Hello and welcome to the 22nd session of the Policy Committee on Planning, Lanyard's and Development. The date today is October 15, 2024, it's 11.05 and I'm calling this meeting to order. Present in our corner chambers today are Council Members, Glimbo, Kimbo, Kagiwata, Evans, joining us shortly here as well. Our council members, Kanieli, Klein, Felder and Viegas. We have joining from our Hilo Chambers, council member Liloi. I'm Holacaguro Inabacher, acting chair. Excuse me, have this committee. Our vice chair, our chair, excuse me, council member Kirkowitz is excused for the day. With that, do we have any testimony, Mr. Clark? We don't know here in the chambers, Mr. Ursula. Do we have any testimony for bill 217? Thank you so much, Chair. We do have a couple of testifiers out in our co-holicite. So Jessica, if you could take it away with our testifiers for today. Thank you. Our first testifier is Kieloha Saguyama, followed by Audrey Boloria, both commenting. I'm Bill 1, 2, 1, 7. Kieloha, you will have three minutes when you begin, these restate, and you'll put it up there. Right. Aloha. I'm Kevos Viyama and I'm here to testify on Bill 217 in a positive manner. And my testimony is based on one word, safety. Our roads are so dangerous without any shoulder. And so all these bikers that are touring towards Pomegranate Valley is a dangerous situation. We have three machines that they need to go through and it's all blind. And like I say, there is no shoulder, so they have to be on the main highway. Our government, whether it's your state have been soon tied and tied again for tourists that take it upon themselves to entertain themselves with our beauty, get hurt and then soon our government and get paid. So to deter any war of this nonsense, I come back to the word safety. So I'm in favor of building 217 based on safety alone. Thank you. Thank you for your testimony. Next we have Audrey Vagoria. You will have three minutes when you begin. Good morning. I'm here to speak for Bill 217 and my concern on the yellow is safety, yes, but also entertaining something that interrupts the global community and makes it dangerous for we as residents here. I'm 82 years old and there's a facing couple out where I go to the pharmacy, which you get my medicine, then cross over the road to go to the dentist, which is expedient 82 years old, however, there is no space between the parking space and the highway. And there's no viewpoints either to see what is coming up from either side because it is blocked by parking on both sides of the road and driveways that enter in, not parallel to each other intersecting each other. And so it's very, very dangerous. Also, many of our senior citizens go walking and they have their own paths on those same roads and sidewalks. If they're impacted, they too are not safe. Is it something that concerns me and I'm glad it's come and been separated to these two roads. Because I was here a while ago, and we spoke about it for the entire area. And it's expedient. The word I'd like to share is expedient. There are some things in our being and in our responsibility that are more expedient and necessary than others. And definitely, this is one. My husband has been gone a year, and he traversed a mountain road for his care at North Hawaii Hospital. There are many times that worrying about my companion next to me needing to be transporting and the bike who's on the road, I could have been in or caused a fatal accident, either to a visitor, to my husband who is trying to stay alive or to myself. You have to commit to something to that is expedient and then expedient for safety for your people and for the beauty of our area and our reputation. We don't want to become the place where people will to see the road and see the view and die. Or get hurt. I believe with you to look past everybody and since it's been narrowed down to area, give our area the safety, the consideration, its consideration, excuse me, and that immediate step it needs. Thank you for English. Thank you for your testimony. Our last test of fair today is Randy Golden, commenting on bill 217, Randy of Up 3 minutes, we begin. Please restate your name for the record. Hello, my I'm Randy Golden, and I appreciate all you've done. I have been working the city evidence since January of 2023. We were done bill 125 till recently, and I want to say I really appreciate you guys taking something and molding it into a bill that can serve the whole island. Now, you've heard me talk a whole bunch of times. I'm wondering if any of you have come out and checked these roads out because this is not a new issue. It's new for Bill 217 but not 125 because we started with this effort. You know our roads are winding, you know there's no shoulders, you know their narrow, when rainstorms come flooding through, rocks come down, it can happen anytime it can be sunny and rain. The mountain road I commuted for seven years, the fog up there, and tourists stopping in the middle of the road to take pictures. So this started because I was driving out to serve a friend, because she was stuck at home in Colbyton and lived in Nealee. And the bicycle tours made it scary and dangerous for me going out just for a period. So I brought it up to the community, they are newspaper and got incredible responses, people did surveys and that's why you've been hearing about this issue two years. So please, please, you've heard it 82 year old, you've heard it 86 year old talk about this. And everybody else I talk to they're working. They can't get here to testify. My nephew, who almost got run over by a car swimming around the group of vice-clists, tour a tour group. We're not against individual vice-clists. We know they have the right to use the road. Those guys know what they're doing. The vices of the group, people are not vices. They are there to see the view. So it makes it really dangerous. Please, our areas getting overrun by tourists. 600,000 visitors a day at Olaloo is regular now. They drive out there, they drive over the mountain road, and we have to be, and we are very considerate and courteous to them out here. You throw in a group of bicep lists amidst this, especially with the holidays coming up, and these bike tour companies go on steroids about Pomody groups out here. You know 30 segments. Please no. Please know that these are our only roads. It's a safety issue of Pee Per. There were 10 testifying people from Bill 125. I cannot get out here again. So please understand you've heard about this issue from this community that wants this bill to pass. Let Koala be the first on our island to receive this protection and you're understanding that the community first is your job. Thank you for your hard work. I couldn't do what you do. Really appreciate your work. Hello, Hannah. Thank you. Thank you so much for your testimony chair. I believe those are all the testifiers we have. Thank you, Ms. Harris-Elli bringing it to corner. Mr. Clerk. Bill 217, immense chapter six article two, section six, dash 12, the way county code 1983, 2016 edition as amended relating to prohibited highways for commercial bicycle tours. Sixth at a portion of Caholam Mountain Road and a portion of Oconee Puli Highway. As prohibited highways for commercial bicycle tours, introduce Ms. Evans. I make a motion to forward Bill 217 to counsel with a favorable recommendation. Moved by Council Member Evans, seconded by Council Member V.A. Gis to forward bill 217 to counsel with a favorable recommendation. Council Member Evans. Thank you. Just for the benefit I thought the Council members, I have a communication that I forwarded wishes for informational purposes only. It is not an amendment and it basically is to give you the section now of the code. You know, you would have had this bill before you by now, but we had to wait till we had the code advisor actually assign the section, the article in the section so that, now the public, if they wanna see it in code, can go online and look at the unofficial version of the code, it'll be in there. My understanding is in February, when they go to print, it'll then become quote, the official version. So right now at section 6-11, which kind of gives the layout of the land as what the expectation is with approval of this bill 217 with a favorable recommendation. What would happen is this, these two sections would correspond, it would go to the director of public works and our chief of police to have 45 days to provide any comments that they would want to provide us on the condition of the roads and any recommendations they might bring forth So this is would begin the for if we pass this or I guess I'd have to ask the point of order of the clerk the and the and the and the and the and the and the and the and the and commission and wait next amount of days for them to respond before we take action. So point of order to the clerk. Mayor Span, next meeting. Vice chair. Also, I'm looking at this six that's 11, section six that's 11 subsection B. This is prior to taking final action on these such ordinance. So that big introduction right there, states that it wouldn't be required that this matter remain in committee or even pass first reading of the council. It just says prior to final action, the council is required to request the respect recommendation of the chief of police, director of public works and other public officials deem appropriate. My recommendation would be that at some point in the process part, taking a vote and second and final reading, that the council or this committee make a motion to refer it the bill to the chief of police, director of public works, and then also include any other public officials. It may be appropriate for the specific proposal to request their recommendations pursuant to this section. I hope that's clear. It is. I think what I'm hearing is that we could forward it to council, but also we need to make a motion to forward it to the director of public works, the chief of police. And if anybody on the council wants any other public official, we could have that discussion today and make a determination that there's someone else we want to hear from. That is correct and then it's part of that motion. If the body determines that there are, quote unquote, other public officials deemed appropriate, that would be included in said motion to write clarity. And though that would not necessarily halt the process, that would be at the council, or this committee, or the council's, corrugated whether or not to halt the process process as long as this matter is not voted on on second and final reading without receiving the recommendations of those public officials. Thank you. Thank you. So with that I would open it up for discussion. Thank you. Councilmember Evans, before I call on other council members, can you just provide clearly the areas that are being proposed? This is your district. So I just want to make sure that members of the council are clear on where prohibition is being proposed for. Right. Thank you. So there's two areas in North Kohala that has been really disturbing to people and these are really, this is like our roads up in North Kohala. So when you leave Waimea and you go over to Hawaii Preparatory Academy, there is a fork in the road and you have a state highway that goes down to the ocean or you have the road that goes over the Kohala mountain. When you get over Kohala mountain, you come down to another fork in the road and to the left is Havi Road that goes into Havi and to the right is a road that goes to Kapaow. So the restriction that we're talking about is from the HPA fork in the road over the mountain to the next fork in the road. And that is where all the curves and the blind spots and the no-no shoulders and really really narrow roads those roads used to be sugar cane hauling roads so they're very very narrow without shoulders and in a lot of like a cut into the mountain so that's why they're talking about you know rocks and rock slides and flooding or whatever so that's one section. And then the other section of the road is when you get to where the middle school is in Kapa'a from the middle school out to Pula La Valley, the lookout point. It's all these switchbacks and gulches and it goes down and we have single lane bridges but we also have the blind spots and cuts into the mountain so to speak which again and no shoulders and that's the end of the road and that's where we're having when with the close with the shutting down YPO Valley, it's even been exapsed, rated more and more and more tourists are coming out driving out to the end of the road. And so now there's lots of traffic, but more importantly, we have all these blind spots and curves in the road. And those are the two sections of road that people are really worried about. Thank you. Thank you. We'll start here with Council Member Connari, your client's elder, and then we'll head over to Heavow with Council Member Ninoi. Thank you, Chair. Actually, I'm pretty proud of Council Member Evans for not only working the bill through and getting it to this point but then actually coming back in front of us with the two roads. This is a real testament to her perseverance as well as doing exactly what she started out to do in the beginning. I like that you have kind of set in motion the process that you created that you help create and also you've identified two roadways that you find to be. In this case public safety issues. I agree with the clerk on his reading what I'm getting is we need a recommendation from two different departments, three, two or three different departments, which I from my listening to the clerk would say that can be started now and those recommendations can come back from the department so well, I mean maybe before we get to second reading so this could be a real positive thing for the community. So look forward to supporting and look forward to seeing how the process rolls out for the first time. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Lee Lang. Thank you. Yes, echoing the sentiments of my colleague. I love it that we pass policy and now we're putting it into action. As far as recommendations of other agencies, I would highly suggest that we do Department of Transportation at the state level. My review of their agencies, I would highly suggest that we do Department of Transportation at the state level. My review of their maps, I believe highway 1,250 is kind of covered under state and they label it as state non-NHS. I don't know what that means. And maybe getting some guidance from State Department of Transportation, Road's Division would be another agency for review of this work. But I absolutely agree with Mr. Cunnelly, Klein, Felder. Whether we bounced the ball for the 45-day review right here and now, or at some later point. I think we could do it concurrently. Those are my suggestions in full support of Bill 1217. Thank you. Thank you, Council Member Kalkiwada and the Council Member Kimbo. Thank you. Just I wanted to second including department of transportation, director Ed Sniffin in this, that would be terrific. Thank you. Councillor Perraquimbo. I'm just going to concur with Councillor McKinney, Lee Clampeter and Lee Luey about the process. I'm going to be a bit of a procedural tourist and say I think it needs to stay here while we wait for that feedback to come just because I feel like approving out of the committee is a recommendation for approval and without the data we can't really do that. I think that making the motion to move it here and then keeping it here until we get that response back is the appropriate mechanism. Thank you. Council Member Vill. I guess. Thank you, Council Member Evans. Boy, you've been on a trail and a track and a bike trip to get this legislation move forward. I want to thank the testifiers who live in your district and who are directly affected, having lived for a short time in middle school at the Macapala area, being very familiar. And this was, that was back in the 80s. So we had nothing even near the amount of traffic we have now. And with the exposure through the internet of sacred and special sites like Polo Lou Valley, that traffic has only expanded, which can be a blessing and a curse. Unfortunately, there are unfortunately roads that were considered very rural and thus ideal for riding bicycles on, you know, very rural roads that didn't necessarily have side parts of the road to navigate was fine then, but we are in a different era and in a different time and when it comes to commercialization of public resources and roadways for personal business gain. If health and safety is an issue, I think that we need to take those steps necessary and especially as I've heard over, it's been almost the last two years now, serving with you that this is a message and something that has been requested from your constituency and I appreciate that and requested from your constituency. And I appreciate that. And I appreciate your listening to them and your perseverance bringing this forward. I'll be supporting this. Should you choose to try and move it forward today? If not, I also understand the need for a couple other parts and pieces to fall into place. But I do think that they can be happening concurrently and we can be headed to where we need to get to if you would like to continue to move this forward. I yield. Councillor Evans. Thank you. So I guess I had a couple thoughts. We could, I could, the thought being is we could postpone it. And then when we postpone it and bring it back, that's additional two weeks. So or we could get it to council and we could hold it there in post-ponent and count the days, hit 30 days or whatever. So at some point, the 45 days is really critical. If we want the consistency of how we do it with our planning commission and the when we change zoning code, and if that's something that the council believes for consistency purposes purposes we could hold it here until we the 45 days and so wouldn't be 45 days from this day. It'd probably be 45 days from the receipt, which I don't know when that's going to happen. So I'm concerned about giving information that may not be entirely accurate, even though I think I understand your question. So we could get a response from the director. All of them could respond within two weeks. They just have it up to 45 days. Yeah, correct. They have up to that much amount of time and they're also just to point out there aren't any repercussions or consequences, whether you want to say if they fail to respond. It's a request. So yeah, you could get that information from one or all three within days or never. Okay, so I'm going to suggest that we postpone bill two ones. Well, first of all, I have to make the other motion first, right? Before we do the postponement. Okay, so the first motion, the motion first, right? Before we do the post-pollumet. Okay, so the first motion, the motion is to forward Bill 217 to the Chief of Police, the Director of Public Works, and the Director of the State of... Before I entertain those motions, Council Member Evans, I would like to chime in. Okay, please. Director Pauzi, could you come forward? I just wanted to know there was some interest in DOT review. Can you share whether, in fact, there are portions within these roads being introduced that are under the state's purview? Sure, Steve Palsy, Director of Public Works. Good morning. So the section of road that Councilmember Evans describes as Colle Hall of Mountain Road that is entirely within the purview of DOT. The district engineer for the island of Hawaii is Harry Takiyoi who reports to Robin Shoshito who reports it sniffing. So that's kind of how that works. And yes, I would recommend getting them the way in on that section of road. The Akone Pule was part of the road swap back in January of 22. So that is entirely within the purview of the county of Hawaii. So upon receiving a letter, I would refer that to my traffic folks. Probably get some way in from engineering and highways as well. I think one of the testifiers pointed out that section of road does have land slips and slides and things. So yeah, we would be able to turn that around and fairly short order. But again, I think I answered your questions about the DOT. Thank you. And for Corporation Council, just wanting to confirm, I know the ordinance says that we may by ordinance prohibit commercial bike tours on designated portions of public highways due to substandard road conditions. This includes state highways or roadways under this state jurisdiction. Thank you. This Trans Corporation Council. The short answer is I'm not quite sure. As a general statement, this body cannot regulate the activities of on-state land. The one reservation I have is that this is a county issued permit. And so I'd like to look at that a little bit more carefully whether a county issued permit could regulate activity on state control property. Okay, thank you. With that, councilmember Evans, if you'd like to restate your motion for review. Yes given that comment yes we're regulating bicycle tours not the state highway which we do have that authority. So my motion is to as too forward bill 217 to the chief of police and the director of public works for their respective recommendation. Did you want you originally included the deal to you? I did, but I think that we can inform them, but I'm not sure they can make a recommendation because the recommendation would be. Don't regulate the bicycle tour operators because the reality is that's really what this bill is about. Okay, just wanted to make sure the motion is clear. So the motion is to Ford Bill to one, seven, to the chief of police and to the director of public works for their review. Motion was by Council Member Evans. Sir, second. Second by Council Member Canele, Klein Felder on the motion for recommendation. Council Member Caney, Kleinfelder, on the motion for recommendation. Councillor McKinnelly, Kleinfelder, and then Councillor McKinnelly, Gawada. Thank you. I'm asking the body. I'm asking the clerk. The wording in the bill is prior to the final action on any such ordinance. The council shall request the respective recommendations of the different directors of the departments. My question is do we need to forward the bill for their content or can it simply be a request from the council member of the body to the departments? Does it need to be as formal as we're making it or can it be a simple email request for their recommendations? The ordinance says that the council shall request, so we're making an official motion so that the council is in fact sending the request to those two individuals, the chief of police and the department of public works director. Sorry, one more time. the motion on the floor is that we are going to for that request to those two individuals for their review and their recommendation on the bill. Okay, I'm just digging out loud because it doesn't only say and their recommendation on the bill. Okay, I'm just thinking out loud because it doesn't only say how we request. We're requesting. So by saying we're forwarding the bill, it's not like we're forwarding it to the Environmental Management Commission, and we're just saying we're going to send them a copy. And they're going to look it over and come back to us through recommendation. I'm thinking through the process because other people may want to do this in the future. And I want to know that we've kind of nailed down the process in this first attempt. Mr. Pazie, if you have any input, and then to the clerk too, if you have any input on how we request our respective recommendation. So my input is my understanding and reading this and listening to all of you is that the council would make a formal request of our department of the director of public works to provide their recommendations. So my my understanding is you ask as a body right because it says the council shall request you we receive that correspondence and then we act appropriately. That's my interpretation or understanding. Okay. Mr. Rannings. Customer for County Climbefeldery. Yes and I concur with I'm sorry, but I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. polls or anything that nature doing in that rigid formality then suggest the council made this request. And then from that point forward it won't be complicated. We'll just send a copy of the bill with a, well, I'm just going to council chair staff will do that. And then just make clear that there's a 45-day window of opportunity from the point I've received to provide that recommendation back to the council. Perfect, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Hurnley-Gleitholder, Council member Kagiwata. Thank you, Chair. Just to say, on this particular thing, I disagree, I think that the whole reason that we had this discussion about other public officials weighing in was to address people who might have insight as to the substandard road conditions and how that would work with bicycle tours. And so I respectfully ask that we do include the Department of Transportation at the state level, especially on that one state road. I remember that this was the discussion that we had. And if now we're gonna to say we're not going to include other people to get their feedback because they shouldn't weigh in on us giving permits. I'm just a little that seems a little bit different than what I remember our discussion being so I'll just leave it there. I would like to see them included for the state road. Thank you. Um, Trichin and Hilo, Council Member Linole. Yeah, thank you. Uh, just point of clarification. What we're discussing is a motion to send bill 217 to the chief of police and the department of public works director for their review and recommendation. Yeah, I agree with Ms. Caguata. I don't think it would hurt to get something from DOT. I do point of clarification or inquiry, does this, Mr. Clerk, does this motion foreclose on advancing this bill to the Council, or will that be dealt in a subsequent motion? No, the motion itself, if approved, would not. It does not cease operations or halt the process, not into itself. Thank you, Mr. Clerk. And I'm gonna be a little bit of a rubble here and definitely support the motion too far to a various agency. But I also wanna see this work efficiently and honor the community on the time that they've waited to get some safety done in this area. And so I'm going to support the motion on whatever agency we forward to, but I'm also going to support the motion to get this to council because I think we can run these concurrently and demonstrate to the community that government can work efficiently and use these parallel tracks and at some point prior to final action everybody's going to come together. Those are my thoughts. Thank you. I yield. Thank you, Councilmember Levy. All right, Councilmember Evans. Chair, either with John redo it or I amend it, but yes, I'm about moving the Bill 217 to the Chief of Police, Director of Public Works and Director of the State Department Transportation for their respective recommendations. Okay, so the first motion has been withdrawn and then the new motion is that the bill 216 sorry 217 is to be forwarded to the police chief, the director of public works and to the Department of Transportation for their review. A second was by Council member Evan, sorry made by Councilmember Evans. Second, I back on some member Kimball. Any further discussion? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries, eight, aye. Is one excused Councilmember Perkowitz. We are still back on the main motion now, which is bill 21740 to Council with a favorable recommendation. Council member Evans, how would you like to proceed? Well, I really appreciate, Member Lee Loy, understanding how passionate my community is about this. And, you know, in thinking it through, it's very possible that we could get a response from the department within two or three weeks. And if it gets to council and we haven't heard back we can always postpone it at council level so um given everybody that came out today and it really appreciate their persistence and willingness to keep coming back to testify um I think I'm going to I would like to see it go to council the Director Steve So the state owns highway we do the markings correct they do the markings on Kohala mountain road They just repaved it and there are still temporary markings. I believe they do the permanent markings. And signage? Because it was a contracted job, I believe their contract required them to do signage and markings. That's why we would typically do that. Okay, and it's under their jurisdiction. Excuse me. It's under the state's jurisdiction. Yes, that's correct. HDOT. Okay and it's under their jurisdiction. Excuse me. It's under the state's jurisdiction. Yes that's correct. HDOT. Okay. Yeah interesting. Interesting discussion between jurisdiction, our ability to tell state agency what to do which we normally cannot and then how to proceed with doing everything we're looking at doing down the line from this bill in the county level. From my perspective I don't see any great harm in requesting the state DOT to weigh in on their thoughts. They may come back and say we have no opinion but certainly they manage and maintain the road. That one was part of their inventory even prior to the road swap. So that was never a county road as far as I'm aware. So I don't personally see any harm in asking them to weigh in their thoughts on the safety of their own road. Let's say they say no opinion. I think as part of the bill, we are to put up signage, is that correct? I remember back to how we finished with an amended bill. I'm not sure we can actually put signage up in there right of way, but there's, on the way, may a side, that's all there road, but on the H may a side. That's all their road, but on the Havvy side, Havvy Road and Kinerzly are both county roads. Not Havvy, but Kinerzly is so, yeah, I, how we would actually do that, I'm not quite sure. Yeah, okay. Yeah, they can, they can down the line. But, but again, we have a relationship with DOT, so it's not like run opposite sides. We, we manage and maintain all their signals and traffic lights and things, so I'm sure that's something we could work on. We also, we also enforce laws upon state highways as well from the county level. Correct. Okay. Thank you, Steve. Thank you. I just want to clarify. I'm not sure that we did speak to signage in the bill that we passed, at least in my review of it. So just want to clarify that before we go on. Council Member Kimbo. Thank you. I'm going to disagree with Council Member Levy. I do appreciate how long the community has waited for this because I know we took a long time to get 125 just right. But since we are a precedent setting on the process here and the motion before us is to move this forward with a favorable recommendation without the response from DOT, GPW, and the Chief of Police. I'm not sure I can make a determination if I have a favorable recommendation. So my preference is to leave it here before we proceed to council because we just don't have the information from the people we decided were experts when we developed 125. That's my recommendation. So. Thank you. Any further discussion? There being none motion on the floor is the for bill 217 to the council. What the favorable recommendation Mr. Clerk roll call please. the motion. On the motion to four, go to and seven to counsel the failed recommendation, Ms. Evans. I. Miss Callamba. Hi. Miss Coguata. Hi. Mr. Connelly Kleinfelder. Hi. Miss Campbell. Nope. Miss Lee Loy. Hi. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. I'm not sure. in the motion carries. Thank you Bill 217 is moving to council with that. That was our last one and only agenda item for the day it's 1141 this meeting is now adjourned and we'll begin the legislative approvals and acquisitions committee at 1 p.m. Mahalo.