16 Water Resources Committee - Regular Meeting

Welcome to the Thursday, 05/21/2026, what's up committee meeting. I'm Shane Senetz, your committee chair. Is now 01:38 in the PM. Mahalo members for taking the time to attend this special meeting. As a reminder, for members of the public to please silence your phones or any noise making devices.

Members in accordance with the sunshine law, if you're not in the council chamber, please identify by name who, if anyone, is in the room vehicle workspace with you today. And minors do not need to be identified. Also, see the last page of the agenda for information on meeting connectivity. Joining us this afternoon, we have Committee Vice Chair, Gabe Johnson. Aloha, good afternoon.

Aloha, chair, council members, community members. There's no testifiers at the Lanai District Office. I'm, in the car, not driving, parked with my, doggy, Hoku Chan Johnson, and she'll be snoring in the background. And I'm here and ready to work. Thank you, chair.

Alright. Welcome, Hoku. Also, we have both committee members Batanggan and Cook are excused for this afternoon's meeting. Joining us in the chamber is chair Alice Lee. Aloha.

Aloha, chair. Thank you.

Also joining us today is council member Tamara Poulton.

Thanks

for being here. Also excused from the meeting today is both council members Keanu Rollins Fernandez and member Sugimura, I believe they're at a separate conference, this afternoon. But joining us online, is council member Nohelani Uhu Hajens. Aloha.

Aloha, chair. Aloha, Aloha, everyone. I'm at my private residence alone for maybe the next, hour or so until my family comes home after school.

Okay. Thanks for joining us. What time is the graduation tonight? Tonight?

It starts at five, but traffic gets a little crazy, so I should probably head over four ish or so.

Yep.

Maybe before that.

Thanks for the reminder.

Raining, so I have to figure out how to dress warm and yeah. And it's out in the field, so I don't know. Gonna have to wash my rain jacket, I think.

King Ko Kekauliki High School?

Yes.

Exactly. Exactly. You heard it right here. Everybody, leave early and bring bring a raincoat.

Yeah.

For the administration, we have sergeant Ryan Ellers. He's from the vehicle homicide unit traffic section, and he'll be joining us online. Joining us, this afternoon in the chambers, we have district court supervising deputy prosecuting attorney Anderson Toshima. Welcome. From the Corporation Counsel, we have Deputy Corporation Counsel, Adrian Rifsnyder.

Welcome. And also members, we have our subcommittee staff with us this afternoon. Good afternoon, everyone. Members, we have one item on today's item, Bill 100 nineteen-twenty 25, penalties for prohibited noise violations, WSAP nine. Staff, is there anyone wishing to testify to bill 119?

Yes, chair. So far we have one individual signed up to testify.

Let's begin with public testimony or oral testimony via phone or video conference will be accepted. Accordance with the Sunshine Law, testimony can occur at the beginning of the meeting but cannot be limited to the start of the meeting. The chair will receive oral testimony for agenda items at the beginning of the meeting and as the item is called up on the Testifiers wanting to provide video or audio testimony should sign up in the chamber, join the online meeting via the Teams link or call in the phone number noted on today's agenda. For individuals wishing to testify via Teams, please raise your hand by clicking on the raise your hand button. And for those calling in, please follow the prompts via phone, star five to raise and lower your hand and star six to mute and unmute.

Staff will add names to the testifier list in the order testifiers sign up or raise their hands. And for those on team, staff will lower your hand once your name is added. Staff will then enable your microphone and video and call the name you're logged in under or the last four digits of your phone number when it's your time to testify. Written testimony is encouraged and can be submitted via the e comment link at mauicounty.us/agendas. Oral testimony is limited to three minutes for each item on the agenda.

If you're still testifying that time, I'll kindly ask you to complete your testimony in thirty seconds. Please ensure your name appears in Microsoft Teams as a name you prefer, to be referred to or anonymous if you wish to testify anonymously. If you're in person, please notify staff that you would like to testify anonymously. Otherwise, please state your name for the record at the beginning of your testimony. Once you're done testifying, excuse me, or if you do not wish to testify, you can the quorum.

Committee members, I'll now proceed with oral testimony. We'll do our best to take each person up in an orderly fashion. Seth, could you call the first testifier?

Chair, we have a person that would like to testify anonymously from the South Maui Residence Area Office.

Okay.

Is that you, Ellen? I I signed up as Howley Stalker. I don't know why they doing anonymously. Hi, you guys. I think you know who I am. Hi. Hi, everybody. In the room with me is officer Carroll, officer Sun Chin, the ambassador guy that's usually over there, but they sent him over here. And Chilin is the OCS staff person for the South Maui residency office. Live and direct.

Thank you all for your time. Thank you, Sergeant Ellers, deputy prosecutor Toshima, deputy corp counsel, sorry I missed your name, and Ellen and all the Wassup staff. It's a relief. I'm sitting in a cool air conditioned office. I don't know how much you guys wanna hear about the the I had today trying to get in here this morning and testify. I wanted to testify on the

Yeah. Testimony on the on bill one nineteen.

Right. I got it right here. That so they would it was after I got inside, it was smooth sailing. And so that's my point is, like, you gotta get inside the building to get any kind of service. I think you guys might have got a memo from somebody.

They made ambassador Martin sign it. Said court counsel said Blake Takayama's name on it, and it's kind of very ho ho with this process. So I'm glad to be here, and I'm glad to have an opportunity to testify. This bill was pretty straightforward. It's I'm not sure what the word is.

Synchronicity, something like that for the officers to be here because Keyhey I'm I think Keyhey I'm not sure how much noise you guys have in your towns, but probably Kihei and Guiluku would be my guess as to the most the most noise. And I'm assuming that the noise would come from loud car stereos, but it could be from other stuff, like people hollering outside the county building and other places like that. So that would be my personal testimony is that the court well, I won't say corp council because I'm not sure if they'd be the right ones, but something called the freedom of speech. Would this my question would be, would this you know, like, if I got a bullhorn and stood outside the county office, I'm wondering how long I I could do that before the cops would be coming around here telling me that I couldn't do it. So appreciate your time, mister Luna Omo Lusinensee.

It's it's always good to see you. You know, like a real tiny guy there in the picture.

Hollow for your testimony this afternoon.

Thank you

for county.

Seeing no testimony.

But the fine seemed kind

of excessive because

some poor people around there. So, is there like some kind of community service instead of the this United States cash money? You, sir.

Any other testifiers?

Chair, no one else has signed up to testify. Would you like to do a brief last call? Like us to.

We'll just go ahead and proceed to the item. Alright members, today we have scheduled bill one. Oh, we can close it. Oh, we'll call a quick is member Johnson still on or did he lose?

Back.

He's back? Members, my apologies. We're at their quorum, we'll need to, keep our cameras on. Thanks, Gabe, Member Johnson. Okay, members.

Today we've scheduled bill 100 nineteen-twenty 25 penalties for prohibited noise violations. Bill 100 nineteen's purpose is to amend Section 9.36.040 Maui County Code to increase fines and establish penalties including possible forfeiture of sound Directors Board Board Prosecuting Attorney's Office expressed of concerns with their ability to enforce the forfeiture penalty proposed in Bill 119. The committee decided to defer as as further discussion was needed. To prepare for this meeting, I sent correspondence to both departments requesting updated feedback and comments on Bill 119. And you can find them under number 10 and number 11 on Granicus.

Both their responses reaffirmed concerns regarding forfeiture. To address these concerns, I've prepared a proposed CD1 version to remove forfeiture from the third offense and second offenses. We can discuss this further members, but I will mention that we're unable to increase the $1,000 fine for the third offense because fines for these types violations under the Hawaii revised statutes cannot exceed $1,000 I also wanted to mention that bill one nineteen deals specifically with noise from amplified sound systems in vehicles and not mufflers as there was some confusion during our last committee meeting. Excessive noise from mufflers is dealt with under code section 10.20.440 and not part of our discussion today. For more information on different noise violations regarding vehicles, please see the Department of the Corporation Council's response on number seven in Granicus.

Before we take public testimony, I want to ask our representatives from the Maui Police Department and the Department of the Prosecuting Attorney for any opening remarks. Testimony? Oh, no. Okay. No. We can go afterwards. Is mister Ehlers This is mister officer Ehlers, sergeant Ryan Ehlers on online?

This is Sergeant Ellers with Maui Police Department and Homicide Unit. I agree with dropping the forfeiture and just increasing the monetary fine.

Okay. Mahalo, Sergeant Ellers. Thank you for your, opening remarks. Now we'll go to district court supervising deputy prosecuting attorney Ryan Anderson Toshima, for his opening remarks.

Thank you,

chair. The department of prosecuting attorney, does support the intent of the bill and to address the, nuisance created by sound amplification systems. We did have concerns with the logistical and practical effect of the forfeiture. First of all, the sound amplification system is broadly defined basically as anything from the stereo deck all the way through the speakers and anything in between. Nowadays a lot of vehicles these integrated systems where it's not just as simple as removing a stereo deck from the car.

Plus the lack of specificity as to what is to be removed could lead to inconsistent enforcement as far as one person the speakers being taken, one person, the whole system being taken out. And then there's the logistical concerns. Forfeiture does require special court proceedings. And during those proceedings, the sound amplification system would be removed from the car, stored pending those proceedings. There would have to be an auction to sell the amplification system once the forfeiture is approved, all for relatively little monetary benefit.

We do support the amended proposal which simply leaves it as a $1,000 fine for the third offense. In my practical experience in court, fines do unpaid fines act as a license stopper at the DMV. So if you do have unpaid fines, you're not able to renew your license. There's certain other complications that come with that at the DMV. We found that to be a very effective deterrence.

And it's a safeguard in that if you don't pay the fines, there's still something hanging over your head. So we do support the new amendment of just removing the forfeiture and raising the fines to 1,000. Thank you.

Okay. Mahalo, Mr. Anderson Toshima, for your opening remarks. Staff, is there anyone else wishing to testify on this item that hasn't already testified?

Sure, no one else has indicated a desire to testify. Would you like me to do a brief last call?

Yes, please.

Proceeding with last call, if anyone in the audience would like to testify or on teams come up to the mic and begin your testimony or use the raise your hand function on teams. I'll provide a brief countdown. Three, two, one. Ms. Chair, seeing no one has indicated that they wish to testify.

Members, any objections to closing oral testimony for WAS WSAP nine?

No.

Thank you. Members, I'd like to open the floor for questions and comments. Each member will have three minutes for the first round and three minutes for additional rounds as needed. Member Johnson is okay, I'll start Chair Lee as she is the introducer of the bill.

Thank you. And I want to thank you Chair for your assistance in getting this item to where it is now, where it's more likely to pass than before. I can I can understand the prosecutor prosecuting attorney's concerns about forfeiture and at least the the higher fine could well be a good deterrent to people continuing to play their music very loud? Which is maybe not a problem in Payea, but it is certainly a problem in Wailuku, especially Wailuku Town, in Kehlani and the surrounding areas. And so, I'm hoping that the members will pass this today.

And as a suggestion to the police department for these types of new ordinances, I hope that you put this on social media and and do press releases and say things like, we will be, if not installing, but at least studying the possibility of putting cameras in, especially at traffic intersections with traffic lights, cameras with audio capability. So that people will think twice about trying to continue to break this law and and back that up with a little bit more police present occasionally. Even if it's once a month, it's something. Thank you.

Mahalo Chair Lee. We'll go to committee chair Johnson followed by member Bolton.

Thank you chair. Okay. I'm going to be honest with my opinion here. I don't like this bill. I don't like these types of bills.

I think they're more like a footloose bill. It's not really it it smacks like territorial law in a in a way. So I think our departments have a bigger fish to fry, and in my opinion, this is a guppy. So I wanted to ask the department who spoke, unpaid fines lead to bench warrants, and that leads to arrests and does that lead to jail? Is that the path that someone could go down on if that were to happen if they don't pay their fines?

Thank you Vice Chair Johnson. In this particular case, the infraction here is considered a violation. There is no possible jail associated with this type of offense. So no, it would not be a bench warrant to arrest type of deal. First of all, this type of infraction would be, I guess, initiated by way of citation, basically a traffic ticket and it's because it's a violation and not a criminal offense. It's one of those where you can just pay the fine, go to court, pay the fine. You don't get a court date.

Can I ask this then? So let's say I can't afford the fine and my driver's license expires because you can't renew your driver's license until you pay off your fine. That's correct?

That's correct.

So now I'm driving with an expired license that could put me with a bench warrant, could get me in deeper trouble. Is

that correct?

That is correct. So now driving without a valid license is a criminal offense where if you do miss court for that offense, a bench warrant would be issued and the offense has possible penalties up to thirty days in jail for driving without a license. Right, correct. That is correct. Your unpaid fines does not allow you to renew your license then you're going to be driving without a license which does lead to a bigger offense.

Right. So Chair, I have I concerns. It's not really my I'm not I don't like this kind of legislation. I'm just gonna say it. But we're at bare quorum, so if we all don't vote yes, this doesn't move forward. Is that correct? That's if that's because we're your council is seven. There's only four online is what I'm seeing. Okay. All right. Well, those are my questions, chair. I just wanted to clarify that that's where we're at right now. Thank you. Thank you, chair.

Malu, committee vice chair Johnson, member Palton for your opportunity. Thank

you, chair. I kinda feel similarly to, member Johnson. You know, this isn't necessarily like a priority or an earth shattering revelation. I mean, I can understand that it can be a nuisance, in neighborhoods, especially at night. But in the scheme of things, if this is your biggest complaint, I'd like to be you.

I guess my questions would be around, you know, they have those they have an app that I heard of. If you run a red light and the red light camera gets you, it'll get you off 98% of the time. So say a police says, hey, you're in violation of the noise ordinance or whatever, and then person who got the violation or the citation says, no, I'm not. You know, how do you prove yes or no when it comes to like appeals or like do they have to have their body cam on and measure the decibel level? Or do they have to measure out 50 feet or more and be like, oh, I'm standing over here and I can hear you.

And then they're like, that wasn't me. That was the other guy behind me. How does the logistics of it work? Is my question.

Would that be for the sergeant?

Whoever can answer.

Sergeant Ellers?

What would the priority be? Like, say between hearing the noise and seeing an expired safety registration or safety, what is it called, safety check or expired registration. Like is there a prioritization if one guy is driving by you with loud music and the other guy is driving by you with an expired safety check? Which one would you go after? Sorry. I'm just curious.

Hi, again, this is Sergeant Ellers. So as far as prioritization, it's whoever you're actively stopping at the time, right? So if you see two, you can't stop both. It's who you already actively committed to doing enforcement at the time, right? So if you see a safety check and you're in the middle of pulling somebody over for the safety check and you hear loud speakers, you're probably going to still pull over the safety check.

If you are pulling somebody over actively for a the loudspeakers or a loud vehicle, then you're going to continue on with that active traffic stop, if that's if that was your question. As far as logistics, it basically goes off of typically off of officers observations, right? So if you are a long ways away, over 50 feet obviously, but usually it's much further than 50 feet for these citations. And you're going to go to that person talk to them and make your if it's a traffic stop or if it's in a park or wherever the citation

And no offense, Sergeant Ellers, but what if there's a dispute? Is it like, well, this guy is a law sworn law officer, so we gotta believe him, or is there an opportunity to say that wasn't me? There was another car, like, blasting their sounds, and he stopped me or something like that.

Sorry.

Well, dispute would be then in court, obviously, right? I'm not the trier of fact. That would be a judge.

I might be asked. So there is in this particular it is a violation initiated by way of citation. However, if you do want to contest it, there is a procedure where you do inform the court, file a notice, and you will get your day in court. The offender will be able show up, present their case to a judge. The state would then enter the case, bring the police officer who issued the citation, have that officer testify as to what they observed.

We may be able to back it up with camera if that's available. So no and in this case we'd have to prove the case by a preponderance of the evidence rather than beyond the reasonable doubt. So it's a little bit lower standard. So it just really comes down to how do we present our case. Do we have measurable, verifiable distances?

Are we able to make just a common sense type of case? I mean that's going to be a case to case basis. Bottom line, there is a procedure for people who are issued such a citation to contest it, appeal it in a way to a judge, and there is an opportunity then for the state to present its evidence if it has any. And then it's just up to the judge to decide whether they find the officer more credible, whether there's mitigating circumstances that warrant a dismissal. Yeah, at that point, it just becomes part of the judge. Thank you.

Okay. Next we have member Uwu Hajjens for your opportunity.

Thank you, chair. I understand where a journey is coming from with this one. Sometimes music is so loud, it's completely obnoxious. The other day, I was taking my children to school, and somebody's music was so loud, it was rattling my car. And I could hear it so clearly, and he was so far away. I was almost impressed if I wasn't going deaf. I don't think if you have money for sounds, you should have money to pay a ticket, because sounds is

not

cheap. That's one. Two, the only thing I will probably add is if the max amount of the fine we can issue is $1,000 the forfeiture of the sound system, how do we calculate how much things cost? Because a lot of things are aftermarket. Do you guys have a system for that? Or should we just stick with the fine of a thousand dollars to make it easier to, for you guys to issue?

Mr. Toshima?

I guess the forfeiture process is basically an auction. So, right, it's bid prices. I'm not necessarily sure how they set the initial bid price, whether that's based on fair market value of the components. I'm not too familiar with the forfeiture process but I do know that it's an auction. So you most likely are not getting fair market value of what you are auctioning off.

So does the auction amount of whatever is being sold did include or is up to only a thousand dollars? And then that would how would that work?

The the the the the fine is separate from forfeiture. So if you find somebody a thousand dollars and you could still have the and the law allows you would still be able to institute forfeiture procedure procedures for yeah. The the the cap for the thousand dollars is is strictly for the applies strictly to the fines only.

And then who removes the sound system from the car? You guys have a way to do that? I don't wanna put somebody I mean, remember, Jonathan, it's like, don't wanna take away somebody's car, and they can't, like, get to work because you folks are removing their sounds.

Well, that's part of the logistical concerns we had is who's going to be doing that. You know, we could assign it to MPD, but do they have the mechanic or the technical experience to take apart a car and take out the sound system and put the car back? Know, that's part

of the

practical and logistical concerns.

You, Member Uwu Hajins. Before I go back to Chair Lee, I just had a question, Mr. Toshima. For the fines and is if you just don't pay the first fine, second fine, or the third fine, your license can can be revoked?

Correct. So any fines.

Any fines.

Any fines. Whether it's from this particular charge or any type of offense.

Not the third fine, but even if you

don't pay the first $250 fine.

Okay.

Or just pay part of it and you don't fulfill the entire obligation. You're still subject to that.

Okay. Thank you for that.

Now there is a provision where it's called restricted license where say you owe $50,000 in fines to rent, you're going to rent, have pay You go to court every three months to show that you've been making these payments and they reissue you what's called a provisional license. So even if you do have a lot of fines, if you're in good faith, have a job and you're making payments, you can still have a license. But that's again, you have to enter into a payment plan with the court to get that. Otherwise, it is any obligation, it doesn't have to be fines, it can be service, it can be other obligations that deal with traffic offenses. If those obligations are outstanding in any way shape or form it can act as a license stopper at the DMV.

Okay, I'll let my nephew know. Shirley?

I thought we took out the portion on removing

That was my proposal in my ASF.

Okay. So we didn't get to that. But that that's gonna be the proposal is not to include the

The forfeiture.

The forfeiture. Right. Correct. Okay. So getting back to the other part, the the fines.

This is really no different than fireworks. It's really no different. But this in this instance, we are rewarding those who blast their radios and disturb other people and they get away with it. And it's easier to identify them because they're the the only ones on the road usually doing that. So I think this one, this instance, it's easier to arrest people or find people and and show them that let's not do this again because it's gonna cost you.

Yeah. In the cases in the case of fireworks, which is a it's a major menace to everybody's neighborhood, and now it's a danger because of the fire possibility. We have to start somewhere. And if this is the start, let's do it here, where the noises are so extreme. And we're not talking about, you know, for a few seconds, somebody has their radio on very, very loud.

It's right down the whole street. It's the whole street. So neighborhoods, surrounding neighborhoods, are disturbed by this, you know, ridiculous music or whatever they call it. And it's you have to wonder about anybody who does that. I mean, it's a total disregard for other people, like zero aloha. And if they can do that, you know, you're wondering if that's their nature to do even worse things in the neighborhood. So I think these people need to be taught a lesson early on before it gets more serious. Thank you.

Thank you, chair. Member Bolton, you have your hand up.

Thank you. Just a couple of clarifications. So it's already illegal. We're just talking about increasing the fines. Right? So it's already a law. We're not creating new legislation. So I would like to ask probably sergeant Ehlers, like, was the last time somebody was cited for this violation or given a citation? How many citations for this violation have been given in the last year and then maybe the last ten years? Can can you do you know? Do you have any? And I'll start there.

So I don't have that offhand. I wasn't prepared for that. The other issue that you have is that not only do we do the citation, DLNR can write the citation. It's a

Oh, DLNR as well?

Yeah. So I can look into it, but I don't believe I will be able to get ten years.

That's

About like the last one, how many in the last year you think you could get that?

I might I might be able to. Yeah. I can look into it.

Could we, send it in writing so that we're official?

Steph.

Because I guess, you know, I think it could be, like, just a paper tiger. We're already it's already illegal if we're still having that problem. I don't know how much I mean, it's already a code violation, so I don't know how much increasing the fine is is really gonna help since it's already a problem. It feels like a paper target or kind of like, you know, illegal parking or illegal abandoned vehicles or all the nuisance things that we have. We're making an effort, but it it doesn't really address the issue. The other does does the prosecuting attorney's office have any idea, like, how many fines have been collected to date, for this violation?

Yeah. So like I mentioned before, this, being a violation, we don't see these charges unless they want to actually fight it in court.

Has anyone fight it in your

In my time at the prosecutors last fifteen years, I have not seen anything like this. They'll come in and fight their seat belts and their cell phone tickets. I haven't seen anybody fight a noise

violation And it could be because they haven't been given one.

Either that or they just pay the fine rather than waste the time to come into court and hassle with the court. So wouldn't be able to answer how many citations have been issued or fines have been collected. I can just only say that I haven't seen anybody come into court to challenge it.

Okay. And then currently, are there exemptions to this, ordinance? Like, you know, if there's a parade and you're on the float or something like that and you're playing the music and people is that existing or should we add it in?

Like a block party.

Graduation part.

Graduation party. Oh, with Or

like, the, you know, the last ride. I don't know if you guys do that, but it's a thing in West Park.

Stereo sound off?

Yes. The current statute does have an exemption for advertising wearing parades.

Funeral procession?

Amplified from your vehicle for emergency purposes.

Mm-mm.

So there are certain exemptions already in the current statute.

I feel like we should take off that political one. That's like saying we can, but you no can. Although I kind of do remember Pele driving around with his boohorn.

Staff did remind me that on Granicus number three, MPD's response to your question, there were none, nothing was, no violations were issued in 2024.

Thank you. Yeah, Paper Tiger. I mean, I guess I can be with it and do it because it apparently doesn't get enforced as it is anyway. I don't know if that's a good reason or what. And then the the money the money doesn't go to us if the police or the LNR stops it. The money goes to the state anyway. It's not like it's gonna come to Maui County.

Is it a moving violation? Or those moving

You're asking me.

Moving violations go to the state or know. Rife Snyder?

I just want to point out, I think that correspondent is my mic on? Oh, yes. That correspondence from MPD related to Title X, which was the muffler. And this is IX, so this is more like the boombox or the base in the back of the car. So those numbers relate to noise violations caused by illegal muffler.

Thank you for that. Member Johnson or Member U'U Hutchins, any need for a second round? Member Johnson?

Okay. Just real quick. You know, I don't know if you guys have been noticing, but for me and my community, this has been a bit of a fad. Like, this has not been around I mean, it was been around a long time ago, and it seems to be coming back like this really loud music. And I don't think making, adjusting our legislation fines to fads is a is a good policy.

I mean, didn't this council, fix untie the knots of banning pinball just recently because that was a fad back then, now you can play pinball on your cell phone. You can play pinball anywhere. And just it's it's it's just kinda it's not really worth if I really wanted to have this to make a fictive change, it starts at the dinner table. My mother would tell me don't do that. My father would be the one telling me do that. My uncles would be mad at me when I drive to their house with this loud music. That's much more effective and I think that's where these kind of rules and policies should start and then we don't need government big brother in there to tell you you can't do that. And the only solution we got is to give you a higher fine. So that's kind of my sense and I think I'm done. Thank you chair.

Okay. Model of committee, vice chair. Lee:

If you don't mind, members, can we just refer this to counsel because I think other people should have the opportunity to weigh in. If I've said this before a couple times. I started the first I initiated initiated the first ordinance, and it was based on somebody dying. Yeah. So, you know, as light as you wanna make of this, that's up to you.

But if I can save another life, if we can save another life, I'd like to see that this goes through. So if you don't mind, just defer it to the next council and then we'll take it up as a group, as a full group. Okay?

Okay. Thank you chair for that suggestion. For my discussion I guess, member U'Hodgins mentioned she kind of pinpointed the amplification. I mean if you're in your home and it's shaking the wall, some of these systems are so huge that it just generates this vibration that kind of you know would impede everyone's right to quiet and solitude sometimes. Mean that's how loud some of these that I've experienced.

Been in my house and I can hear it from the street or rattling the windows from the street. So my suggestion would be should we anticipate this if it gets any louder. We're only visiting this because we've never seen the magnitude of these systems. Nowadays these systems are not just your eight track radio in the car. These are sophisticated systems that up the whole space of your trunk.

And so I don't know if we want to anticipate this getting even worse, but I'm a nursery school or a hospital where people are healing or in neighborhoods where you shouldn't be late at night or during kids nap time or something and you're coming through the neighborhood blasting your stereo. So that's kind of my thoughts. Member Palton?

Yeah, Like I said, I don't really have strong feelings. Even if I voted for the increase fine, I don't feel that it would make a difference because I don't I've never heard of anyone getting cited for it, but I can vote to move it forward. I don't have strong feelings because I don't know that it'll make a difference. But I guess my question is, I'm not clear on what the request was to move it to the full council. Is that without taking a vote here or discharging? That's the question I had. Discharge. Oh, discharge. Okay. Whatever.

We would still send

a letter though. We'd still send a letter. Member of staff is requesting a quick recess. We'll take a quick recess to 02:30. Is that enough? Five minutes? 02:30. What's up committee meeting is in recess to 02:30. What's up committee of Thursday, May 21. It is thirty pm.

And mahalo members for that quick recess and for the discussions we had prior. We've invited mister Rats today to we've had some requests to include some of the other members. But at this point, Director Rats, would you want to

you, chair for the record. David Rotts, director of council services. So anytime a committee gets a majority of voting members to approve a motion, that will trigger a committee report. And the motions from a committee are to make recommendations to the council. And among the recommendations that a committee can make is to request that it be discharged from further consideration of legislation that was referred.

So a committee report of that nature of the motion is approved would put the bill before the council via committee report. Another option to get the bill before the council that is a goal, say that you have Chair Senensi, is even if you don't have the benefit of a formal committee recommendation that's transmitted through a committee report, you could ask the council chair to put the bill itself back on a council agenda. And then when it comes up, there could be a motion to discharge the committee from further consideration. So there's a couple ways to get a bill to the council without actually having a recommendation to either pass the bill or to file the bill. Thank you, Chair.

Members, any other comments after hearing Director Ratz? Chair Lee.

I would suggest that you just ask all the members present if they don't mind discharging this matter. Even though it doesn't mean that they agree to it. It doesn't mean anything about passing it or not passing it. It's just moving it to the body, to the council body.

Okay. Thank you, Chair Lee. Member Polton, any

No objection.

No objections. Okay. No objections from committee Vice Chair Johnson.

No objections, chair.

Okay. Member, Uhu Hajens.

No objections, chair. All good with me. Thank you.

Okay. So with that, members, we'll I'll entertain a motion to discharge bill one hundred nineteen-twenty twenty five.

So moved.

It's been moved by chair Lee, seconded by member of Uhu Hodgins. All in favor of the discharge, raise your hand say aye. Yes, seconded by member Uhu Hodgins. Staff?

Chair, that's five ayes, four excused. Councilmember Batongen, Cook, Sugimura, and Rollins Fernandez. Motion passes.

Staff, is there anything else before we adjourn today's meeting?

There's nothing else outstanding, Chair.

Okay members, thank you all for your great questions, comments to our panelists today. This concludes today's Water Authority Social Services and Parks Committee meeting. The time now is 02:34 and this meeting is adjourned.