NEIGHBORHOOD COMMISSION

REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
MONDAY, NOVEMBER 24, 2025 at 6:00 P.M.
Kapālama Hale – Room 153
925 Dillingham Boulevard, Honolulu, HI 96817
AND VIA WEBEX

This meeting location is open to public participation.
Other available options include participating by computer, phone or by video system.
WebEx and phone-in instructions are as follows:

Meeting Link: https://cchnl.webex.com/cchnl/j.php?MTID=m4ed0ce4c5871978ea94a35efd24063d1
Meeting Number / Access Code: 2482 418 5050
Password: NC00 (6200 from phones and video systems)
Join by Phone: +1-408-418-9388 United States Toll

Recordings of Commission meetings can be found at: https://www.youtube.com/@NeighborhoodCommissionOffice
Google Drive: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1LS8mfBOkIKp5hqr6Fwr5Kn1HCYCURUu0
Rules of Speaking: Anyone wishing to speak is asked to raise his or her hand, and when recognized by the Chair, to address comments to the Chair. Speakers are to keep their comments under two (2) minutes. Public testimony taken on each agenda item. Please silence all electronic devices.
Note: The Commission may take action on any agenda item. As required by the State Sunshine Law (Hawaiʻi Revised Statutes Chapter 92), specific issues not noted on this agenda cannot be voted on, unless properly added to the agenda.
NCO Toys for Tots – Toy Drive: The NCO will be collecting donated children’s toys (new & unwrapped) at tonight’s meeting. If you’d like to donate, please bring your toy(s) to this meeting.

I. CALL TO ORDER BY PRESIDING OFFICER
A. Roll Call of Commissioners, Establishment of Quorum

II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. Monday, October 27, 2025 Regular Meeting Written Summary for Video Record

III. PUBLIC CONCERNS – Limited to 2 minutes for items not on the agenda

IV. NEW BUSINESS
A. Waimānalo Neighborhood Board No.32 – Request to permanently change all seats to At-Large
B. Reported failure of Neighborhood Commission Office (NCO) online system to allow residents to sign up to receive agendas/minutes
C. Report on discrepancy of some NCO information that appears to be incomplete covering subdistrict boundaries

V. COMMITTEE REPORTS
A. Neighborhood Plan Committee – Chair Larry Veray

VI. ANNOUNCEMENTS
A. Next Meetings: The Commission will recess in December 2025. The next Neighborhood Plan Committee meeting is scheduled for Monday, January 12, 2026, at 6:00 p.m. at Kapālama Hale and virtually via WebEx. The next regular meeting is scheduled for Monday, January 26, 2026 at 6:00 p.m. at Kapālama Hale and virtually via WebEx.

VII. ADJOURNMENT OF SUNSHINE LAW MEETING

VIII. ADJUDICATORY MATTERS – The Commission will exercise its adjudicatory functions in accordance with HRS § 92-6.
A. 2025-12 Lye v. Caravalho
B. 2025-13 Savaiinaea v. Dudley

A mailing list is maintained for interested persons and agencies to receive this board’s agenda and minutes. Additions, corrections, and deletions to the mailing list may be directed to the Neighborhood Commission Office (NCO) at Kapālama Hale, 925 Dillingham Boulevard, Suite 160, Honolulu, Hawaiʻi 96817, by telephone on (808) 768-3710, fax (808) 768-3711, or e-mailing nco@honolulu.gov. Agenda documents and minutes are also available online at http://www.honolulu.gov/nco/boards.html

All written testimony must be received in the Neighborhood Commission Office 48 hours prior to the meeting. If within 48 hours of the meeting, written and/or oral testimony may be submitted directly to the Board at the meeting. If submitting written testimony, please note the Board and agenda item(s) your testimony concerns. Send to: Neighborhood Commission Office, 925 Dillingham Boulevard, Suite 160, Honolulu, HI 96817, fax (808) 768-3711, or email nbtestimony@honolulu.gov

If you need an auxiliary aid/service or other accommodation due to a disability or an interpreter for a language other than English, please call the Neighborhood Commission Office at (808) 768-3710 between 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. or send an email to nco@honolulu.gov at least three (3) business days before the scheduled meeting. It may not be possible to fulfill requests received after this date.

DRAFT REGULAR MEETING WRITTEN SUMMARY FOR VIDEO RECORD
MONDAY, OCTOBER 27, 2025 – 6:00 P.M.
KAPĀLAMA HALE CONFERENCE ROOM 153 – 925 DILLINGHAM BOULEVARD, HONOLULU, HI 96817
AND VIA WEBEX TELECONFERENCING

Video recording of this meeting can be found at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vQglLTnnQrQ

Meeting materials (Google Drive) can be found at:
https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1LS8mfBOkIKp5hqr6Fwr5Kn1HCYCURUu0

I. CALL TO ORDER – [0:00:01]

Chair Smith called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Quorum was established with 6 members present.

Members Present: Mahealani Bernal, Angie Knight, James Logue, Harris Nakamoto, Patrick Smith, and Larry Veray.

Members Absent: Bill Clark and Christian de Quevedo.

Guests: Winston Welch, Michelle Matson (Diamond Head Neighborhood Board No.05); Kevin Lye (Downtown-Chinatown Neighborhood Board No.13); Evelyn Cullen (Kalihi-Pālama Neighborhood Board No.15); Steven Melendrez (Mililani-Mauka Neighborhood Board No.35); Germaine Meyers (Nānākuli-Māʻili Neighborhood Board No.36); Tom Heinrich, Claire Santos, Greg Misakian, Daisy Murai (Residents); Executive Secretary Lloyd Yonenaka, Dylan Whitsell, Travis Saito, and Dylan Buck (Neighborhood Commission Office – NCO). There were approximately 21 total attendees. Name not included if not legible on sign-in sheet, not signed in and/or not participated in discussion.

II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES – [0:00:33]

Monday, September 22, 2025 Regular Meeting Written Summary for Video Record – [0:00:33]: Chair Smith asked if anyone wished to offer amendments to the distributed minutes. Hearing none, the minutes were approved as written; 6-0-0 (Aye: Bernal, Knight, Logue, Nakamoto, Smith, Veray; Nay: None; Abstain: None) – [0:00:48]

III. PUBLIC CONCERNS – [0:00:54]

Outstanding Requests for Information – [0:01:11]: Kevin Lye noted for the record that he had submitted a list of outstanding requests for information. He requested these be worked into the commission agenda at the appropriate time so outstanding questions can be addressed.

Questions, comments, and concerns followed:
1. Future Agenda Item – [0:01:51]: Chair Smith acknowledged receipt of Lye’s submission but noted it came after the agenda was already published. He indicated these matters would be addressed in the future.

Downtown-Chinatown Neighborhood Board Concerns – [0:02:07]: Greg Misakian raised concerns about the Downtown-Chinatown Neighborhood Board meetings. Misakian expressed concern that the Chair seems to be disregarding concerns raised by multiple board members who have the floor and are speaking, cutting them off while they’re trying to speak and not allowing them to finish. He also requested the Commission look into this matter.

Questions, comments, and concerns followed:
1. Commission Action – [0:03:57]: Chair Smith acknowledged he has attended several meetings and is working with the Chair. He noted there is some movement on that front but would rather not go into detail in public, confirming this is something the Commission is looking at.

Different Perspective on Downtown Board – [0:04:35]: Germaine Meyers expressed appreciation for the new Commissioners and leadership. She stated she has attended the Downtown-Chinatown Neighborhood Board several times and finds that the Chair is very good at holding meetings according to policy. Meyers noted that some board members, including some present at tonight’s meeting, are very confrontational instead of collaborating offline, and tend to be confrontational toward the Chair during meetings. She expressed hope that the issue can be resolved, emphasizing that meetings are about the community, not infighting between board members.

Parliamentary Procedure and Political Activity – [0:07:01]: Tom Heinrich raised two issues. First, he suggested an appropriate parliamentary memo might be helpful soon regarding “call the question.” He explained that several chairs he has witnessed recently don’t properly handle this motion. Second, he cautioned that political season is already upon us, suggesting an appropriate reminder memo to all board members may be in order regarding limitations on direct political activity during meetings, noting he knows individuals who are already candidates or planning to be formal candidates.

Training for Board Chairs and Members – [0:10:12]: Claire Santos commented on the topic of running board meetings and being a good Chair. She noted she has had discussions with Chair Smith and Executive Secretary Yonenaka about better training for Board Chairs and members, and acknowledged they are working on achieving that.

IV. EXECUTIVE SECRETARY’S REPORT – [0:11:00]

Summary of Chairs & Vice Chairs Meeting on Monday, October 6, 2025 – [0:11:07]: Executive Secretary (ES) Yonenaka reported on two main topics from the Chairs meeting. First, regarding training for board members on Robert’s Rules of Order, the NCO has created short training videos in the past and is looking at reviving and updating them. Second, ES Yonenaka announced the NCO will update the website regarding board member information. A request was sent out today asking all board members to send information including a brief bio (optional), photo (optional), and contact information (required).

Update on Artificial Intelligence (AI) generated minutes – [0:14:09]: Executive Secretary Yonenaka provided an update on AI-generated minutes. The NCO is trying to stay ahead of the curve and recognizes they will constantly have to work on the AI side to improve minutes. Currently, AI does what you ask it to do. The office has gone from four pages to eight to ten pages of minutes, and the general reaction has been that everybody seems to like the more detailed minutes. ES Yonenaka emphasized this will be an ever-evolving process as they try to make it better.

Questions, comments, and concerns followed:
1. Support for AI Minutes – [0:16:19]: Meyers, Secretary for Nanakuli-Maili Neighborhood Board No. 36 since 2017, stated she has seen all versions of minutes over the years. She finds the AI-generated board meeting minutes pretty accurate and interesting because they summarize the meeting but capture “the heart” of what she feels is the perfect interpretation of Sunshine Law about getting the gist of the conversation.
2. Caution on AI Complacency – [0:17:42]: Lye emphasized the importance of not getting lulled into complacency regardless of who generates the draft written summary. He noted that for Board No. 13, they still see recurring errors that can be easily corrected by taking time to read or do a once-over glance at the draft.
3. Complaint Status Inquiry – [0:18:46]: Lye asked about a complaint filed in late September 2025 that hasn’t appeared before the Commission or been enumerated. He inquired whether there was any ex parte communication with participants in the complaint and expressed hope that until the amended neighborhood plan is approved, the current rules are being followed.
4. Additional AI Cautions – [0:21:07]: Misakian echoed Lye’s concerns regarding AI, urging caution and care, warning against complacency and laziness. Misakian also expressed concerns about the complaint system not being addressed in a timely manner, noting numerous complaints with many delays. He questioned how the proposed 10-day format would affect these delays when there is already plenty of time in the life cycle but issues still aren’t being addressed.
5. Board Member Responsibilities for Minutes – [0:23:05]: Meyers, speaking as a Board Secretary, noted that all board members are volunteers. If board members feel it’s critical to have precise and accurate minutes, they have two opportunities: volunteer to be the secretary, or during approval of minutes, raise their hand to point out corrections and email them to the NA to save time during the board meeting for community concerns.
6. Format Guidelines for Minutes – [0:25:36]: Heinrich suggested that a format guide sheet showing certain elements that need to be in minutes would be especially helpful, regardless of how they’re prepared.

V. NEW BUSINESS – [0:27:58]

Consideration of Potential Charter Commission Submissions Regarding the Neighborhood Commission and Neighborhood Commission Office – [0:28:03]: Chair Smith explained this item is on the agenda because he received outreach from the Chair of the Charter Commission asking for submissions. He placed a copy of Article 14 of the City and County Charter online in the shared drive, as it deals with the Neighborhood Commission and Neighborhood Boards. At this time, he would not recommend the Commission make any submissions, but opened the floor to commissioners if anyone had thoughts. He noted submissions are due by November 7, 2025, so there is not much time.

Questions, comments, and concerns followed:
1. Individual Submissions Encouraged – [0:29:24]: Knight stated she doesn’t know if the Commission has to send any submissions as a Commission, but she exercised her right as a community person to submit a submission. She encouraged and empowered commissioners to do the same as individuals.
2. Individual vs. Commission Submissions – [0:29:49]: Chair Smith clarified that everyone is entitled to submit their own individual submissions; this agenda item would only be for a submission on behalf of the Commission itself.
3. Monitoring Future Proposals – [0:30:09]: Heinrich agreed that at this point, anyone is free to submit their own proposals individually, which is most appropriate given other committee work. However, he strongly encouraged the NCO and Commission to pay attention after November 7, 2025, to what proposals are submitted. He noted that in the last two Charter Commissions, especially 2015-2016, there was a direct proposal by motion to repeal or remove Article 14 from the Charter. He urged the Commission to pay attention as discussions progress, noting the Commission and NCO may need to respond to proposals on behalf of the city administration.

Consideration of Policy to Require Allowance of Board Member Participation in Public Concerns on Issues Raised by the Public – [0:32:37]: Chair Smith explained there was a board meeting he attended where the Chair, by agreed policy, did not allow members of the board to make comments or ask questions of members of the public who raised issues during public concerns. These were issues raised by the public, but board members themselves were not allowed to participate. This struck him as probably not a good policy since boards are there to serve the public, and sometimes board members can provide information that would be helpful. Executive Secretary Yonenaka noted that if a member of the public brings something up to the board, board members can certainly participate and ask questions. Deputy Whitsell clarified that the Office of Information Practices (OIP) opined that board members themselves should not be raising their own concerns during the public concerns section. However, OIP further clarified that if a member of the public raises a concern in the public concern section, yes, board members can ask them to elaborate or get clarification, but they shouldn’t be using that section themselves to raise their own concerns.

Questions, comments, and concerns followed:
1. Policy vs. Law Question – [0:33:29]: Chair Smith questioned whether just because board members can respond under Sunshine Law, does that mean boards should allow them to respond? He asked if a Chair creates policy saying board members will not be allowed to participate in public concern discussions, does that become a Sunshine Law issue? The discussion explored whether OIP is saying board members “can” participate versus having a “right” to participate.
2. Historical Confusion – [0:35:23]: Deputy Whitsell noted this all started with a memo from OIP that confused all the boards. Bringing the common-sense factor, he agreed with the Chair that there’s a time and place board members need to respond, especially when emergency responders are present, because everybody was interpreting the memo as meaning they couldn’t ask questions when in fact they could.
3. Clarifying Questions Allowed – [0:36:02]: Meyers explained that on her board, as she understands OIP’s statement, board members cannot share community concerns themselves. During community concerns when the community brings up a concern, the only thing board members cannot do is take action (make a motion to do something about what was said). Her board’s practice is to ask clarifying questions about what the community is expressing to help understand their concern.
4. OIP Letter Clarification – [0:38:38]: Lye asked for clarification on the origin of agenda item 5B and whether it was informed by the OIP letter. He noted that OIP clearly stated board members can/may discuss, ask questions, and receive information raised by the public as part of the public input agenda. However, as Meyers stated, the board cannot deliberate or decide on matters not listed on the agenda but raised by the public. He asked if the chair was trying to suggest a way to restrict or constrain the permission OIP appears to grant freely.
5. May vs. Required – [0:39:34]: Chair Smith clarified his understanding that OIP’s letter states the board “may” participate in discussion but does not stipulate that boards are “required” to allow board members to participate. The question is whether boards can adopt a prohibition of board members from deliberating on concerns brought up by the public during public concerns.
6. Policy Not Legal Issue – [0:40:18]: Chair Smith stated he doesn’t think this is a Corporation Counsel issue but merely a policy issue. He didn’t check with OIP because they are most likely about protecting the public, not protecting board members.
7. Support for Board Member Participation – [0:41:02]: Misakian agreed with the Chair’s original position, stating this may fall under Robert’s Rules. In his opinion, the full board should have an opportunity to speak. Once the issue is raised by the public, the board should be able to speak, and nobody should be silencing voices of either the board or the public.
8. Board Members as Community Messengers – [0:42:53]: Matson stated that board member participation would be valuable for evaluating whether to place items on the next agenda or assign to committees. She noted that many times constituents provide information but are not able to attend or log on to board meetings. Board members should be allowed to be messengers for their constituents and present concerns not on the agenda. Chair Smith stopped her, clarifying that’s forbidden by Sunshine Law – board members cannot represent constituents or bring up things not on the agenda. Only members of the public can bring up issues under community concerns.
9. Alternative Options for Board Members – [0:45:31]: Commissioner Logue suggested that usually boards have a board business section where such items could be brought up if on the agenda. The discussion explored whether board members could have concerns read by the chair, which Deputy Whitsell clarified is not allowed based on OIP’s interpretation. He explained that because board members have the privilege of being on the board and can request items be placed on the agenda (unlike the public), OIP’s view is that if community members raise something, board members have the ability to put it on the agenda.
10. Narrow Issue Restated – [0:47:12]: Chair Smith restated the narrow issue: will the Commission allow a board or chair to prohibit members from discussion with an issue raised by the public?
11. Board Practice at Mililani-Mauka – [0:47:34]: Melendrez explained their board members do participate with the public in discussions. Before doing anything, they defer back to their Chair for permission, then all participate. It helps make a wider breadth of discussion and they arrive at solutions for the community, which the community appreciates.
12. Speaking as Community Member – [0:48:22]: Welch stated that community concerns involve representatives of the community, but board members are also members of the community. If a board member has a concern as a member of the community not on the agenda (perhaps an emergent concern since the agenda was published), they should be able to speak.
13. Clarifying the Prohibition – [0:50:02]: Knight asked if the question prohibits all discussion of board members, including clarifying questions. Chair Smith explained that the board he attended had a rule that did not allow board members to ask or make any discussion of public concerns. When someone raised a public concern, board members were not allowed to respond in any way. The question is whether the Commission should make a policy (not in the rules but as policy) directing chairs or boards to allow members to participate in discussions.
14. Support for Clarifying Questions – [0:51:19]: Knight commented that as someone who has high schoolers and college students on Neighborhood Boards, sometimes they don’t give full context. It helps to have board members usher that person through what they’re saying. When taking notes to follow up on concerns, it helps to ask more questions about context (specific parking issues, street light locations) to be able to act on concerns.
15. Policy Would Reduce Confusion – [0:52:10]: Meyers expressed hope that the Commission would create a policy to clarify what is acceptable during community concerns, which might be confusing for some Chairs and board members. OIP opined that board members just can’t deliberate and make decisions, but that doesn’t mean they can’t ask clarifying questions to help come to solutions.

[0:54:08] – Veray MOVED and Bernal SECONDED to adopt a policy that board members are allowed to participate in discussion for items raised during public concerns by the public. Hearing no objections, the motion was ADOPTED; 6-0-0 (Aye: Bernal, Knight, Logue, Nakamoto, Smith, Veray; Nay: None; Abstain: None) – [0:55:01]

Questions, comments, and concerns followed:
1. Implementation Through Plan Committee – [0:55:48]: Knight asked if this would pass as a motion rather than writing an actual resolution or memo to the boards. Chair Smith stated a motion is sufficient.
2. Caution on Plan Provision – [0:56:12]: Lye expressed support but cautioned that Neighborhood Plan 2-14-118(d) says boards can provide for reasonable administration of oral testimony by rule. He’s not sure if that applies but wondered if it leaves wiggle room for someone to protest the adopted motion. Chair Smith responded that the Commission does not deem it a reasonable restriction, which is exactly what they passed, noting the Commission sets policy.

Discussion of Agenda Informational Links – [0:57:02]: Chair Smith noted he had a discussion with Buck (NCO) about this topic, which was brought to his attention by someone questioning why the Commission doesn’t have specific links to folders in question. This agenda item is to explain the NCO’s policy and reasoning. Buck explained that for agendas, the meeting link is for the specific recurring meeting. Below that, the recordings link goes to the generic NCO YouTube page, not a specific playlist, giving the option to see all published videos. The Google Drive link is a general link to the Commission’s folder, where users can see previous years, months, testimony folders, and committees. The reason for using a general link is to prevent someone from being locked into one specific month’s folder. If they used a specific October link for this meeting, users couldn’t backtrack to see everything else available. They see having a specific link as a disservice. For minutes, there is a specific meeting recording link for that month, and then the Google Drive link again.

Questions, comments, and concerns followed:
1. Testimony Link Consistency – [0:58:49]: Lye asked for clarification whether the link to testimony accessed through the NCO website links to the same information accessible through the URL printed on Commission agenda documents. He wanted to ensure there’s a uniform way to reach testimony and board packets. Buck clarified that testimony folders are linked.
2. Finding Commission Meetings – [1:00:25]: Matson expressed finding it disconcerting when logging on to YouTube and getting all the meetings, making it difficult to find Commission meetings. She emphasized the importance of having direct links for Commission meetings, agendas, minutes, and committee meetings so neighborhood board members can see what’s happening at the Commission level. Buck explained that the YouTube page has 33 boards plus the Commission, so the main page shows many videos based on posting time. However, they do have playlists. Users can bookmark the Commission’s playlist on their computer, and the first video should always be the latest.
3. Gratitude for Links – [1:02:29]: Meyers expressed gratitude for the links on agendas. She explained that in a perfect world, clicking links would show all reports and testimonies at that moment, but as board members know, when clicking on agendas just before meetings, many times reporters don’t provide reports until the meeting date. Some reports are emailed ahead of time, sometimes not. She appreciates the growth and updates NCO has been making since she joined her board in 2017.
4. Sunshine Law Requirements – [1:05:00]: Misakian appreciated the comments but noted there is a rule and Sunshine Law regarding meeting materials that should be made available so the public can see them and decide whether to attend meetings. If a PowerPoint presentation exists and will be shown at a meeting, it should be uploaded a certain number of days prior. That material is important, and having it easily found, especially for kupuna, is what board members like Matson are requesting. He emphasized there is a documented process with rules and regulations that need to be followed.
5. Openness to Suggestions – [1:06:50]: Chair Smith stated the Commission and NCO are trying to listen to the community and make things easy. The NCO does things certain ways for legitimate reasons. If anyone has specific suggestions, they should send them to the NCO, and if it’s a great idea and possible to implement, he’s sure they will.

Review Committee Appointments – [1:07:20]: Chair Smith explained this item is to add an appointment to the Neighborhood Plan Committee. Chair Smith would like to appoint Commissioner Knight as the seventh and final member.

Hearing no objections, Commissioner Knight was appointed to the Neighborhood Plan Committee – [1:08:12]

VI. COMMITTEE REPORTS – [1:08:56]

Neighborhood Plan Committee – [1:09:01]: Chair Veray reported that the committee met last Monday, October 20, 2025. The area they’ve been working on is the complaint process. Chair Smith has led this effort for many months, really trying to streamline it, make it extremely fair, and get it to a point where it’s not too long to act on complaints. They were at the point of doing final review when the NCO came up with some creative ideas. They looked at those last week and are in the process of trying to incorporate some of those ideas. Veray asked for patience, stating next month they’ll go back and see what they were able to integrate, review it again, and eventually get it to OIP for quick review, then to Corporation Counsel, then let the boards take a quick look for any final ideas before hopefully being done with that section. He also shared good news that they’re going to jump into some exciting areas of the neighborhood plan based on surveys done in the past and things they’re hearing at meetings. They want to try to get those areas updated, which is really what board business usually involves. He invited anyone with time available to join them at the next meeting (the third Monday in November) and thanked everyone.

VII. ANNOUNCEMENTS – [1:11:30]

Next Meetings – [1:11:30]: The next Neighborhood Plan Committee meeting is scheduled for Monday, November 17, 2025, at 6:00 p.m. at Kapālama Hale and virtually via WebEx. The next regular meeting is scheduled for Monday, November 24, 2025 at 6:00 p.m. at Kapālama Hale and virtually via WebEx.

VIII. ADJOURNMENT OF SUNSHINE LAW MEETING – [1:12:54]: The meeting was adjourned at 7:14 p.m.

Submitted by: Dylan Buck, Community Relations Specialist, NCO
Reviewed by: Dylan Whitsell, Deputy, NCO
Finalized by:

To view agenda and minutes, visit our board website.

Event shows physical location; however, other options of participation may also include WebEx and phone.  If available, instructions for WebEx and phone can be found at the top of the agenda.