We just want to know specifically what you want. >> Okay. >> So, tonight, so far from this commission, what I've gathered, you definitively want a soil management plan, which we can work with. >> You also want to know some more detail what's under the building. I we're happy to provide that. Okay. Okay. If you have other comments on that RER plan, if you feel there's other things that are lacking that you would like to review that are pertinent to how soil is going to be addressed in the site, we we'll provide it to us and we'll respond appropriately. We're not looking to hide anything. We're not looking to keep anything from you. We've provided the documents you've asked for. Um there's been some confusion on whether they're appropriate or not. We believe they are. If there's something lacking, this is part of the process. It's a back and forth comment.
Um Let's see. Right now, what happens is that if a student is awarded, again, the base is going to be their federal Pell Grant, and a student is awarded Hawaii Promise. If a student goes out and gets any other kind of aid, right, through any kind of philanthropic, institutional, Hawaii Community Foundation, any kind of aid, we have to repackage their aid to exclude Hawaii Promise. What we're trying to say is that to let that federal state um aid stand with Hawaii Promise um so that students aren't penalized for going out and getting additional scholarships. But it seems like So, so nationally, though, isn't that aren't aren't they doing that for most institutions? They're penalizing if you get more scholarship, cuz I've talked to a lot of students and they're like, "Oh, no, since I get scholarship because they re- re- redo my financial aid package." So, is this is this like kind of a loophole?
So that's item 9.3. So uh Danielle and Rob, would you like to lead us through this? You guys took the reigns of it last time and we >> appreciate it very much. >> Yeah. Okay. So I think um what's attached here is just some notes from our meeting.
We respond and hopefully address your question. So, you know, we're in the really the first step of this process tonight and uh you know, we we definitely want to work with you and move this along. Um we're not looking to be adversarial here. We want to work with this board. We want to satisfy you and uh hopefully get an approval here. Um so again I would suggest maybe the board can work offline on a list of comments related to the Rama plan and contaminants that um your your your team can provide to us and we can add to the list of comments and um coordinate with the peer reviewer on. >> Okay. As long as if we can work on this offline but we have to have that discussion in public form so everyone hears the answer to those not just >> No. Absolutely. No ab right.
>> Yeah, and many of the Hawaii Promise, I mean, of the Promise programs across the nation are also trying to implement this in their state. And I think we had one of our consultants um testify at the last time that this is this is the practice I think um I don't I think it was an unintended consequence of saying last dollar. I don't think that was the intention of Hawaii Promise. But I think that that has been you know they have seen across the nation that had that has been the outcome and they're trying to remedy that um through you know clarifying that they're talking about last federal and state dollar and not all dollars. Okay. All right. Thank you, sir. >> I still I'm a little confused here. So if the Pell Grant's a federal program say do they they don't normally cover 100% right?
Um, I guess we can kind of briefly go over that and Rob and I just chime in and you guys can ask any questions. Um, again, we we met. It was really to try to find a way to just create something there. I want to preface everything with saying that this is really a timesensitive type of um I don't know even know thing to turn around because if we if we do want to achieve this we do need to have some things in place. So um we walked through uh as you can see as we start off we start off with like what do we want the details of the position to be what grade level how many members. Um, we could definitely go up from two members eventually, but we figured two members would be a great thing to start with. Um, we would start with a junior and a senior and then you would alternate.
I we can go through tonight if you want to get the comments out. But I just thought it more appropriate as we re the comments provided by >> staff. As long as as long as those questions are answered in a public form and not on a website or in private someplace. >> No, our our intent is to respond to comments. Uh everything will be public. Um the the response to Miss Solomon's and the commission's comment letter will be public record. We'll have a written response to that. Ideally, as we've done in the past, normally what we would do is provide one package. It'll have a response to comments to to to her comments to the peer reviewers, to the wetland consultant, and we'll we'll have a nice letter, have each comment listed out. We'll provide a response to each one and the supporting documentation, soil management plan, um maybe a revised plan set if there's some modifications to the storm water, etc.
Or do they cover 100%? >> And it depends on the student need how much money they would get for that. Yes. >> So say they they say they don't cover uh $500. Yeah. Or whatever it is 100%. So the Promise program comes in and can they then do that last $500? No. Yes. That's that's exactly how we use Hawaii Promise. So how were we doing it before? That's always been my thought that that's what we were doing. Well, what was happening is that if a student went out and got other scholarships it would displace Hawaii Promise instead of stack on top of um instead of stack on top to meet their indirect needs. So if a student you know got five you know their student need was $5,000 and they got 4,000 from a federal Pell Grant and they got a thousand from Hawaii Promise.
So, you know, obviously the next year, the second year, you would be having that junior at a two-year term, move up to a senior, and then we would be looking to bring on a new junior. Um, so that you're always having someone who's had a little bit of experience and you have that new junior coming in shadowing, just kind of how we used to kind of deal with our ambassador program. Um, we really spoke about I don't know if Rob you want to add anything specific in, but we really really felt it was important for um the K through eight voices to be brought in a bit more. I mean, they've done a great job with bringing in especially the middle school, but we really would like this um role to incorporate more of bringing in the K through eight voices. And how that's done is something that will determine as we roll this out because this is going to be new.
Um and I and I think that'll provide a nice compreh comprehensive package that can come back and then um you know we obviously we can still have other discussions in the meantime with the board but I I think that's an appropriate way to proceed here and we'll hopefully >> so we're clear you're you want us to have the document that the notice of intent peer reviewed for storm water as is. Is that correct? We we we do I don't think there's any >> without consideration of our comments. >> Cor well I I think that the the peerreview should receive your comments. Um but I think it would be appropriate for them to review what we've submitted along with your agents comments and any other comments from the commission and then we can respond appropriately to their comments with them. I I think it's a better path forward.
If a student went out and got a scholarship of $500 that would we would repackage and uh the 500 would be taken out of Hawaii Promise. But isn't that what you know the Hawaii Promise was to put in whatever addition that needed. And so if they do get other scholarships, then they would reduce the state funding and allow for other students to get it. Right? So what are we saying here? We're saying you're going to get it no matter what and and No, we're saying that if you have any direct need that we can fill that with the federal financial aid and Hawaii Promise. And if you access grants or other private scholarships, that you use that to meet your indirect costs. Cuz the direct cost is just tuition and books, right? You still have housing, transportation and all >> that you should use it for tuition.
It's going to be an opportunity um for these first two to really really like make it what it needs to be. Give our feedback be very very fluid because it's just the details of it I don't think we're going to understand until we get into it. Um and I think so the the rest of the layout I don't want to go too much in detail with like every little piece. So you guys just ask questions, but um and we really try to lay out what does the uh process look like for application. Um we kind of came up with the IASB has samples and so we took that and basically edited. It's not included in this but I think you guys have access to it. The editing was horrible like when it got sent to you guys. I'm sorry. um we kind of try to plug it in, but basically what we'd be looking at is it the students would have um access to the job description.
It's still getting all resolved. It may just take a little more time on our end which which is fine. But we we want to initiate that peer review ideally tonight if the if the board makes a vote to initiate that peer review. Um we we would like to proceed and I think it'll be in the commission's interest because if they have additional comments or reiterate or you know her comments I think it's it's a path forward for all of us >> to the commission. uh just in response to the applicant's uh suggestion to have the peer reviewer uh be in receipt of the comments that uh I had submitted as well to them. Um that was not included in the scope uh that GCG provided for storm water. Um I'm not sure if it would change the pricing if they would need to spend an hour or so reviewing the nine pages of comments submitted.
A lot of scholarships, right, have requirements that should be used for tuition or that the check has to be paid directly to the school for the tuition. So how do we how does that fit in? I mean, there are some, but many scholarships, many uh private philanthropic dollars don't make those designation. What about those that do? Then what happens? Then you would have to displace. Okay. So then what the the direct or indirect um needs, the Promise program pays it 100%? No, no, no. It's built on first the federal aid. So the the student has to show financial aid need through the FAFSA process. And typically they would get a Pell Grant award. Depending on their need is the amount that they would get. And then whatever is left um to meet their direct cost, that's when the Promise comes in. Okay, but then we all you also say indirect, which mean which is transportation, food, housing.
Um they would have to turn in one staff recommendation. Does not have to be a teacher. Um it just has to be a staff member of BPS. Um along with that, there is a template kind of that we would lead into a a student letter, if you will, where we're kind of asking, why do you want to do this? What are some ideas? Um and then they would turn that in with that letter of recommendation and that is something then we would go forward into a um process where I think all of our all of us board members perhaps if the timeline works right we would have a close session to kind of go over our top picks and then we would move that into eventually into an interview process when we have an interviewing like maybe committee I don't know if it's Rob and I we'll talk about that a little bit more um how many we're going to do.
um or not just for the applicant's consideration. >> I I don't see an issue, but I don't want to speak for Mr. Angler. Jeff, I don't think that'll be an issue if if they need an extra hour or two. >> No, he said no, it's not a problem. >> Thanks for the interpretation. just in case um as related to the peer review, I I would just um if if the board is going to entertain that tonight, we would appreciate it. And then um on that matter also, um wondering if there's been any update on the the wetland side, if there who you may have reached out to, what the statuses >> uh through the commission, the wetlands, we did get a response from one wetland scientist firm. Um the scope they provided included storm water which is being done by GCG. Um I sent that back to them to request a revised scope uh that did not include the storm water.
Yeah. >> Housing, right? So, those are you call it indirect or direct? Indirect. Indirect. Indirect. So, the Promise program can pay for all of that? >> Direct. Only direct. Oh, not indirect? No. So, the Promise and federal aid only So, each student has a direct cost of need and federal FAFSA, Pell Grants um can pay for direct costs. And the Promise is for direct costs only. Okay, I was under the impression that the Promise was for indirect costs. No. No? Mhm. Right? Huh. So, so I guess in the analysis then, we're we're we're still short then that there's no cost impact. I don't know how there is not one. I mean >> if you're if you're going to allow them to use outside scholarships for the indirect, you're in theory we're now subsidizing your direct costs more through Hawaii Promise, right? Yeah. But we don't know what that cost could be.
I mean, it's just going to depend on the conversation here. Um, with the hope of by May's board meeting, we would bring to the table then the two candidates that have been it's been narrowed down to, we would recommend and then that way we can bring the students on and they're take their oath by June. >> Yeah, exactly right. So, a couple other things to add here. Um, one, so We're expecting this to be a really a big increase in responsibility and it's it's going to be a big we think it's going to be a big time commitment for people um that want to apply for for this position. So, we want to be pretty clear with that um expectation um so people know what they're what they're getting into um for this. And it's not not to say anything about how we've done done it in the past student ambassadors program, but we I think we want to take it to the next level here a little bit.
Um so the applicant wasn't being charged for storm water twice. Thank you. >> Um they stated they would get that to us. Um we just have not received it yet. >> Okay. Who's the consultant? The >> uh that one is Beals and Thomas. >> Okay. Okay. Great. Anyone else from the commission commission more questions or comments? So we we do have our site visit scheduled for Saturday and uh if we want to um let's continue this hearing till our next offcycle meeting on March 30th. We can entertain that if that's agreeable. Let's let's approve peer review first before we continue the hearing. >> Okay. >> And and with that, just uh the just to reiterate the two requests we made earlier because I know there's been a lot of discussion. Uh one would be like we said the applicant is fine with the initial peer review.
We are anticipating that we if if there are no changes to federal financial aid and again, this is not all students, right? These are students that show financial aid need according to the federal guidelines. >> Right. Right. But we don't know what that number is. Cuz cuz I'm I'm assuming we we have a current set of students that you know would have to be recalculated, right? Based on this new law. So, I'm assuming that it's so small that it's you thinking it's insignificant or are we talking this impacts >> I mean so, Hawaii Promise is one kind of funding, right? We also have like, you know, we have stuff like native Hawaiian tuition waivers that also come out. So, it's not the only thing that we use to >> I exactly. Yeah. But we're just making sure, right? If But you guys We got We got We're going to pass something and then you're going to be like, "Oh, we got to go tip into the tuition, you know, surplus because we we forgot that, you know, forgot to do the calculation correctly, right?" Yes.