvement projects. No other comments on that. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Director Kawano. Members, any questions for the director? Council Chair Waters.

Thank you. Good morning again, Director Kawano. In page one, paragraph two, in the second whereas, it contemplates the passage of Bill 2024 for the year 2026. Excuse me, Bill 24 for the year 2026. Has the mayor signed Bill 24?

Is that Bill 24 or Bill 23?

23, I think.

For CIP. Is it 24? Well, in your resolution, it says Bill 24.

OK. To my knowledge, he's in the process of signing it. So far, he has preferred to actually sign the bills. I think today is the last day.

Actually, I think yesterday was the last day. So it's 10 days from the day we transmit it, right? And my calculation is the last day was yesterday.

Well, that's not my call. I was told that their understanding is today is the last day.

For both the CIP bill and the administration's budget bill.

That's what I've been told.

OK. Yeah. Well, do you know what's going to happen?

Do I know what's going to happen? Yeah. Both bills. I think he's going to sign all the bills.

Oh.

Yeah.

Wonderful. Okay. I mean, I'm just asking because is it premature for us to pass this before the mayor signs the bill?

That is a great question. My team and I were questioning that as well. I believe the CIP bill is 23. Yeah.

So what's bill 24?

I think it... 24 is a geo-authorization, 22 was the operating, and 23 was the CIP, from my understanding.

Yeah, so the geo bill is moving forward, right? The 24, Bill 24. For 23, I don't think, to my knowledge at least, there aren't issues in that bill that we strongly disagree with. I can't say the same about Bill 22. I mean, when you say he's going to sign all bills, is he signing Bill 22? Well, he could sign them, but he could also line item veto the bills as well.

Well, again, my position is that that time expired yesterday.

That's not what I've been told, but we'll see. Can we call up Corp Counsel? I'm not Corp Counsel.

No, he's sitting behind you. Hey, good morning.

Hi, good morning. I'm Reed Yamashiro, Deputy Corporation Counsel.

No, thank you so much. I believe we, the council, transmitted the bills, Bill 22, 23, and 24 on Friday the 5th. So under the charter, the mayor has 10 days, right, from when it's transmitted to veto or sign or not sign it, and it'll pass without a signature. So Isn't it true that the 10 days expired yesterday?

Well, my understanding is the city clerk informed the mayor that today is the last day. And I believe it's because Juneteenth was counted as a holiday.

Juneteenth?

Yeah.

But it's not a state holiday, is it?

No, it is not.

And in fact, the mayor In years past, they signed a memo recognizing it as a holiday and giving city workers the day off. But my understanding is that did not occur this year. Isn't that correct?

Okay, but my understanding is the city clerk told the mayor that he had until today, that the 10th day was today.

In what form was that transmitted to the mayor?

It's on the website.

But was it an official...

I'm not sure if he gave an official...

But okay, but you're an attorney. We're asking you to interpret the law. The law says you got 10 days from the day it's transmitted. Juneteenth is not an official holiday. Can you please count 10 days from June 5th?

If you'd like me to give a legal opinion, I'd suggest going into executive session.

Why is that?

To preserve attorney-client privilege.

What if we waive attorney-client privilege? Who's the client?

The counsel is the client.

Up to you, Chair. Do you want to go into executive? But part of the problem is you're representing both sides, right? But no, I mean, heck, I think the people ought to know, did the time expire or not? I might count 10 days from June 1st. 5th was yesterday. And we don't count weekends, we don't count holidays. There was King Kamehameha Day, right? So that's an official holiday. So what's your reading of this?

All I can tell you is that the clerk informed the mayor that today was the 10th day.

Well, is it possible that, oh, okay. Okay, Chair, I mean, I'll defer to you if you want to go into executive session.

Just so I understand, Chair Waters, you would like further clarification on this or just to be on the record so I understand if we need to further go into executive session or if you're okay with what was stated today. Does the council want more clarification?

I'll defer to you and the committee. I believe the time expired yesterday. my interpretation. I'm not sure if the rest of the committee feels the same way.

Council Member Cordero.

Thank you, Chair. I think it is good to have legal clarification, but I don't know if we need to go to executive session for that. Thank you, Chair.

OK. Anybody else want to? I'm trying to get clarification as well. I just want to understand if it's required for us to go into executive session. And if you're saying the council, we can decide. But it sounds like you would rather

because of client... Well, yes, I'd recommend executive session.

Members? My only mana'o is that, you know, since the clerk is involved here as well, separate from corporation counsel, should we have the clerk here as well? Because there seems to be communication that the clerk said it was today, and clerk is part of the city council, so.

And maybe, could I get clarification if we bring clerk and get their information, their input, does that have to go, can we do that in the public setting? Okay, okay, members. Because we have some concerns and we're not sure, I'll call a recess at this time and we'll further discuss it and reconvene when appropriate. Thank you, recess.

you Thank you. We'll be right back.

Thank you. Members, at the time of 1120, I now call the Committee on Budget back to order.

Chair.

Chair Waters.

Thank you so much. I'll withdraw the question of Corp Council. Thank you, Corp, and we'll leave it for another day. Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Appreciate the discussion.

I appreciate the discussion as well. Members, any further discussion? Seeing none, the Chair recommends that Resolution 26-145 be reported out for adoption. Seeing no further discussion, any objections, any reservations? Hearing none, so ordered. Moving on to agenda item number six, resolution 26-146. This resolution authorizes the Director of Budget and Fiscal Services to issue and sell in one or more series not to exceed $11 million in principal amount of general obligation bonds of the city and county of Honolulu for financing the amount appropriated in ordinance number 26-146. also referred to upon its arrival as Bill 23-2026, CD2-FD1, and as may be further amended to the City and County of Honolulu for the purpose of financing capital costs for the Honolulu Rail Transit Project. Before we call up the administration, we will proceed first with in-person oral testimony in the Council Chamber. Clerks? Do we have any in-person testifiers for this item? Chair, there are none. Thank you. Proceeding on with remote testimony, clerks, do we have any remote testifiers for this item? Chair, there are none. Thank you. I'd like to welcome back with us from the Department of Budget and Fiscal Services, Director Andy Kawano.

Andy Kawano again, Director of Budget and Fiscal Services. Thank you for hearing Resolution 26146. for the amount not to exceed $11 million of potential bond issuance with regard to the financing of the rail. So this is the... Per the FTA and the full funding grant agreement, one of the scheduled payments the city is making to fund rail construction, the total amount is $214 million. I believe we have four more payments after this year of about $10 million each. So we're winding down. You know the full commitment that the city put forth at the time the full funding agreement was put into place so thank you for posting this and We we anticipate adoption Thank You director Kawano members questions for the director Okay, seeing no further questions members.

We are in discussion. I Seeing no further discussion, the chair recommends that resolution 26-146 be reported out for adoption. Any discussion, any objections or reservations? Hearing none, so ordered. Moving on to agenda item number seven, resolution 26-147, This resolution accepts a gift of transportation, lodging, meals, and conference registration fee valued at $5,600 to the City from the National Association of State Procurement Officials for two employees of the City's Department of Budget and Fiscal Services Division of Purchasing to attend the National Association of State Procurement officials reach conference and training event in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma from July 21st, 2026 through July 25th, 2026. Before we call up the administration, we'll first proceed with in-person oral testimony in the council chamber. Clerks, do we have any in-person testifiers for this item? Chair, there are none. Thank you. Proceeding on with remote testimony, clerks, do we have any remote testifiers for this item? Chair, there are none. Thank you. We'd like to welcome back with us Director Andy Kawano from the Department of Budget and Fiscal Services.

Andy Kawano again, Director of Budget and Fiscal Services. With regard to Resolution 26147, I want to thank Council Chair for posting the resolution by request of BFS. We're sending two purchasing buyers to the conference. Great networking and, you know, and conference where they get not only training, but they're able to talk to other purchasing buyers from other cities and share best practices. Great, outstanding event for employee growth within our purchasing team. Thank you for posting it.

Thank you, Director Cuomo. Members, questions for the director, Council Member Cordero.

Hi, Director Cuomo. I agree with you. It's a great opportunity. I was wondering how are the employees chosen or do you, I guess, rotate the different procurement members on your team to go? And yeah, I just wanted to...

There's definitely a rotation. We have our division chief, Pauline Youngling, to provide you the details on that.

Good morning. My name is Paula Youngling. I'm the administrator for the Division of Purchasing. So yes, what we do is we do a lottery system. Okay, and so that's how we select. This year we kind of pulled from our section managers, one person from there and also one from the buyer pool. So it's done by lottery.

Thank you, Chair, and thank you, Ms. Oh, sorry. Thank you. Sorry, is it Division Chief or?

Division Administrator, Paula Younglee.

Division Administrator Younglee. Thank you so much. I really appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you, Council Member Cordero. I had a couple of questions as well. One of them was similar to Council Member Cordero, how it's chosen, who goes. Is this done every year? Is this annually that two of the members from your department attend this conference?

Actually, the prime member that gets asked to go to this conference and gets the scholarships and administers them is the administrator of the state procurement office because they make up the National Association of State Procurement Officials. So what she does is that she will offer those scholarships out among the counties, among other chief procurement officer jurisdictions, for example, DOE and things like that. So actually for the past two years, she has offered us scholarships for this particular conference. So two scholarships per year. It is an annual event, but whether or not we get a scholarship offer comes from actually Bonnie Kahikui, who is the state procurement officer.

Thank you for explaining that.

So we're very fortunate. We're very fortunate that she does that and offers to us.

Thank you. And Director, you mentioned that there's a lot of benefit to going to this. There's training. I haven't talked with you guys, I think maybe it was earlier last year, but I have heard in the past some concerns with the procurement process in the city. So in these trainings, what have we learned? How can we see, or what kind of benefits have we reaped from attending them that have you said it benefited us, but if you could maybe name one or two things that you feel like we've been able to take from the trainings and we've implemented it in our system here so that the procurement process is more efficient.

Do you mind if I answer? No, thank you for it. Definitely. So chair, one of the things that was a big component of last year's REACH conference was the notion of AI. So they had many training events, many presentations and things like that on AI. So we had sent two folks last year, and that's one of the things that we are going to be looking into a lot more effectively. We've got even a little working group a little hui within our organization that's looking more into how we can engage with ai in in our procurement processes this year it's got a lot of training events on this conference associated with and i believe last year when we were having our budget discussions i met with most of council members on our procurement process and our procurement improvement program and what we're looking at And so one of the big things that I talked about during those sessions with you guys was the importance of procurement planning before we even went out and solicited for bids. So this conference has actually got big training and other events on developing solicitations, working on more training and things of that nature with agencies in the procurement planning process so that when we do go out to bid, they're more effective and more impactful. So that's what we're looking at for this time. Also in post award contract administration and ensuring when we do award that we're still getting fair and reasonable pricing. So there are gonna be events associated with that. So I think that folds very well with our other efforts in the procurement improvement process that we're going through right now. And we'll be working to include those going forward in our planning and implementing more improvements going forward.

Thank you. Thank you for explaining that. We look forward to seeing more of what you guys are receiving in these trainings and how we can definitely make our procurement process more efficient. Members, any further discussion at this time? Okay, thank you. Thank you. Seeing no further discussion, the Chair recommends that Resolution 26-147 be amended to a CD1 to incorporate amendments to conform dates with the date provided in Exhibit A. Any discussion, any objections or reservations? Hearing none, so ordered. The chair then recommends that resolution 26-147 CD1 be reported out for adoption. Any discussion, any objections or reservations? Hearing none, so ordered. Members, we are at the end of our agenda.

Can I make an announcement about RPAD 2? Go ahead, Council Member Cordero. Thank you. Thank you, Chair Wakimoto. Really quick, as Council Member Kia Aina mentioned that Honolulu Board of Realtors, as well as the real property, assistance division is going to be going to our different communities. They will be in my Pearl Ridge community on July 11 as well as July 18. Both are Saturdays at the Pearl Ridge farmers market. If you would like to learn more about homeowners exemption and support from the city as well as HBR, RPAD and HBR will be there from 8 to 11 or I think 11, 8 to 11 a.m. So Once again, that will be at Pearl Ridge Farmers Market on July 11 and 18, and I will also make it point to be there as well. Mahalo.

Thank you very much for the announcement. Members, any further announcements? I would just like to make one little announcement. I wish my mom a happy belated birthday. Where's her birthday? Yesterday. So she's not watching, but I'll show her this recording later. Seeing no further announcements or discussion, mahalo everyone for attending and participating in today's meeting. There being no further business, this meeting is adjourned.