16 Water Resources Committee - Regular Meeting

Thank you. you

Will the Water and Infrastructure Committee of August 31st, 2026, please come to order. The time is now 1.37 p.m. May I ask that all participants please silence all noise-making devices. I'm your Chair, Tom Cook. Members, per the Sunshine Law, please identify by name who, if anyone, is in the room, vehicle, or workspace with you today, exclusive of minors. I would also like to ask the department representatives who have joined online, please also turn on your camera when it's your turn to speak. Now I'd like to introduce the committee members, starting with Vice Chair Yukile Sugimura, who is excused, Council Member Kawanoe Patongan.

Aloha Chair, Aloha members.

Good afternoon, Council Member Gabe Johnson. Aloha, Chair, council members, community members. There's no testifiers at the Lanai District Office, and I'm here and ready to work.

Thank you. And aloha, good afternoon. Chair Alice Lee.

Aloha, Chair. I'm home alone in my workspace and ready to work. Thanks.

And good afternoon. Aloha, Council Member Tamara Paulton.

Aloha, Wina Laakako.

And from Moloka'i, Councilmember Kiani Rollins-Fernandez. Good afternoon.

Aloha a wina ala, Chair. Aloha a wina ala kakou mai Moloka'i nui ahina. I'm at my private residence alone. There are currently no testifiers at the Moloka'i District Office. Mahalo, Chair.

And good afternoon. And aloha, Councilmember Shane Sinensi.

Aloha a wina ala, Chair. Happy to be here. No testifiers in Hana, Chair.

And aloha, good afternoon, Council Member Noholani Uuhajans.

Aloha, Chair. Aloha, Chair. Aloha, everyone.

From the administration, we're joined today by representatives from the following department, the Department of Water Supply. We have Director Stuffelbein online. Good afternoon, Chair. And Kimo is the lead on this item. I'm here, thanks. Okay. And Deputy Director Landgraf is on his way from Department of Public Works. Will be forth joining us. And Department of Corporation Council, who do we have today?

Good afternoon, Chair, Deputy Corporation Council Caleb Rowe. I would also like to introduce our new Deputy Andrew Michaels.

Welcome. We're also joined today by representatives from the State Department of Hawaiian Homelands. Would you like to introduce yourself?

Good afternoon, everyone. Good afternoon, Chair and Council Members. My name is Elijah Davidson, Department of Hawaiian Homelands. I am also joined by ATA.

Good afternoon, Chair and Council Members. My name is Lisa Applegate. I work at Austin Sutsuman Associates. We are the design engineers for DHHL on this project. Thank you.

Welcome and thank you. From OCS, we're assisted by our committee staff. Please see the last page of the agenda for information on meeting connectivity. Good afternoon, everyone. We have two items on today's agenda. Y30 relates to Bill 97, 2026, authorizing the Mayor to enter into an agreement with the Department of Hawaiian Homelands on the development and dedication of Waihuli Wells. Next, we have Y25 relates to resolution 26123, authorizing a waiver under section 2.50.060 Maui County Code to allow for the use of certain type of herbicides on county property. Members, if there are no objections, I'd like to take testimony after receiving opening comments on both Y30 and Y25. Member Balton?

Thank you, if I could just make a statement. Previously, at the start of this year, informally, Board of Ethics told me to recuse myself on DHHL, but then I asked for clarification because the paper lease we had was for Lahaina and not Waiʻohuli, and Ms. Akitaki said that I could vote on this.

I'm glad, because I'd like you to participate.

So I said it before that I couldn't vote on DHHL, but then I got clarification from her. So I can vote on this one, but not Lahaina stuff.

Thank you for your clarification. Okay, thank you members, let's begin. Members, Y30 relates to Bill 97, 2026. Bill 97's purpose is to authorize an agreement between the Department of Water Supply and the Department of Hawaiian Homelands to develop a new groundwater sources for proposed Hawaiian homelands developments in Waihuli. The proposed project includes three wells on Hawaiian homelands in Waihuli, along with a storage tank, transmission pipeline, and related improvements needed to connect the wells to the Department of Water Supply's existing water system. Under the proposed agreement, the Department of Hawaiian Homelands would be responsible for planning, designing, constructing, and obtaining the necessary approvals and funding for the project. The Department of Water Supply would review, approve the project plans, oversee and inspect the work, and provide reasonable assistance to the Department of Hawaiian Homelands with obtaining the necessary permits and funding. At this time, would the Department of Water Supply like to introduce themselves and provide any opening comments?

Sorry, Chair, real briefly before we continue, could we just designate the folks from DHHL and ATA as resource persons under Rule 18A? Thank you, Seth.

No objections, thank you and welcome.

No objections.

Okay, Mr. Deputy Director of Water.

Chair, council members, Kimmel Langer, Water Supply. The department is in support of this bill. What it does is it helps the ETHL get their beneficiaries housing quicker because it helps to develop the infrastructure and then additional water resource that helps them support their projects.

Thank you. And DHHL, would you like to make some opening remarks?

Yeah. As I mentioned earlier, my name is Elijah Davidson. I'm a project manager with Department of Hawaiian Homelands, and we're pushing this forward to really get and expedite the construction of housing for our people, for our beneficiaries, and so we're really passionate about this work, and we're really excited to partner up with DWS and the County of Maui.

Thank you. Do you have a presentation?

Yes, we're pulling it up right now as we speak. So first off, aloha everybody. I know I had introduced myself earlier, and thank you all so much for being here. But I'd like to go a step further and say that I am also a beneficiary on the list. My family are all beneficiaries on the list, still waiting. My grandma, my grandfathers who passed away, wasn't able to receive it. So I speak here with a lot of passion. And so as I go on to present this, I just want to preface that. So beginning here, we're here to talk about the Waihuli Wells, Bill 97. Of course, Department of Hawaiian Homelands, we are in support of this. So this really focuses on our beneficiaries' needs. And as many of us already know, here in Maui, there's water limitations. And as DHHL is issuing out thousands and thousands of paper leases to provide to our beneficiaries, we are now having a growing obligation to fulfill those leases to provide homes and construct them in a timely manner. And so really we're looking at our current DHL development and we're noticing that, of course, with development comes water needs, sewer capacity, so on and so forth. And so that is why we're looking at constructing these three wells up in Wyohoolee. And of course taking a look in the future for our future development projects. Like I mentioned earlier, we have released thousands of leases to this point, but we're looking at releasing thousands more. taking a look at the department's wait list. And this is just taking a look at Maui. The total wait list is over 9,000 individuals, with the residential wait list being almost 4,000, and the average wait list age being over 60. And this actually goes back to a previous lawsuit against the Department of Hawaiian Homelands, a Kalima case, where a lot of people on our wait list are passing away before receiving a home. Specific to this project, the project is located upcountry in Waihuli. And in this map, we're taking a look at the location of those wells as well as the transmission line. Taking a look at the project overview, the proposed development of these three wells and the water transition line in upcountry Maui is directly to support Native Hawaiian beneficiaries. The critical water infrastructure will not only secure our long-term water access, but directly support the development of over 1,000 homestead lots for Native Hawaiian families now. Instead of waiting an additional so on and so forth years for additional water capacity to become available, we can move on this through advanced water credits with the Department of Water Supply. And what the advanced water credits do is it provides 39.5% of our needs right now for our developments. The advanced water credits will be able to support the Waihule Economic Development Opportunity Area, as well as 950 single-family residential lots in Waihumaoka, Wailuku, and Kamalani, 55 agricultural lots to support ohana farming and self-sufficiency, as well as additional future lots in Palihonui North and South. But in total, once the system is completed, it could serve an estimated 2,880 residential units for Hawaiian homeland beneficiaries. So taking a look at the draft memorandum agreement with DWS, the estimated operating capacity is 1.728 million gallons per day for all three wells. And of that 1.728 million gallons per day, DHHL will be receiving the entirety of that 1.728 million gallons per day. So this focuses on benefiting Department of Hawaiian homelands. The advanced water credits will provide 39.5% of DHHL needs. So the agreement with DWS Maui, the reason for this agreement is really it comes down to is the transmission lines and the systems that can be provided by partnering with DWS. For DHHL, we don't have transmission lines that can reach across the entire Paeina, but by partnering with the county, we can utilize that to transfer and be able to bring water to our beneficiaries and developments. Additionally, we're also focused on the advanced water credits that this agreement would bring. This provides 39.5% of our needs currently, so we can continue our development right now. as well as operating costs. Of course, Kimo, I don't have to tell you this, but operating costs of whales are very, very expensive. And for the Department of Hawaiian Homelands, I mean, as much as we're pushing forward to get more revenue, we don't have the capacity to be able to sustain ourselves and operate these systems by ourself. That's the agreement with DWS. And of course, what it comes down to is really faster housing development. We know that housing is an issue here in Hawaii. Housing affordability is an issue, and the longer we wait to develop these homes, the more expensive it becomes for our beneficiaries. Of course, it is to support economic opportunities. It'll strengthen water sovereignty, and as well as provide homes for future generations. Looking at the projects that will benefit right now with the advanced water credits would be Waiohuli Economic Development Area, as well as Kamalani, which has 400 residential lots, Pulehunui, Wailuku Single Family, 204 residential lots, Waiohumaoka, 343 residential lots, and 55 agricultural lots. As we're going throughout this process, we're partnering up with other companies to ensure that we're in environmental compliance for this project, as well as Historic Sites Compliance and Kapaa'akai Framework. I had mentioned earlier to a lot of council members, but we had formed a working group, and it was really at Commissioner Archie Kalepa. Really thankful for that, and we were able to talk with community members. We were able to talk to multiple individuals to get their feedback on this agreement. And moving forward, we made those adjustments, and we were able to talk with DWS and come to a place where we're in agreement. And so as mentioned earlier, today's bill is really to talk about the draft MOA between DHGL and DWS Maui. Mahalo.

Thank you very much for your presentation. Deputy Director Landgraf, do you have anything to add?

No, I don't have anything to add at this time, Chair. Okay, thank you.

So before we begin our discussion, let's see if anyone would like to provide testimony for Y30.

Yes, Chair, we have some individuals signed up if you could read the testimony disclosure.

Anyone wishing to testify, please sign up in the lobby, join the online meeting, or call into the phone number noted on today's agenda. For online testifiers, please click raise your hand button. For those calling in, please follow the prompts via phone star five to raise and lower your hand, star six to mute and unmute. Please ensure your name on Microsoft Teams appears as the name you prefer to be referred to or as anonymous if you wish to testify anonymously. If you are in person, please notify the staff that you would like to testify anonymously. Otherwise, please state your name for the record at the beginning of your testimony. Written testimony will continue to be accepted and can be submitted via e-comment at maoacounty.us forward slash agendas. Staff will enable your microphone and video when it is your turn to testify. Oral testimony is limited to three minutes per item. If you are still testifying beyond that time, I will kindly ask you to complete your testimony. You can view the meeting on Akaku Channel 53, Facebook Live, or MauiCounty.us forward slash agendas. Decorum will be maintained throughout this meeting. Breaching decorum includes anything that disrupts the orderly management of the meeting. Violation of decorum may result in your being removed from the meeting. At this time, I'd like to open public testimony for Y30. Staff, please call the first testifier.

Thank you, Chair. The first individual to testify is representing the Royal Patent and Kingdom of the entire country. Aloha.

Yeah, I'm going to be testifying today representing the Hawaiian Kingdom.

yeah as a citizen of the hawaiian kingdom and sovereign anyway could you please speak closer you can start your testimony again but it's hard to hear you so please speak as loud as possible so everybody can hear you thank you okay can now you can hear okay this is how um this is the loudest i guess but um okay i can hear him okay um online so it might be the chamber continue

So this is for DHHL. DHHL, so how are you guys able to be developing all these different lands and stuff like that? Because as everybody should know, or you guys know also that the DHHL Hawaiian Homestead stuff was created by Cujillo, which he used crown lands, right? Am I wrong? I don't know if I'm wrong or pretty sure I'm right. But he used, I guess they used and took the kingdoms, the king's lands, the crown lands anyway, and then he's supposed to be using those lands and there's being developments outside of those lands that are not crown lands because besides the crown lands, there's the government lands and then the regular people's lands who got awarded royal patents and stuff like that. So how are any of these developments being allowed to be approved, number one? All the lands, all the different lands that is being built on, the heirs, pretty sure they haven't been contacted. So please contact all the heirs. And even on the crown lands too, with none of the heirs' consent on royal patented lands, I don't know how that's able to be passed and everything like that. And call up all the descendants and all the beneficiaries for all the lands. that is being developed and yeah.

Does that conclude your testimony? Members, any clarifying questions for our testifier?

Seeing none, staff, next testifier. Thank you, Chair. The next testifier is the individual calling from the phone number, last four digits, 4945. They can dial star six to unmute themselves and begin their testimony.

Aloha, committee. There's Jesse Law calling in there. I also can, I heard the previous testifier loud and clear, so it must be the microphone in the chamber. At one time, I have an advantage over the being there building. I'm on a street in Calhoun, Louisville, if you hear any big trucks. And that's why I'm not on the street, but I'm over here by myself. So I'm testifying. I appreciate that you guys know. And thank you, Mr. Roche, for running the department, calling it like it's supposed to be and for the people. Because I actually got the agenda from the Boating Board in the South-East Army headquarters there in Kaulau, Kaului. And this is Bill 97. . Thank you previous testifier because For clarifying, when I saw the Hawaiian homeland thing, I was automatically like, oh, yeah, okay, great, they're doing it for Hawaiians. But they might have just put the label Hawaii on there. And it's like, I mean, I understand a little bit about the quantum stuff. It's a little bit of it. I'm not Hawaiian, so I kind of feel out of place. That's fine on this. And I trust the water department. probably more than a lot of other departments, especially the county clerk's office. So I won't hold the intent against them that the other departments are not doing their jobs very well. But it's just the body of the council, like if one person acts bad, it's bad on everybody. So I like my point on that. And I think I got pretty much I probably missed something, but I think I have another chance to testify again on the next one. So thank you all you good staff members, please be phono. And I'm not voting for you, Chair Cook, I'm voting for Kelly James. I don't know.

Staff, do we have any other testifiers? Next.

Chair, that's currently all the individuals signed up. I can provide a last call. This is the last call for oral testimony. If anyone would like to testify, please come up to the podium and begin your testimony or raise your hand on Microsoft Teams and staff will enable you. The count is three, two, one. Seeing none, Chair, no one has indicated that they wish to testify.

Members, seeing there are no individuals wishing to testify, without objection, I will now close oral testimony. Thank you. As a reminder, written testimony will continue to be accepted into the record. Members, I'm proposing two rounds of three minutes per member. Are there any objections? Thank you, members. Let's begin the discussion. We'll start with Council Member Betonga.

Thank you, Chair. Okay, so Can you walk me through the difference between the advanced water credits and the source credits to DHHL? And then how was the source credits to DHHL calculated?

So the advanced water credits were really a negotiation between us and DWS to establish what our current need is to move our developments forward. And looking at source credits, I believe that would be a good question for Kimo, if you would like.

So they're getting roughly 40% in advance, and then the rest of the others, roughly 60% will come at the completion of the wells, right, when it's dedicated and accepted. And then the operating capacity, the estimated operating capacity is roughly equal to the number of source credits, correct?

Correct, that's correct.

Okay, so what happens if, the estimated capacity is different from the actual capacity and then I don't see anything in the agreement that allows for that delta to be adjusted or for adjustments due to that delta.

Yeah, that is correct. So we're depending that the hydrologist has done his work correctly and it's gonna come out like that. Now if it doesn't, then I believe we probably make an adjustment based on that.

Okay, but that is anticipated on both sides, even though I don't see anything in the agreement. You guys are comfortable with that?

Okay.

And then on one of the slides, one of the benefits to DHHL is that the county will be taking on operating costs. And I think it's mentioned that millions of dollars per year. So what is the, the department's comfortable taking on those obligations?

Yes, because we will have those customers also. Right, all of the agent will be our customers. So we will get revenue from that.

Oh, I see, okay. So I don't think of this as like a cost benefit analysis only within the agreement. they build well, we give them advance credits as payment for the well, and then we take on maintenance and operations. I see that as the liability, but I have to think further out so that we'll recoup those costs because the DTHL beneficiaries will be paying into our system now.

Correct, they'll be the Department of Water Supplies customers, right? And so the water they use will be, they'll be billed for the water they use as the revenue.

Okay, and you guys did the calculations to ensure that it all balances?

Well, it depends how much they build out, right? So as the buildup continues, there'll be more, but we didn't do the exact calculation on that, no.

Okay, but for the purposes of the agreement before us today, you guys are confident that it should all balance out? Yes. That we're not gonna be taking on millions of dollars in liabilities specifically as a result of this? Correct. Okay.

Okay, right. It's about, so the agreement was kind of about so we can get them to move so they can get to where they need to go now. So it's an agreement to move forward to do something.

Understood, okay. Thank you, Chair, and thank you, resource personnel.

Council Member Johnson, discussion, questions?

Thank you, Chair. The presentation answered a lot of my questions, and I don't really, I support this, and I wanna find a way that we can give water to our beneficiaries, Mr. Landgraf, I'm gonna throw you a softball. Is there anything we need to know? A softball question, an easy question. He goes, what's softball? So is there anything that the body needs to be aware of before we move forward with this? Are there any concerns in your research on working on this bill that we should be aware of? Because everything seems on the up and up with me.

Yes, we all worked at it together to make sure that the DHHL beneficiaries would be the beneficiaries of what we're deciding to do. And that basically gets them to get the infrastructure built and their houses built as quickly as possible and the water will be dedicated to them. That was the whole idea of it.

Yeah, great. All right, thank you. No more questions, Chair.

Member Johnson, Chair Lee.

Thank you. Mr. Landgraf, do we have similar arrangements with DHHL on other projects, water projects?

We have similar arrangements, but the department usually gets part of the capacity in the other projects.

And why would this one be different?

I guess the difference is we want them to have all the capacity so they can meet the needs of what they need to have done.

Okay, which is great, but we haven't met all the needs of the general public's needs for housing. So how do you justify us having this arrangement without like in prior instances, gaining some water use?

I guess the idea is, so this will be fully in support of DHHL, because if other projects come up that need to have water sources developed, then that would be for those projects, and sometimes what happens with the project when the water resources are developed, there is not that much left for DHHL when they need to do theirs. So we're trying to focus this toward their projects and there'll still be, you know, we're still want to develop more resources for, you know, other projects besides DHHL.

Do you mind if I add to that? Um, I would also like to add that from our understanding in the conversations, this creates a more resilient system for the County of Maui. Um, it provides a necessary water for department line homelands projects without straining the current system. And so that was, I believe, a really huge benefit to the Maui County.

Okay. And that's fine. I believe we have and continue to support DHHL, not only with funding, but, you know, our general funds, but with the GT, a portion of the GT taxes is allocated for DHHL So that's why it makes sense that we would partner with DHHL on receiving some water because we are so far behind in providing housing for our residents, which include many part Hawaiians. So I was just wondering why in this particular instance, there is no sharing of some source DHHL, do you have any comments?

I think, and I understand the need here on Maui is immense, right? And for us, DHHL, as I showed earlier with our waitlisters, I mean, we have individuals who are passing away on our list. And so we're really trying to expedite this. So, I mean, we really appreciate this conversation and we would love to partner with the County of Maui on this. But I appreciate the questions.

Okay, can you tell us one last question? What percentage of that 9,000 are from Maui?

I can't get you that number right now, but I can get that for you at a later date.

Thank you. Thank you.

Council Member Palten, your turn.

Thank you, Chair. Could somebody tell me how the six-year number came about? In the agreement, it says something like the wells will be developed within six years or else it could be extended, force majeure, something, something, yada, yada.

I can kind of give a brief timeline. We put together those six years based upon our environmental needs. We have to go through environmental clearances. Additionally, there are other clearances that we have to do in that area, so it's really based upon that as well as permitting of the system.

Is there contingency time, and if department agrees to extend that to 10 years for this agreement here, would that be beneficial?

I think it'll be beneficial for the conversation, absolutely.

are you guys open to 10 years? Because stuff happens, fire burns down a whole town, flood takes out a whole town, stuff happens.

Yeah, we would be open to that, but we just want to make sure that the process goes as quickly as it can. We don't want other delays that may not be related to something like that.

So I guess for corporation council, would we put that in exhibit A like six years unless there's a major problem and then we can extend it to 10 years or how would that legally worded?

Well, so currently there is an automatic extension for force majeure, so you mentioned fire. I guess I don't know what that means. Sorry, that refers, sorry, you're right, you guys aren't lawyers. I see that word every day. That means emergencies. That means something that's beyond your control. So the things that you mentioned, a flood that took out a town, a fire that took out a town, that's a force majeure.

Oh, okay, okay. So it's already in there then?

Right, it would be told by a force majeure.

And it doesn't have to be spelled out what the force majeure is until after the force majeure happens and then you're like, that's a force majeure, so we're extending it however much time you gotta extend it.

It's a pretty well understood term of legal art, so. with the legal crowd. The lawyers know what it means, yeah.

Okay, all right, and then... it said that if it's too much chlorides, that DHHL would be responsible for bringing down the chlorides. In West Maui, when there's no explained reason for high chlorides, we're concerned if the chlorides are so high, what does that mean? Like it's a brackish well or?

Well, it could, but it just depends what the testing, what this shows up as a testing, right? Where are they in the lens, right? Or if they're taken out and it's affecting the sustainable yield.

So if they're not able to bring the chlorides down to that level, you don't envision any scenario where that would happen?

From what the hydrologist has said, we don't think it's going to be an issue where they're going to make the wells.

The hydrologist, Mr. Nance?

I believe so.

Okay. He's the same one that Pulelehua used.

Sorry, but in the case that there is high chloride levels, we would use a reverse osmosis system to address it. Lisa, did you want to add to that?

Right, so the understanding right now is that we believe the water quality will be of high enough quality that treatment will not be required, but once they drill the wells and they test them, that will be the final say on whether it's required or not. But yes, reverse osmosis would be the treatment option if the chlorides are higher than expected.

Okay, just saying, I heard this story before with Pulelehua, so just letting you know.

So maybe you could clarify too, there's an existing well that's the test well that's been there for a long time and that's part of the reason that the thought is they're high quality water.

Yeah, absolutely. Actually, there's an existing USGS well in that area adjacent to our proposed wells. So that's how we're able to get actually really relevant testing samples for this project.

Okay, fingers crossed for you guys.

Thank you. Please. Sorry, to go back to your earlier question, we actually do define a force majeure later in the agreement. I found out it's in section 10.6, and it refers to failures such as earthquake, fire, hurricane, flood, and other acts of God, strike, insurrection, litigation, court order, governmental action or inaction, or other events or occurrences that are beyond such party's control.

Thank you, that is pretty comprehensive.

Thank you. So Member Rollins-Fernandez, your turn.

Mahalo, Chair, and mahalo for the presentation and for meeting with me before this meeting. I also appreciate DHHL putting together a working group of homesteaders to come up with the final MOU language or to work with you folks on that. I did attend one of the DHHL meetings on the Waiohuli Well when the MOU had different language. And so I'm happy where we landed. And I support 100% of the water going to DHHL for homesteaders. DHHL is the only department that we are constitutionally mandated and under the Organic Act are obligated to carry out the mission of housing homesteaders, providing aina to DHHL beneficiaries, to Native Hawaiians. And so there is no other law that is requiring us to house anyone else. This is the only one. So I support this 100%. Mahalo, Tara.

Thank you. And members to Nancy.

Hello, Chair. And just following up on Member Rollins Fernandez questioning about the Organic Act for Corporation Council under the 78 state constitution, the public trust law. Are we obligated to? um, uh, provide water for under the public trust for DHHL.

Yes. One of the public trust purposes of water is provision of water to DHHL.

Like, is it like 10%? So we're, we're obligated as, as the county or the state is obligated.

Um, the government in general is obligated to promote public, the public trust for water resources. And so both the state and the county have an obligation.

Okay, and then for Deputy Landgraf, so are we using some of the G.E.T. to increase the water infrastructure? Are we using funding to increase accessibility to the project?

Not for this project.

Not for this project, was it not a project? Yes, that's the Lahaina project. That was Lahaina project, okay. So we're not using any of that GTE funds for this?

Not currently, no.

Okay, all right. Okay, that's the only questions I had for now, Chair. Thank you. Supportive.

Thank you, Councilmember Uhu-Hodgins.

Thank you, Chair. I really have no other questions other than what has been asked earlier today. I did have a meeting with them a while ago about this project as well, and my questions were answered then, and I'm happy to support. Thank you.

Thank you. Chair has a couple questions. In the pre-meeting with DHHL and DWS, we discussed whether the phrase for its own use in Section 5 conflicts with the use restriction in Section 1.03. In response, DHHL noted that DWS' use remains subject to the use restriction, given that the restriction is the phrase for its own use necessary, or could it be removed to avoid any ambiguity? I think it's a corp, anybody question? And section five. conflicts with the use restriction in section 1.03. And in response, DHHL noted that DWS's use remains subject to the use restriction, given that that restriction is a phase for its own use necessary, or could it be removed to avoid any ambiguity? This question is being asked because it was part of the previous meeting and we just needed clarity from Corp Council and from the department.

Chair, it's on page six of the agreement. It's the fourth from the last line of section five.

And sorry what was the first section you said so there was a portion in section 5 and the other one was in section what?

Section 1.03

Chair, so I think that what that allows us to do is we may need to adjust our flow to match the DHHL usage, and that's what it's there for. It doesn't really, the restriction will still be there, but we may need to adjust the flow, so we may need to kind of change the rate we operate the system just to match the flow. Okay, so it's clarification. What was that, sorry?

I'm just saying that it's to matching the flow, the use with the flow.

Yeah, so let's say that the usage was, 500,000 a day, and we may need to adjust the flow in the DWS system to match that usage. The restriction would still be there, but because we had to adjust a portion of our system to make up the difference, then what that is there for, because we may need to use some of the DWS water to adjust for the flow, but then we would bring it back and balance it out.

Okay, thank you for that clarification and chair if I may I believe that the portion in section 5 is Mostly referring to use of the infrastructure and not to the use of the water That's part of my second question

In the pre-meeting we discussed whether page six section seven on the source credits of not less than 1.72 million gallons per day is appropriate. DHHL's position is the not less than is appropriate because their beneficiaries want to be assured that the entirety of the operational capacity of the three wells is allocated or prioritized for DHHL's use. And that has been validated and clarified in this meeting. Chair is very supportive of this. It's pretty exciting that the HHL's organization and all of their land holdings and all of the beneficiaries matched with their current funding and the awarding the leases and really getting ahead of this to get people back on the land and then collaborating with department of water supply utilizing the existing infrastructure that the county of maui has this is just really an exciting win-win for all the beneficiaries and it's going to help with our housing needs for our community in a really big way

Thank you, Chair.

Is there a need for a second round? Anybody? Member Bedonga.

Thank you, Chair. I guess I'd just like to start off by saying I'm also supportive of this. I just have a couple questions regarding terms within the agreement that I'd like to ask before we take the vote. So this one's for Deputy Director. Under Exhibit A, Section 2, scope of DHHL's obligations, it says that they will perform all tasks necessary to develop the project, make it operational, and commence delivery of water at no cost to DWS. But prior, in the same exhibit, it says that DHHL will be pursuing funding from the project from various sources, including the fed, state, and county, and that DWS will assist them in obtaining those fundings, including from the county. So what non... DWS funds do you anticipate the county needing for this project? Because it seems weird for one department to say, we will not be paying into this project for ourselves, but there will be an obligation created, whereas you will look for money from other departments.

Well, I don't know if we would do it directly. Right. But if they needed support from DWS saying that we support the project and we're going to, you know, do what the agreement says, then we will say that. Right. Now, I'm not sure if some of this also means G E T money. I don't.

Right.

Okay.

And then I would like, so in the first round of questioning, I know that you guys had mentioned that if the estimated yield doesn't match actual, that you guys would discuss an adjustment in the credits given plus or minus, either way. But I would feel more comfortable if there was language to that effect included in the agreement. Would you guys be opposed to that? I don't have language available now, but I just want the county covered.

Could I ask for a five-minute recess, which is going to address that question, and it was something that I didn't address.

Okay, sure. Everybody okay for a five-minute recess? Can I ask my last question first? Go ahead. This one's for Corp Council. So you had brought up Force Majeure, is that how you pronounce it? When you read the definition, it included government action or inaction or other events or occurrences beyond such party's control. If they are a government entity and we are a government entity, how is it that government action or inaction is outside of either party's control? How would you How would we enforce this clause within the agreement?

So the idea of that is, you know, the parties are DWS and DHHL. There are other governmental entities that might, for whatever reason, create a delay in this. The federal government, some action on their part could create a delay. It could be another department of the state, you know, becoming involved and causing a delay, that sort of thing.

Okay. Okay. Thank you, chair. Thank you. I'm okay with the, with the recess now.

So the staff five minute recess, it isn't, it's not welcome back members. We're going to reconvene at two 42 for our white, uh, committee afternoon meeting. Um, So I'm going to address a couple of things. One, with Corp Council, the agreement appears to skip Section 8 going from 7 to Section 9, and Section 9 includes a reference to Section 8. Could you clarify whether Section 8 is missing or whether these references need to be corrected?

Thank you.

MR. Thank you, Chair. That was a transcribing error on our part. So it does go from Section 7 to Section 9. Section nine then refers to section eight above. However, section seven is directly above that and also it refers to source credits and paragraphs or section seven deals with source credits. So I see that change as being a non-substantive change, just renumbering.

Okay, thank you. Now Chair would like to entertain a motion to recommend passage of Bill 97 on first reading, including any non-substantive changes. So moved. So moved by Member Johnson, seconded by Member Sinensi. Any discussion?

Member Patonga. Thank you, Chair. I don't have language for a motion, but I just want it on record again that I would prefer if there was language to describe what happens if there's a delta between the expected and actual operating capacity from the three wells.

I think I can help with that. I'm gonna make a motion to amend by removing the phase 1,728,000 gallons per day. And within it, by removing that, it basically just uses the source capacity as the volume.

Wait, what paragraph are you deleting text from?

Chair, so this would be a motion to amend Exhibit A to the bill, Section 7, where the amendment would be to remove the phrase 1,728,000 gallons per day, which is so that the first paragraph would read, upon the completion, final inspection and dedication and acceptance of the Waiohuli Wells by DWS and completion of the license, DWS shall grant DHHL source credits and the appurtenant source availability on a first priority basis, collectively the source credit of not less than the total DWS operating capacity of the three wells. That would be the first sentence in section seven.

DHHL, are you comfortable with that language? Yes, we are comfortable with that. So moved, Chair. I guess I should have asked both parties. I agree with the language.

Okay, thank you. So moved, Chair. Okay, thank you, Member Johnson. Did you have a question or you're voting? Okay, thank you.

What?

Sorry, Chair, just for clarification, you would delete the last sentence of that paragraph?

Apologies, Chair, no, that was just an amendment to the first sentence of that paragraph, not the entire paragraph.

Oh, no, okay. So you would keep the... So the second sentence in the paragraph,

Yes, perhaps you're right, Councilmember Sinensi, that that may be appropriate for deletion. Perhaps the Chair would like to ask for DWS and DHHL comments.

If I could maybe make a suggestion that it say instead of deleting it, we put something along the lines of the estimated 1,728,000 gallons per day is sufficient source capacity for DHHL's proposed developments in Central, South, and upcountry Maui. So we're just adding the term proposed or anticipated.

Okay, so just for clarification, the paragraph would read that the credits would be equal to the operating capacity of the three wells and then the second paragraph would be the estimated or the anticipated 1,728,000 gallons per day sufficient.

Mr. Rowe. Yeah, maybe the estimated 1,728,000 gallons per day capacity of the wells is sufficient source capacity. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Rowe. Friendly.

Yes, thank you, member Senetti.

I think we should probably ask DHHL because they are gonna have to update. This is an agreement that has been negotiated.

Yes, for DHHL, we're fine with that as long as we get the full entirety of the operating capacity of the wells.

Would you prefer that language as to, well, I don't want to muddy the waters. That's fine. If you're in agreement and the lawyer's in agreement and the amenders seem to be okay, I'm not gonna shake this tree.

Member Rollins-Fernandez, thank you. Member Rollins-Fernandez?

Mahalo, Chair. First... Sunshine Law, disclaimer, both my children are now home from high school and my husband from work, McKenna Fernandez. Okay, I just wanted to point out or have stated for the record and for the public that may be watching, 1.03 capacity of Waiʻohuli wells, max capacity of the three wells combined is anticipated to produce approximately 2,592,000 gallons per day with 24 hours continuous pumping. And then the 1,728,000 is for an estimated 16 hours of pumping. And in this section, it does also say which is approximately 576,000 gallons per day for a combined total. So approximate is used in this section as well. I'm supportive if both the department, DWS and DHHL, are supportive of the language. I just wanted to make sure that it was clear that the max capacity of the wells exceeded the amount of 1.7 million. Mahalo, Chair. Thank you, members.

Thank you, members, for clarification. So before I call for a vote, I'm just going to ask... Chair Lee?

Yeah, since there looks like full support of this, I just want to say that I will support it, but I still have reservations. Thank you.

Thank you, Chair. So I'm going to ask staff and Corp Council and DHHL and DWS if everybody's clear and this is fine. I'm seeing nods. Okay, great.

Yes, Chair.

Members, call for the vote on the amendment. All in favor, raise your hand and say aye.

Aye.

Chair, that's seven ayes, zero noes. Members Uhuhajins and Sugimura excused. Motion passes. You're back to the main motion as amended.

Okay. Members voting on the main motion as amended? Aye. Aye.

Chair, that's seven ayes, zero noes. Members Uhuhajins and Sugimura excused. Motion passes. Thank you. Thank you all.

Okay, thank you members. This item will move on to the full council's consideration. Thank you, Kimmel. And is there a need for a break? We're gonna move on to the next item. You guys want a break or just move on?

Move on.

Okay. Thank you very much.

Director Moline is online.

Okay. Okay, members, welcome Director Molina. He's getting booted up. So we're gonna continue. Members, Y25 relates to Resolution 26-123, which requests a limited temporary waiver from the Maui County Code pesticide restrictions. Resolution 26-123's purpose is to grant the Department of Public Works approval for a targeted minimal and highly controlled herbicide use in critical public safety areas along the county roadways where nonchemical methods have proven ineffective. I want to clearly state this resolution does not what it does not do. Resolution 26123 does not grant a broad or permanent exemption from pesticide loss. The waiver applies strictly to discrete high priority locations and conditions identified in Public Works Vegetation Management Plan under Exhibit 1. Under Code Chapter 2.5, pesticides not listed under federal organic standards are generally prohibited on county property. However, Section 2.50.060 allows agencies to apply for a temporary waiver when public safety hazards exist. The Department of Public Works has submitted a comprehensive vegetation management plan outlining specific usage areas, including pavement preservation projects, sightline impaired intersections, narrow roadways, guardrails, and tree stump removal, where overgrown vegetation presents serious hazards to motorists, pedestrians, and infrastructure. If approved, this waiver would be effective for a period of two years during which the public works must abide strictly by safety, environmental, and application guidelines in the plan while continuing to evaluate nonchemical alternatives. Also, members, I've submitted an amendment summary form with the proposed CD1 version to incorporate clarifying and non-substantive revisions for your consideration under Granicus number five. At this time, would the Department of Public Works like to introduce themselves and provide any opening comments? Director.

Yeah, thank you, Chair. Good afternoon, members of the White Committee. I am Jordan Moline. I'm the Director with the Department of Public Works. Thank you for your time today. On the call with me. We have our highways chief Michael Ken Norris as well as our consultant Who's been supporting us on the plan development? Mickey slants, I may Refer to them during the Q&A for any questions Are they with us they're online, okay and

so we should designate them as resources, and could they introduce themselves?

Chair, they're enabled on our end, so they can go ahead.

Hey, good afternoon. This is Michael Canaris, the Chief of our Highways Division.

Hello, this is Miki Slintz with Hayway and Aldrich.

Thank you, Chair. Is that it? Yeah. Okay, members, any objection to designating them as resources due to their expertise?

No objection.

Okay. I would just ask to please speak closely into your microphone loudly and distinctly for us in the chambers, but also for everybody online. Thank you.

Yeah, so the department is here today to request a waiver. from the pesticide restriction code. And so, next slide please. So under the code provisions, there is a process allowed for up to a two year waiver request to be granted by the county council to enable targeted herbicide use. Our request is specific to our use in county right of ways for the maintenance of our infrastructure. The request includes use confined to specific locations where we've struggled with non-chemical methods and where we feel public safety is at risk. Our request is supported by the vegetation management plan document which has been transmitted to you folks that identifies locations, provides photographs, site conditions, some management history, cost information, and impact minimization efforts. Anything beyond what is being presented today would be subject to additional waiver requests in the future. And so for some background, Ordinance 5242 enacted in 2021 took effect on August 5th, 2022 and established Chapter 2.50 to restrict pesticide and fertilizer use on county property. Section 2.50.060 provides for a waiver process subject to council approval. Waivers are two years and may be extended upon subsequent council approval. Next slide, please. Thank you. Oh, sorry, going back one. There we go. So under that section, or subsection 060C, there's criteria established for the council to consider when approving any waiver. Three criteria include a situation exists that threatens public health and safety, Alternative control methods that allow substance have been evaluated and determined to be insufficient. An application of otherwise prohibited substance will, to the greatest extent practical, minimize the impact on abutting properties. Next slide, please. So the first criteria in public health and safety. So we'll walk through some examples where we document hazards on county roadways, sidewalks, and roadway safety infrastructure where we're seeking to utilize this waiver. Next slide, please. So one of the biggest impacts vegetation can have on roadways is visibility and sightline obstructions. especially on our rural, narrow, windy roads where you're already constrained with site visibility. The encroachment of vegetation just increases the risk on those roadways. Additionally, when the vegetation encroaches into the road itself, it pushes vehicles and all other users towards the center. So you can imagine on our narrow, windy roads, when you have that condition, it just contributes to less safe conditions. Within our improved areas, these weeds can penetrate into cracks, pavement, and pavement and sidewalks. They can grow to the point of becoming trip hazards for pedestrian strollers, wheelchairs, et cetera. They also can contribute to failure of those pavements by forcing water infiltration into those areas that can undermine the integrity of those improvements. Additionally, along our roadways, we have various traffic safety devices, including our traffic signs and our guardrails that need to ensure line of sight to make sure they function and can be observed by motorists easily and clearly. So those areas are notorious for growing vegetation right around them. The other hazard we experience with just the additional manual removal is our crews being at risk on the roadways doing this work on these narrow, tight roadways for extended period of times on high frequency because manual removal is what warrants that amount of frequency, being out there cutting grass to ensure that those heights do not start to become a risk to the roadway safety. Next slide, please. So our waiver proposes use along these hardened surfaces, our pavement and preservation, and our sidewalk services. The images on the right, you can see various scenarios of vegetation growing up along cracks, Within pavement, even those that have been treated once before, on the left you can see a pavement crack that's been sealed, and we have re-emergent of the vegetation through those cracks. On the right, you can see a brand new infrastructure project where we installed new sidewalks, and so between the curb line and at the face of the wall there, those joints are notorious for growing weeds in those cracks, and they can be very difficult to get removed manually. And so these are typical applications where we would be requesting to utilize our targeted herbicide to help control the emergence of those weeds in those conditions. Next slide, please. So another area is that intersections and narrow winding roadways. Particularly, there's seven intersections upcountry along our major thoroughfares that we feel it's critical to maintain that visibility at those intersections. Additionally, out towards Kahikili Highway, or on Kahikili Highway past Waihe'e, That road is a narrow, windy road, many stretches of guard rail and signage, and the remote location makes it difficult to keep up with vegetation maintenance out in that area. The other request we've received from our districts is to support it on Lanai, given our small bandwidth over there and the long expanse of Keaumoku Road downtown. on the backside of Lanai, those areas would support us being able to better maintain the vegetation control out in those areas. And of course, as the vegetation grows, I mentioned earlier, the line of sight impedes encroaching into the roadway more and more, as well as the accumulation and the trapping of moisture along those areas just contributes to the degradation of those improvements along those roadways. Next slide, please. So yeah, specific usage areas along our roadside infrastructure, our guardrails, signposts, utility poles, reflectors, where concerns about visitability arises. And we also struggle with the, besides just weed eating, any kind of hand tools to really get those areas clear of vegetation is challenging. when we try and do manual removal. And also just having to apply that much more man hours on the road in those conditions creates its own hazards for our crews as well. And so these targeted areas is where we hope to be being able to utilize the waiver being requested today. Next slide, please. We also want to use these this waiver to improve our tree removal projects. When we take down large trees, often you can get re-emergence from the root, the stump that remains, which has us going out back there regularly to re-maintain and re-pull down any new regrowth that's occurring. And so targeted use on those newly cut stumps will allow us to better control the regrowth of those roots and of those tree stumps. Again, utilizing it targetly when we freshly cut as opposed to any sort of broadcast applications. Next slide please. So yeah, the department maintains a vast roadway network of over 1,000 miles of roadway shoulders. Since we've stopped using herbicides, there was a large increase in staffing as a result. And even with that, we are still working six days a week just trying to keep pace. And it's difficult to keep up with all of it. Anybody that's fought green cane grass knows three weeks it's fully grown again. And so it's required us to be out there at least twice a month hitting those same areas over and over. Sometimes we get lucky with rain, but most times, especially in these areas, Haiku, Kakuloa, even the dry days promote vegetation growth. These are also our more steep areas. Access is limited. Confined corridors make everything a bit more challenging. So the more we can minimize our cruise exposure on those corridors, I think the better. And then lastly, of course, the tree removal, for which we'll have a lot after our Tropical Storm Lala cleanup gets through. Next slide, please. So second criteria in the waiver requirements includes evaluation of alternatives. Next slide please. We have been approached over the years with several different strategies that we've tested. Of course right now manual mowing and cutting is our practice. In previous budgets, council approved the use of steam treatment, which we've tested, and fortunately have not found good success in that piece of equipment, and not have found that it's a very, quick application either. And so that system has been abandoned. We also have piloted use of weed mats at a few different locations under guardrails. They're quite extensive in labor to install, and they haven't provided the life that we expected them to. Our weeds are very healthy over here, and so they eventually win over time. A couple of organic treatments that we've been presented with and tested just haven't shown to have long-term staying power. And so needing to over-apply those types of products is a concern for us as well. So those are some of our pilots we've tested that we don't feel confident utilizing as a permanent measure going forward. Next slide, please. So our team went through some of their records to try and capture some of the costs. as a comparison, if we are able to utilize that targeted application, we can anticipate substantial savings, which to me not only frees us up to tackle other duties we have, but also gives us capacity to try and figure out better strategies that we can work towards to continue working to offset our use of the herbicides that were being asked to consider today. Next slide please. The third criteria involves minimizing impacts for any herbicide use that is being conducted. Next slide please. So of course our utilization is specific to county rights of way. We are considering a pre-emergent product which ensures that new growth is controlled and that's what we hope will allow us to minimize overall application. of any sort of herbicides and ensure that we don't have to be treating more than we need to. Also for the tree removal, directly applying that to cut surfaces and not any sort of broadcast applications. Next slide please. So part of our request involves targeted, limited, and precision applications, again, to those traffic safety devices along our roadways, to those pavement and sidewalk structures, those joints specifically, where we see the weeds emerge. So very targeted to those locations and those growth areas. Broadcasting or aerial spraying is not being considered. And really just where we need to ensure that longer term safety conditions at those critical traffic safety areas. Next slide please. Our prior use of herbicides included certified applicators, so our staff get trained and licensed to be able to apply pesticides following all regulatory instructions on applications. controlling our application approaches, low pressure, shielded nozzles, spray wands, cognizant of weather conditions, avoiding rainfall soon, before or after applications, avoiding high wind conditions to mitigate drift, following manufacturer recommendations on rate, testing equipment to ensure we're applying that consistently, Limiting application where potential discharge into storm drains or other surface waters could be a risk. Managing our handling and our storage of the materials, ensuring that we're not doing it over any places where spills could be not contained. Proper storage at our facilities. Appropriate signage went out on the roadways to ensure the public's aware when applications are occurring and ensuring sites are secured until the proper cure time has allowed for safe access by the public. Next slide, please. So to wrap up my presentation this afternoon, we feel that the public health and safety is a concern here that warrants our waiver requests to ensure those traffic safety conditions are preserved along our roadways for a more reliable period of time. Like I mentioned, those sight distance encroachments, trip hazards are those targeted areas where we seek to utilize our waiver. We have tried our handful of alternatives, and we feel like the utilization of the waiver will ensure responsible use and effective use and allow us to continue evaluating other methods in the meantime. And lastly, that we have best management practices amongst our crews that will be applying the herbicides to ensure that we minimize its exposure to the public and to the environment and ensure that it is very targeted and controlled so that we don't have to increase the risk of utilizing these materials on our roadways. So that concludes my presentation for this afternoon. Thank you for your time.

Thank you, Director. Does your team have anything to add, or they're basically here for answering questions? Okay. Thank you. Members? Testimonious, Paul, right? No, we're taking testimonials. Oh, okay. At this time, I would like to open public testimony for Y25.

Staff, please call the first testifier. Thank you, Chair. The first individual to testify is calling from the phone number last four digits 4945, and they can dial star six to unmute themselves and begin their testimony.

Thank you, staff.

This is Jesse Law.

Can you hear me? Yes, we can hear you.

Okay, thank you. It's kind of tough when you can't just see and then it's like real quiet. Okay, I'm over here. I moved over to another location in Kaului. I'm here with one other person that would like to testify after me. And one of the advantages of being testifying remotely and not being there in the chamber is that there's no rules to eating rules. That's another plus for today's news is I got to enjoy some ice cream without that big mean ambassador guy coming over and harassing me for eating in the chamber. So I understand this is agenda item about using herbicide. It goes, So, yeah, this is a tough one for me again. My instinct is to say no to that, but I'm a worker man, so I don't realize how hard it is to compete with Mother Nature, and especially when it's so many roads and not enough helpers. I wish I could watch the slides, so I really don't like being excluded from the council meeting by the county clerk's office. I just wanted to put that on there. And my other alternative to using the herbicide is that people should depend on the government to do everything for them, and there should be more community organizations to get out there and maintain the roadway. And I've been trying, trying, trying to do something like that in my neighborhood, but actually, I wouldn't say the county government is stopping me, although they kind of are because they don't really, I don't know how to put it. They're not helping me get a business started. So very frustrating for me to sound like there's a lot of work to be done, but being told that I can't help. So yeah, that's my... That's my, that's my, the way I'm sticking with the community to help more and get together. And as I said, no, that's not my job. That's the county's job. And I would like to get into, I don't know if there's any more meetings this week, but what solidified my opinion to say no is that there's probably gonna be some compromise. And I especially wanna hear from the former guys. But it's Queen Yulia Kalani's motion. birthday's on Wednesday and he probably wouldn't appreciate it.

Okay, here's the other testifier.

He wants to speak up.

You have three minutes, I'll let you know. Okay, tell me when.

Okay, introduce yourself.

Yes, my name is Hines Kuwo. Hines Kuwo represents the Kenan-Wa'i government, a sovereign nation of God. Now, the point is, the point I said from before, Richard Beeson, who we're talking to, also the county council, which is you guys and they all know who you're talking to. I am representing from Kapo's side, which is the whole entire island, which means where do I live? I live in Maui, in the kingdom. Every island I go to is in the kingdom. We're four plus million acres large. Because of your non-righteous act been doing from the beginning of 1893, it continually passed out all the way to now, which is all screwed up. And because it's screwed up, because you guys illegally did it, I'll be calling you guys down in this month to come, day to come, as being murderers. You guys are totally Maui County, Kane, Maui County, and the snake state of Hawaii, and the serpent state of America. There are nothing but murderers. And also, our Africa, our sovereign nation of Africa, is also stating that we are going all the way to the end. That means this is not America. And everybody is in the government, county council. I'll be talking to you very soon, okay? And I'm talking to you right here, right now, at Walmart. And the point is, I'll be talking to all you guys soon. So you guys do hear me, right? Right? Because I love all you folks. But this is not no place to be talking about this outrageous act at Walmart. I definitely see you guys again. And definitely, it is not America. It will never be America. I ain't going back to those guys no matter what. And that is the end. We are Kingdom Hawaii. Bottom line. Hawaii, goodbye.

Thank you for your testimony. Members, any clarifying questions?

Seeing none, staff, next testifier. Chair, that's all the individuals signed up. I can do a last call for oral testimony. If anyone would like to testify, please come to the big podium and begin your testimony or raise your hand on teams and staff will enable you. The count is three, two, one. Seeing none, Chair, no one has indicated that they wish to testify.

Members, seeing no more individuals wishing to testify without objection, I'll now close oral testimony. As a reminder, written testimony will be continued to be accepted into the record. Members, I'm proposing two rounds of three-minute questions per member. Any objections? Seeing none, let's start with Councilmember Patonga.

Thank you, Chair. Only questions have to do with the proposed locations. So I understand the intersections and then the narrow and winding roads because they're specifically listed, but for the rest of them, the pavement preservation projects, the sidewalk maintenance projects, the guardrails, those kind of things. Do you have a sense of where they're at, how many, or is it just like, I mean, I guess guardrails, I can see, but I don't know the scale or scope of your pavement preservation projects and sidewalk maintenance projects.

The intent is for all of them really to be treated and ensure that we have those features visible. It varies between districts and they are throughout the roadways at various points. We don't have an inventory of guardrails on a map at this point in time. Our pavement preservation, I mean we can present that on what's up on the schedule and where we're using those on those projects and similarly with sidewalk maintenance. Any projects that we do undertake and this is primarily in-house for our highways crew that does in-house work.

Okay.

So yeah, sidewalks is more in our urbanized areas, those urban streets. Of course, pavement is all over the place, depending on the schedule for any given year.

Okay, so I would just look at the department's maintenance. log or whatever you guys have for upcoming projects to get a sense of where these are going to be used.

Yeah, and what we could provide is we previously applied herbicides prior to the ban. Okay. And so we have those records from where those maintenance applications occurred. Okay.

And then this is a limited time waiver. So this body would grant two years. What's the plan? Are you guys intending to look for... a permanent solution between then? Or is the idea that you'll test it out and then if, well, I guess since you previously used herbicide, you know how it's gonna work. So is the plan to keep asking for limited term waivers?

We'll see how this first two years go. With our guardrail work, we are changing the practice to try and essentially pave under the guardrails to try and minimize growth that occurs right there. What's hard is not all guardrails can just get paved. So like a lot of guardrails on need slope remediation to redo the guardrails. And so a guardrail project turns into a multimillion-dollar slope repair first. Otherwise, the guardrail is really just floating on an embankment that's not so sound. So that's one operational practice we would change to try and apply hard surfaces under those pavement structures or those structures that we can try and avoid the prevalence of growth there and the need for herbicides in those areas. Yeah, so depending on what we can do over the next two years, how much progress we can make exploring alternatives, and we'll see where we're at as far as needing additional or coming for additional waiver requests or choosing an alternative. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Director.

Thank you. Member Johnson, discussion.

Thank you, Chair. Director, we've had this discussion in the past in this committee. I'm sure you're aware of how I feel on this. So I'll just simply ask about some solutions that maybe we could agree on, like the Adopt a Sidewalk program. Would you consider that where the community goes out and gets those sidewalks that you say that are particularly hard for your crews to get, something like that, where we bring the community in? What's your opinion on that?

We're not opposed to that. Those are hard programs to rely upon. The code already provides that the sidewalks are the responsibility of the budding property owner. But enforcement of that is not well appreciated. That's a different topic as well. There's also certain conditions that are, let's just say people, some people have more challenging frontages than others.

Yeah, sure. It's a big thing we're talking about here, so to narrow it down, like Joe's sidewalk versus Susie's sidewalk, I get it, like they're all variable.

Yeah, I mean, we can explore those opportunities as well. Great. But yeah, the reliability would be part of the concern there.

I understand that. You know, I'm going to ask another question about the dangerous, windy roads that you mentioned. You know, I have concern about our crew. I'm sure the body concerns. We don't want anyone getting hurt. So maybe you could give us some data or some facts on that. Like how many accidents or incidents did we have last year from mechanical weed removal on our roads? Was there anybody got hurt last year?

I have to go verify, but from what I recall, I think we did okay. So I'm not aware that we have actual harm occurring.

So we've been okay so far. I'm glad to hear that, that's good news. So the idea that it's dangerous and our folks might get hurt, it was concerning to me to hear that. You didn't have one incident last year, knock on wood, hopefully no more, but I just wanna make sure that we're clear on that. So the idea that you were using weed zap and it was underperforming, that is my understanding that it's cinnamon based and I use cinnamon based because it's organic on my farm. But cinnamon based herbicides is very specific in how you use it. Nothing more than six inches. You can't spray it on a 10 foot tall cane grass and expect results. It's not going to happen. You get them when they're babies, you get them when they're starts. So I think the idea that, and this was your words that kind of made me think about this, you said, we had to over apply these organic fertilizers. And that is a concern for me because your very next slide said we have to use the exact amounts according to the label, which is exactly what we want you to do. So we don't want people to over-apply any type of chemical if it's not performing. So I think, first off, I want to clear that up. I certainly hope that you guys aren't just, if it doesn't work, just add more. That's not the solution. No, no, no.

It would be more just needing more applications. OK.

Okay, is what I meant not that we would just dump the whole gallon on it I guess I wanted to be clear when you said over apply I had concerns because there are specific rules on every type of herbicide and now we have to read them and we have to do Over apply not in the sense of each application, but in terms of strategy or Harrison. Yeah. Okay.

That's what was meant All right.

Thank you clarification the, and I heard the time, so I'll just wait for the next round. Thank you so much, thank you, Chair. Oh. It's, Chair, you want me to ask another question? I will, otherwise I can wait, whatever you want.

Chair Lee, questions?

Thank you, thank you. Hello Jordan, Director. I certainly support your request because I see our crews working the highways all the time in Wailuku and those long stretches on Kahikili and other places prove that these herbicides and a lot of these types of other things we're supposed to be using might work in some areas and not work in other areas especially in areas that are become overgrown very quickly and so so you have sight distance problems driving and you also have uh you know fire prevention challenges so i i fully understand what you're trying to do and i support you on that thank you chair

Member Paulton.

Thank you, Mr. Corp Council. My understanding is two years is the maximum. Can we go for a less amount of time on the waiver?

Yes, under the section D, it says it may be a period for up to two years.

Okay, so I would prefer starting off with like something like six months or something if we gotta do this. The other question I had is when you said you tried the steam thing and like that, was that the year like, your budget jumped up like millions or something because we were doing this alternative method. So did you buy the STEAM stuff? And then what happened to it?

And then I thought you were also adding positions as well. Yeah, so that's the same year. We bought the equipment and we bought all the bodies and that's how much vegetation work there is and how effective the herbicide use was in offsetting those man hours.

So what happened to the steam equipment? Did you sell it?

I'll have to verify. I think they're still trying to use it on Lanai. but the other districts discontinued its use.

So you auctioned it off at public auction or what happened to the equipment that we purchased at a big dollar amount?

Yeah, there were like 25,000 a piece or so and we still have them.

So what is the plan for that? Recoup the money or? We don't know yet. It's junk right now. Okay. Then those specific intersections or any of these places, are they close to the ocean or coaches and things like that?

Some may be, so like, of course, South Key Road gets pretty close, but those would be areas we'd have to reassess, because we mentioned we wanna be cognizant of those proximity to any kind of water bodies, drainage ways, even catch basins themselves.

So does the waiver need an amendment to not be in a proximity to bodies of water?

We have that, I believe that's in there, but if that wants to be, council wants to add that as additional condition, should they choose to approve the waiver, we take no objection to that.

Okay, and then this Haley Aldrich, you guys had to hire a consultant to help you with your waiver request, is that what happened?

Yeah, as you can see, there's a 42-page document that our highways division had to prepare. So we utilized consulting services and being that this is the first one ever submitted on this ordinance, we felt it best to bring in that help to make sure we could do it as thorough as possible.

Did you not hire a consultant on how to remove the weeds without pesticides or herbicides?

No, that was all done internally by our staff back in 2018, around the time we were getting a lot of inquiries about those products and whatnot. So we had some test sites out at our Waikapu yard.

Okay, so you hired a consultant to get a waiver, but you didn't hire a consultant to do the job without herbicides or pesticides? Correct. Okay. I'm kind of leaning towards voting no on it as presented. So I'm not sure if you want to defer or do something else to get this looking better than what it currently looks like. There's concern about the use of pesticide along Kahikili Highway because it runs off straight into the ocean. the pavement preservation, I don't know if you can just scrape that off or something else, but I'm leaning towards no, thank you.

Member Rollins-Fernandez, your turn.

Mahalo, Chair. So I went back to the meeting minutes on July 21st, 2021 and the committee report on August 6th, 2021 to better understand what was discussed when voting on the waiver application like a location a location map for the proposed usage area a landscape plan photographs of it i don't think it meant like all guard rails i don't i don't think that that was like the intention with the waiver um i i heard what you said uh director to One of my colleagues' questions about, oh, I think that was Member Patongan, about what you would achieve in two years. So if you had specific locations where you plan to pave under the guardrails in this next year or two, then I could be supportive of those specific locations under the guardrails. I think when we created this section, it really was to try to phase out the amount of pesticide use. And I think when we had parks come before us to discuss you know, the potential of using the waiver as well. Like, my understanding from, you know, the experts at the time was about better soil health. And, you know, I know that's parks and so, you know, this is highways and so how much investment are you going to make into the health of the soil? for these areas. I guess I would have liked to at least hear about that. And if that would have required contracting consultant to help you with that, then maybe that would have been helpful. But like my colleagues, I don't see an end to this waiver after two years. There's no plan aside from paving under some of the guardrails and then shoring up the guardrails with weak embankments to pave under those. And I don't know about like safety about like tripping. I don't think that that's what was really intended for safety. Because these areas where people would walk, are they along the highways? And would trip?

Yeah, sidewalks is where pedestrians would be walking.

but the photos that you submitted in the proposal, it didn't look like sidewalks. It looks more like gutters.

It could be along the gutter cracks as well, wherever those weeds emerge along those joints between the pavement and the concrete of either the gutter or the back of the curb and the sidewalk or curvy sidewalk in any wall structures.

Okay, any other comments to my comments?

No, we'll take those into consideration, thank you.

Okay, Mahalo Chair.

Thank you. Member Sinensi, questions for the Director?

Yeah, Mahalo Chair, Mahalo. Director Molina, for your presentation, I do understand. I spend a lot of the time on the road driving here and back to Hana, so I understand the overgrowth. However, I too have some concerns. I can see where for the preservation projects, a lot of, I see some of the growth that are coming out of the cracks and the sidewalks and on the roads. However, those are the areas that our kids utilize the most. On the summer breaks and even after schools, this is where they're playing. This is where they're riding their bicycles, right on the sidewalks. So think spraying. That was one of the main reasons that I supported the bill was for the safety of our residents and our parks, especially our children. I supported it for the safety of our county workers and utilizing this product. I don't know how many in the past were affected by, you know, and I would want to kind of see that, that, um, data. Cause I remember seeing a lot of, um, our county workers get sick too. Um, I've personally experienced that. So that was my main concern. So I don't want to, uh, put our county workers in danger, let alone put the county at risk of litigation against us. If, if the safety concerns of using these, you know, um, glyphosate, um, chemicals near our children and our workers. So that was the main concern that I supported the bill, just for the protection and safety of our workers, our community against lawsuits. Part of the waiver was, you mentioned some of the areas. If there are areas where there's hardly any population. Because I can tell you now, if you start spraying, you're gonna get a million calls about seeing the dry grass along the roadways. And it's not just the department. A lot of our offices will also receive these calls. We already have. And it's not even county roads. If the state sprays, we'll get the calls. And I say, well, it's not our county roads. but they get state and county highways mixed up. So we get a lot of those. But we did discuss the waiver. If it was areas out in Kaupō, areas where there's hardly any population, I think we can be supportive. Areas that the workers cannot access for some areas. I would like to see, as Member Rollins-Fernandez say, see the areas where we can utilize the equipment that we purchased right after the bill passed. We added an extra $7 million to the budget just to address this bill, the ban on pesticides. So there are areas where you get the big cane grass that you could use the big machinery. But other places too, I would support, if this list of areas in Haiku is a tripping hazard, I would just go ahead and pave over it or cement or even spray concrete some of the areas so that you're not having, just pave over it those areas so that you get the clean line of sight. So, like Member Rollins-Fernandez, I would like to see those areas. I think the report needs to be, I mean, I get it, you're addressing certain places, but when it comes to pavement preservation, that's the entire county. And for me, just where our kids are playing, that's a concern for me. Thank you, Chair. Sorry for going over.

Thank you, Member Ascendancy. Council Member Uhadjiz is excused, she had to go. Chair's question, everybody got a question, right? Okay. When you're director, what's the difference between past practice and this planned limited focus use? said no aerial spraying they didn't spray aerial before but would you drive along with a truck and spray it now you're gonna use backpack what's kind of what's the mechanics and the utilization to apply so that we have a better understanding yeah so the department prior to the prohibition had been reducing its herbicide use

And so it had declined greatly. We stopped the broadcast spraying. So the brown grass that Member Sinensi mentioned is that broadcast spraying, which is not part of what we would be doing anymore. Manual cutting is still gonna be involved. So we're not gonna stop cutting and be spraying everything. It's just these features like the guardrails, the signs, that we need to ensure that site distance can be preserved longer. So combination of manual removal and timely application would be the approach now, as it had been prior to the prohibition going into effect.

Other clarification, like a sidewalk, it's where the weeds, the asphalt's meeting the curb and where it's growing through cracks. So it would be like spot spraying where it's necessary, not the whole sidewalk. Correct, yeah. We're not gonna paint the sidewalk with herbicides. No, I understand the concern. It's a really legitimate concern and just trying to focus in on the...

I mean, I think most people that have license to apply pesticides understand those protocols and that targeted use, which is what we're, in the direction we would be going for our applications.

Who will be supervising the applications?

So that licensure comes from the State Department of Health, and then it'll be part of our team and all our safety program to oversee those applications.

Well, I would hope because of the past legislation, the sensitivity and education from the community about the hazards, that the application and the oversight would be comprehensive. And that's why you're asking for temporary application. So I've seen since we had the drought, now we've had a lot of rain, and uh in my district and just every nook and cranny everything's growing like crazy and i think from my experience kind of farming and whatnot pruning stimulates growth so when you get in there and you weed eat it it's not killing it it's just basically knocking it back for a bit so um Thank you for your presentation members second round of questions started with member raise of hands member Johnson first remember the dongun second

Okay, thank you, Chair. Director, in your slides, you had Lanai-Kiyomoku Highway, and not to get in the weeds of this discussion here, thank you, I was saving that. Iowa's always in the assumption that that's not a county road, so can you clarify that? We do maintenance, no. Right, we do maintenance on a state road, is that correct? It's an old government road. Okay. Can you clarify that for my community? Because we often get in the weeds on this. It's an old government road that the county maintains. So when we got to fix it, where does the funds come from?

I'll direct you to Chapter 12.50 that talks about maintenance of old government roads. And if there is a desire to do an improvement, that's something for the council to consider, whether it's willing to take on those obligations. Is it a one-time obligation or is it a forever obligation? You know, once we touch it. That's what I was thinking. It was gonna be like that, right? So that code is structured in that way to address one-time obligations. all right i don't want to go any farther and it involves home heartless agreements etc from abutting property owners so it's yeah it's it's robust in the sense of trying to mitigate against the perpetual obligation on those old government roads and yet here we are we're planning to spray on this old government road so does that add more liability or not liability more responsibility for us uh well the intent is to remove it because we cutting grass down there already right So I would say it would alleviate our crews on Lanai to shift them to be working on other areas.

Yeah, I know the road well and I know it's pretty banged up and the weeds on the road are probably the least of its problems. it's just a mess, right? And that would be for a different discussion on how do we fix that because it's an old government road. Okay, so you're asking for a full exemption, not like just we're gonna use these particular, these are the ones we wanna use, this chemical or that chemical or this herbicide. You just want an exemption. You guys would decide? Have you decided?

I mean, yeah, from what I understand, there's only a few that really are recommended. Which is glyphosate? Is glyphosate roundup for the weeds and the garland for the woody vegetation.

Yeah, both those have glyphosate. I think the second one has glyphosate in it, is that correct? The garland? Yeah. Yeah. There's so much controversy over that chemical and we talk about what it does to our children, to our environment, but also the guy who won against Monsanto, his name was Johnson just coincidentally, but he was the applicator. And that's the danger in my mind as a worker. So I think we could come up with a better solution. I don't really support this at this time, even though I appreciate you guys' work on this. So thank you, Chair. Member Patonga.

Thank you, Chair. This one was a little bit difficult for me, because I, on one hand, see the good faith effort that the department made to work within the parameters of the law. The report details significant time and taxpayer dollars that are dedicated to maintaining our roadways. But I do have two big concerns. One is that the proposed locations, I think the proposed locations need to be defined. They have those in some instances where the intersections are listed and then the narrow and windy roads are listed, but the pavement preservation projects, the sidewalk maintenance, and the guardrails are not. And I always thought that was a little bit of a weak point of the application itself. The other part is that it's been five years, I see them trying, but I did not get a sense, at least from the application, alternatives. And so I do worry that this is going to be a recurring request. And so if I do support this, I would have to be with the understanding that the department would keep working to find alternative solutions. Because I like that this application is time limited and geographically bound. If it becomes time unlimited and geographically blurry, then it's harder to support. I had initially been toying with the idea of making amendments so that it would only apply for those geographically bound sections, the ones where there's the maps and those intersections and then the narrow and winding roads. But I, in my previous role, had heard a lot from the ADA community about how unsafe the sidewalks are. And that being a large portion of the exemption request, I don't know how to structure this now. I heard Member Rollins-Fernandez's request about the weeds and the sidewalk, but I actually do think that that's one of the more important ones that we give the department the tools to be able to address because of how unsafe I have heard it can be for people who have, who are not fully able-bodied. I guess I just wanted to share that that's where my thoughts are at right now. Director, if, If you have thoughts, do you want us to take, having heard the body's thoughts on this, do you have feedback you wanna share? Are you looking for a vote today? Would you be open to amendments?

Thank you, Chair Member Batangon. This is a new process, so it's really uncertain to us, too, what the expectation of the policymakers are with this code. So we're here learning together. Thank you.

Thank you. I guess, just for the record, I would hope that if we do take this up, that the proposed locations be more defined, and that there would be an expectation that this is a bridge to help the department get things back under control so that they don't have to come back to us with a waiver request in the future. Thank you, Chair.

Thank you. So, I was gonna recommend we defer it for further discussion and clarification.

Can Member Johnson ask his question because I gave it to him because I don't know how to say the words and it would help to know the answer.

No, I don't mean to terminate discussion. I just wanted to let you know the Chair's intent. Thank you. Go ahead, Member Johnson.

Look at us all working together. Okay, real quick, the idea when you're using a cinema-based herbicide that it should be done on the cakey weeds a small smaller weeds in my mind that would be ideal for the sidewalks so have you used the cinnamon based herbicides on the sidewalks on those little you know where they're coming out of the cracks not on the 10-foot cane grass around your guardrails that that in my mind doesn't seem like a winning solution You usually from when I use, when I use this, I cut the grass first or I cut it first and then I sprayed on cause you, it's similar to the hack and squirt method where you expose the plants. Uh, Oh my God, I forget the word, but underneath this, this, the outer layer, there's inner layer that that's like you put the cinnamon based in there and that kills the plant. So how do you guys actually apply the cinnamon based herbicides? Again, we only piloted it, so we hadn't put it into full operational use. You put it on a field, that picture?

Yeah, yeah.

See, that's, of course, I wouldn't expect that to be a very useful thing, because it's meant, again, it's on the label. It says how you do it on the label, and just to spray it on a field, I don't see it being very effective. So I think it would be kind of ideal for the sidewalks. Yeah, just anywhere where the little cakey come through the cracks, that's perfect for the cinnamon stuff. I'm giving them.

No, I know. I like it. I'm just thinking about the guys in the field who are going like, okay, is this a little cakey piece or is this a big piece? And they've just been told, go clean it up. Yeah, that's pretty much it. Members? Mr. Residency.

Mahalo Chair, I would be supportive of deferring for more discussion, but just for more discussion, again, I can be supportive in areas where we wouldn't have large populations, for the east side anyway. If Director can maybe request from our local public works what areas on East Maui they're considering it or? like like um the the maps in this proposal um i'll be appreciative for maps for for east maui so that we can look further into it um i only brought up the spray uh cement because i've seen in some of our naco trips along there are roadways they do they do spray some kind of like uh um but they also spray another type of green, not foam or anything, but to keep weeds down. They have other methods that they use just to keep weeds five feet, ten feet off of the roadway. so i think by making these these large areas alongside and just keeping it with with some of these i i don't know what other municipalities are using like we can check um up at the the northwest states but they use a lot of those um some kind of spray foam and then a spray that is non-toxic and it looks organic or it could be just all the African tulip or some cuttings or something that keeps the weed down, keeps the weeds down, something like that. But I'd be open to more organic alternatives. Thank you.

Chair.

Member Ramos-Fernandez.

Mahalo, Chair, and mahalo for your recommendation. I'm supportive. I think it would be good to try out the recommendation from Member Johnson. And I don't know, I try to look it up. I don't know if it's called vascular bundles, like xylem, the tubulars within the plants that take the water up to the leaves. Anyway, so that... And, you know, like if there are like specific locations, not just all guardrail areas. And then for the sidewalks. Okay, so I have weeds that spring out through like my driveway. And I do use steam and it does kill them. it kills it all the way down to the root. But, you know, it's windy and seeds from weeds nearby will come and get stuck in the crevices and will spring up again. And that's just what happens. But I would still not be supportive of spraying pesticides when I know that steam and hot water works because I use it myself. Mahalo Char.

Okay, thank you. Member Palte.

Thank you, Chair. I'm supportive of your recommendation. I would just say, when it does come back, some of the things that I'm looking for is, like Member Batonga said, is specific areas and... a shorter time period and trying those other methodologies that have been discarded for like big fields on the pavement preservation or the sidewalks. For the guardrails, maybe they need the waiver, but what I was looking for in the waiver in health and safety was the maps that you gave for the intersections. I think majority of them are upcountry. I did wanna see, since we hired so much extra people and bought the things that if they're not applicable for guardrails or intersections, then maybe we can try them on the pavement preservation or the sidewalks because of the way that Member Johnson said the application is or Member Rollins-Fernandez said the steam, like these are small little ones and if we keep them under control, at least give it a try or a report back to us. But just seeing all guardrails, all sidewalks, all pavement preservations, there's a very clear difference between the listed intersections. I could potentially be supportive of the listed intersections, but the rest of the thing, it's not clear. Are we taking into account gulches? Are we taking into account bodies of water and things like that, which I wouldn't be supportive of. those types of areas. And then if we give a waiver for all of this, what did we purchase the equipment and hire the people for? What would they then be doing and the equipment just be sitting around? So not to say no, never, but those are some of the things I'm looking for to get to a yes.

Okay. Chairs? This is good, we're gonna defer it. Director and the Public Works has some parameters. I'd like to weigh in on the time a little bit. We're talking about 1,000 linear feet, or was it miles? Yeah, miles. Yeah, 1,000 miles, and all of the... considering the size the area the variety of things the amount of time it wouldn't be it's like you might start here it's kind of like painting a battleship you're going to start here in five months from later you're going to be over here so you're not going to be doing the whole thing for the exact time so that's one aspect of giving enough time the other aspect of it is the amount of material that's going to be used in some of these areas is going to be minute. So very healthy discussion, and I'm grateful for the presentation, and I think we all want to help Public Works accomplish their goals for safety. I think the other thing I'm thinking is they probably won't be worried to be having too many people. because there's a lot of work to be done and whatnot so um if there's no objection the council i mean the chair is going to recommend deferral of the sitem no objections so it's now 405 and 406 and i thank you all for your participation am i supposed to do anything else

No, I thank you for 24 minutes of free time though.

Bonus. Aloha friends, thank you for this afternoon.