Welcome to the 43rd session for the Committee on Finance. Today is September 30th, 231 PM. This meeting is being held in the Hawaii County Chambers in Hilo, Hawaii. I'm calling this meeting to order. Mr. Clerk, do we have any testimony today? Chair, just noting that we've got, we've received notification that we do not have any testifiers in your remote sites. Or here in the Heelow Chamber or View Zoom, so no testifiers at this time. Okay, perfect. Today for attendance, we've got Councilmember Evans, Councilmember Kulgey, Water Councilmember Viegas, Councilmember Kimball, Councilmember Kirkowitz, Councilmember Galimba Suleyloy and Olaqa Inaba are excused. Let's go to our first order, Business Police Communication 12.38. Do we have any testifiers for communication 12.38? Hearing none, communication 12.38, report of fund transfers, authorize June 16 to 30, 2024, and July 16 to 31, 2024 from Controller KO-Shero, dated August 9, 2024. Thank you very much. May I have a motion, please, to forward communication 12.38 to the Council with a, sorry, to close file on communication 12.38 to the council with a start to close file in communication 12.38. So moved. Okay. We have a motion by council member Kimbo and a second by council member Inaba. Thank you for joining us. Two close file on communication 12.38. Any discussion by the council on this measure? Hearing and seeing none motion is on the floor. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Mr. Clerk, you have seven members in favor. Councilman Ralila, Councilman Glimbo being excused. Next. Do we have any testimony for communication 139.4? Hearing none, communication 139.4. Third quarter claims report January 1 through March 31, 2024. For claims investigator adjusted from claims investigator adjusted Clifford D. Vickering III, dated August 13, 2024, transmitting the above report pursuant to section 2-9 of the Hawaii County Code. Chair, motion to close file and communication 139.4. Motion by Council Member Kimbo. Seconded by Council Member A. Naba. Closing file and communication 139.4. Any discussion? And we do have the appropriate folks from our administration here if there are any questions. Okay, hearing anything none? Motion is on the floor. All in favor? Any opposed? Mr. Clerk, we have seven members in favor. Council members Liebel and Glimbal being excused. Next item please. Do we have any testimony for Communication 139.5? Hearing none, Communication 139.5. Fourth quarter claims report, April 1 through June 30, 2024. From claims investigator adjuster Clifford DeVick during the third dated communication 139.5, fourth quarter claims report April 1 through June 30, 2024, from claims investigator adjuster Clifford D. victory in the third dated August 13, 2024, transmitting the above report pursuant to section 2-9 of the Hawaii County Code. Chair, motion to close file and communication 139.5. Motion by Councilmember Kimbo, seconded by Councilmember Annabelle, closing file on communication 139.5 discussion on the motion Council Member Nabila. Yeah, just a quick question for the Hawaiian Telecom item This is going back over two years. So just wanting to understand a little bit on the timeline for this one. Good afternoon, Mr. Vickterine. Good afternoon, Cliff Vickterine. Claims investigate a co-operation council. Okay, to get to that question, really was on their part, they had a collection group that was collected on behalf of them. And the information that we needed, we were seems to not be getting back and forth the correct information. It asked them for information for Ho and Tao. They want to have a check written to Ho and Tao, but sent to them just send us information for them. So basically, I started jumping in and calling Ho and Tao directs that I deal in with the collection agency. And even I took a little while to get done, I finally got in touch with the parent company for how Intel up in Chicago. And the head of the, I guess the security department there was able to work with me. So it took a while to get through to get to them, but it was their side given us the wrong information continuous, we even know we have for correction. Thank you. And this was the amount for a pause at like a replacement, or what was the resolution in the end? If we're allowed to ask that. Yeah, the damage of basically the replacement value of the poll. No, okay. Thank you so much, Chair Hayot. Thank you, Council Member Inava. Seeing no further discussion. Thank you for being here today, Mr. Victorian. Motion is on the floor. Two close file on communication 139.5. All in favor? Any opposed? Mr. Clerk, you have seven members in favor miss Lee and miss Gilemba excused Resolution space do we have any testimony for resolution 593-24? Hearing none resolution 593-24 authorizes the mayor to enter into an agreement with the State of Hawaii Department of Health Allows for the receipt of 925,000 dollars of federally derived funds to support opioid remediation activities introduced by Councilmember Cundinley Eclanfeld or by request Councilmember Villegas Motion to move resolution 593-24 to Council with a positive recommendation Motion by Councilmember Villegas, seconded by Council Member Coguata to four resolution five, nine, three, dash two, four to Council with the Fable Reconciliation Council Member Villegas. Do you want to say anything? Yes, I, wow, it's really great to see this coming to fruition. This opportunity was brought to Council during my first term in office and at the time it was people weren't so sure about it and questioned the viability of the you know they're being responsibility with the opioid manufacturers for this epidemic and in the last six years we have only seen unfortunately that grow now with the introduction of Fentional and the black market use of that that drug but I just I want to thank the administration and all those in the legal team that worked closely with the state and the federal government to ensure that this money comes to our county. We are in dire need of the resources to help with addiction recovery and a lot of the other extenuating circumstances, just one of them being houselessness that often comes out of addiction. And for the community, I just want to read this because I feel that it is really powerful and it gives our community an idea of the resources that will be coming our way. In 2021 and 2022, a series of settlements were finalized to resolve lawsuits against pharmaceutical companies related to the opioid epidemic. Major distributors and manufacturers agreed to pay billions of dollars as part of the national opioid settlement. Participating states and local governments are expected to receive a total of $26 billion over 18 years. The state of Hawaii anticipates receiving approximately $78 million with the county of Hawaii's direct share estimated at $2.,000 is the current balance available to the county of Hawaii. I am deeply grateful for your continued work. Director Adams, I'm sure this took some continued relationship building and I'm deeply grateful for your continued work, Director Adams, I'm sure this, it took some continued relationship building and advocating for our county to get this sum, and I look forward to learning how it gets distributed to do the most good for the most people, and to mitigate so many of the devastation, the devastating challenges that our people have gone through. And so, this is a mahalo, this is an encouragement to our community, this is gratitude to this council for voting to participate in this settlement and thus we are in line to receive these funds and future funds without a yield. Thank you councilman. I'm wondering if we can get our India here for a sec. While they're coming up, I'll also just add my thanks to working on this settlement funding money and distributing it along with councilmember Vigas. So, you know, I represent one of the areas that with one of the biggest homeless populations and also concur that opioid addiction is a huge, has a huge part in helping us try to figure out this puzzle. So thank you for being here. So just a clarification, this is the second payout to our county of these funds. Is it the final payout of the funds or is there more to come? Thank you, Kelsa Menor, Kagiwata, Doug Adams, Director Research and Development. There were two different setups in terms of the funds that are coming. The initial was funding that the county had as a part of a settlement, so a money coming to the county for the county's use. This is the state's money that is now being allocated to the county, confusing to me too, first time I heard it. This is not the only amount that is going to be coming, but this is by far the largest amount that will be coming. Over the next 18 years, we anticipate the amounts being more in the 70 to 80,000 a year kind of range. Okay, thank you. And are you able, or maybe your staff you're able to talk a little bit about what this funding, the plan is for this funding at this time? Yeah, so I should first of all say thanks to Councilmember Viegas for highlighting my role in this, which was absolutely nothing. All right. So Yosheya Taki, who is our community well-being specialist in the department, and Tim Hanson, who is obviously executive assistant to the mayor, really worked this issue at the state level to make sure that we were identified. They worked with Department of Health, the AG's office making sure that this MOA is squared away so that we can do what we need to do with that. And with that, I will turn it over to you. Thank you. Just push the button there. Here you go. Got it. Thank you. Thank you. Just push the button there. Got it. Yoshio Taken, economic development specialist from research and development. So, Tim and I are working together to actually gather stakeholders and discuss the use of the funds. So, we have not determined the best use of the funds, but that conversation is actually ongoing. And this is a big chunk of the funds that's available currently, but we are expecting, you know, less than $100,000 or so annually for the next, at this point, 15 years or so. Okay. And does this have to be allocated and spent in a certain amount of time? Not necessary. But we are definitely looking into spending as we, you know, as soon as we are ready to. Okay. Thank you. So, and is there a process for people that might be interested? Is there application or is it going to be more than administration kind of working with the community groups to figure out where the administration thinks it'll be best used? I think we're gathering the information right now and then most likely at the result of this conversation will probably be really seeing either RFP or whatever that complies with a county and state. Okay. I would just add, it doesn't necessarily need to be an RFP because these are not federal funds. These are settlement funds as is our understanding. So RFP is an appropriate way to procure. It's not that it wouldn't necessarily be that. But there isn't the federal funding requirement that we see when we use federal funds. Okay, so there may be some federal funding requirement that we see when we use federal funds. Okay, so there may be some simplified process that you can use. Okay, thank you so much for answering my questions. I look forward to seeing how we can assist our community with these funds that are directly needed. Thank you both so much. I yield. Thank you. Councilor Evans. Okay. What struck out to me is how little 2.1 of 78 million. So my question is how did they make a decision about that dollar amount? Was it based on government consensus, based on poverty, based on what were the numbers that the Department of Health used? Because I can tell you we have a lot of poverty. We have a huge amount of domestic violence associated with opioids, we have homeless, there's all kinds of stuff going on, the fentanyl task force. I just want to know why, why so little? Because to me, I want to get as much as we can get of 78 million. Yeah, so Councilmember, the 2.1 is a decision was made at a national level. In other words, our state, I'm sure was involved in negotiations with the national settlement folks. The determination of how the state ended up with 2.1 out of 28 billion is not something that we were privy to. 78 million went to the state. Oh, Kelly got 2.1. Yeah, so that 2.1 million is on allocation that the county was able to receive specifically. But for instance, the example from the tax force and that was on 478,000 or so. That was the state allocation. So state decided that they would like to use their funds for the county. So 2.1 million is funds that we have more discretion over. But they might be additional funds that the state might be able to also allocate to each county as well. So this, the decision of how to disperse 78 million is a formula. Potentially there's a formula that would have divvied up amongst the county and then the Department of Health left a pot of money for them. And then they will set priorities and then basically we could apply potentially for some of that funding. There was a methodology that they used and I just can't tell you exactly what that methodology was. But I believe that in the long term, that state might be able to allocate additional funds from their own allocation. And the only reason I'm saying this, is don't take it as a negative. It's a positive in the sense that we as a council can ride our state legislature, the Senate and the representative, and say go to the Department of Health, get more money for our county, for these different areas. If in fact, the Department of Health has discretionarily held back, let's say $50 million, saying for the priorities of X, Y, and Z under these categories of x, y, and z. So then we can tell our state legislature to get x amount of that 60 million or 50 or whatever that we want it to come to this county for these specific reasons. So there might be an opportunity for us to get a whole lot more than the 2.1. And that's what I was looking at because 78 million is a lot of money. And I was trying to figure out how do we get more of the pot of that money right so that's my thought behind my questioning. We can go back to DOH and find out about if there's a fight or more I think we just fight for our fair share I'm willing to fight more thank you. I'm just wanting to make sure I understand the B-52. So this is the first MOA was associated with the state's directed share of the funds. And then this MOA is associated with the counties directed share of the funds. They're both around opioids, so just wondering, procedurally, why are we needing more agreements? And are we, for every new type of funding source, do we not just want to have a continued agreement that kind of covers all matters relating to opioids with the Department of Health because it's the same to entities. So I think they will only be two MOAs for the entire settlement funds for the state. It's just for the county share, so there has to be two MOAs for the county share and state share. They're all part of the $78 million. The other piece of this is that for the county piece, whatever the first amount of funds that we received that we did the MOA on, the use of those funds is different in terms of the restrictions than this use. And so the M.O.A. has had to be different because of the way the settlement was written and what we could use the different pots for. And so that I think is probably as clear an explanation that I received about why two different M.O.A.'s. an explanation that I received about why two different MOAs. Yeah, and I will also add that the first MOA was intended specifically for task force, which is different from this use. We are looking at a little more general use of funds for opioid remediation activities. in both cases though the funds have come down through the state, right? That's correct. Please. Good afternoon, Elizabeth. Stance Corporation Council. If the Council wants an explanation for how this settlement fund is set up, I can provide a little more information. So when these lawsuits are filed, the county filed its own lawsuit and is sued of a number of opioid manufacturers. At some point, the state filed its own lawsuit. And then when a nationwide, there was two different nationwide settlements that were reached and built into those were incentives to have the state, the states managed the funds so that there weren't so many direct recipients of funds. The formulas for the funds, as Doug said, was set up at the national level. So when I say incentives, there are financial incentives if the states were able to get the counties to sign on to having the state manage the fund. And so we agreed to participate in that because of the incentives. Having said that, we also wanted to make sure that the county would be able to self-direct some of the funds. So if we had gone to lawsuit and settled outside of the formula, then we would have gotten the same percentage of money. But it would have come straight to us. So we agreed to have the state manage the fund. It's not necessarily the department of health. Part of the settlement agreement set up a task force. And I think if you want a presentation on that, Tim Hanson might be a good person for it. But that task force has done needs assessment across the state. And so it identifies needs statewide, some of which will be on this island. So residential treatment, for example, is that identified specific need that isn't just we see as our own need, but the state sees as its need. And so when you see the term the county directed funds, that's that portion that comes remember Evans, you think this is kind of small, but the tire state and our county also benefits from the state directed funds. but the entire state and our county also benefits from the state-directed funds. So there's kind of two different expenditure processes but that Tim, I believe, is our county representative on this statewide board that is made up of a number of professionals across the state that were negotiated and identified to help identify the needs of the entire state. So when you see the county directed, that's that portion that was negotiated that the county can say this is how we want to spend it. And then there's the state and the county still has a say in how that is spent because we're on the board. But money will still come directly to the county through that source. Got it. Okay. Thank you for that background information and then just on the finance side. For, we're taking money and via the resolution and the accompanying bill, do these line items currently already exist in the budget? No. Okay. Yeah, so if we can just get some information, we're creating new line items and then are those types of line items, lines worth of funds stay in that line item in previous or future fiscal years where the funds might not be completely expended this fiscal year. Correct, sorry. Tim couldn't be here today, so I'm his replacement, which is not always a good thing. But there are similar opioid line items in the budget, but that is for the money we got, we received from the state. So this is now the county portion and it will be carried forward until it's spent. But as we get new appropriations, it will be added to the budget and that line item. But as Yoshi said, it's going to be more in the $70,000, $80,000 range each year. This is by far going to be our biggest allocation. Okay, and that to be clear, the carry-forward remains in that specific light. That specific light item so that everybody can see how it's being spent. That we'll be tracking it over the 18 years that we'll have the funding. Perfect. Thank you, Jerry. Thank you, Council Member Nava. Council Member Vigas. Sure. Just a quick little bit in here that may shed a little more light. This last paragraph says that the funds and spending must comply with the Hawaii MOA strategy, which reflects the national opioid settlement restrictions under three categories of treatment, prevention, and other initiatives. Now while other initiatives is a pretty broad term, treatment and prevention, I think are key here and what I'm interested to hear your team comes up with and best ways to allocate and spend these resources. And I officially rescind my thank you for Mr. Adams and give it to you. Thank you for all your work on this. I know this is a dance, but I am I'm just grateful to see this coming through. And if I remember correct me, if I'm wrong, Judge Strands, but not all not all municipalities throughout the country participated. Like we had to vote as a council to participate, which gave us access to being a beneficiary of these funds at some point. And so that's just another part I want to point out because that was passed at the time. And I'm deeply grateful for that. And we would have missed out on this. So thank you. Thank you. Okay. Seeing no further discussion. Thinking back to our meeting as Hawaii asked Rebecca to read this one in because she fought for this and she was a voice for our community as well as for our government to go after these funds and I remember her arguing with different levels of art administration at the time because she saw the importance of this. And it wasn't a unanimous pass. Actually, it was a six to council vote, council members, Lee Loay and council members, Tim Richards voting against the measure to enter into legislation. And so to see it come to this point, and to be accepting $2.1 million over the next decade, or more for our county, just because we passed the resolution really does highlight the importance of something unique that comes along and seeing the importance. And your day at Councilor Viegis, so thank you for doing that for us. Yep. Thank you. Okay. So good discussion. Thank you. Mr Adams. Thank you. Mr. So what is your name again? Otake. Thank you very much. We do the motion on the floor to four resolution five nine three dash two four to counsel with a favor recommendation on the favor two, four resolution five nine three, dash two, four to council with a favorable recommendation. All in favor? Any opposed? Mr. Clerk, you have seven members in favor. Council members, Lee Lai and council members, Glimba being excused. Bill 196, please. Do we have any testimony for Bill 196? Hearing none, Bill 196, amendments ordinance number 24, dash 32 as amended, the operating budget for the County of Hawaii for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2025. Appropriates revenues and federal grants, opioid settlement funds account, $925,000, and appropriates the same to the opioid settlement funds accounts to support opioid remediation activities introduced by Councilmember Cunley,, Klein Felder, by request. Motion to approve bill 196. And forward to Council with a positive recommendation. Motion, by Council Member Villegas, seconded by Council Member Rainnabba, forwarding bill 196 to Council with a favorable recommendation discussion council member Vegas just want to this is those fund that funding and allocating it to our budget so just thank you again I yield thank you okay seeing no further discussion motion is on the floor all in favor any opposed mr. Any opposed? Mr. RSL you have seven members in a favor and two being excused council members Lila and council members Glimma Bill 197 please Do we have any testimony for bill 197? Hearing none bill 197 immense ordinance number 24-32 as amended the operating budget for the County of Hawaii for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2025, increases revenues in the state grants career criminal program account, 55,000, 34 dollars and appropriates the same to the career criminal prosecution program account for the total appropriation of $546,168. Funds would be used to support nine positions in the office of the prosecuting attorney introduced by councilmember cundie Lee Klein filter by request move to approve bill 197 and forward to council with a favorable recommendation Motion of my council member now of a second of my council member Kimbo to forward bill 197 to council with a favorable recommendation any discussion. Councilmember Kimball. Yeah just to have a procedural question to deputy director this does not have the accompanying resolution is that not necessary or did we? As a good question, Council Member Kimball, there is a good answer as well. It is a good question. I fortunately do not have that answer for you at this second, but I can follow up on that for you. I'm not sure if that had come previously or that is something about timing that maybe the press unit attorney's office was considering. So I'll look into that for you guys. Okay great yeah I don't recall that we saw a result on this but look forward to seeing that come forward thank you. Thank you, Deputy Director. Okay, with that we have the motion on the floor. All in favor? Any opposed? Mr. Clerk, you have seven members in favor. Council members, Golemma and Lilo are being excused. That does bring us to the end of the agenda. Being that there is no further business, we are adjourned. It is 3.03 pm on September 3rd. Thank you.