So the expectation for involvement and responsibility will be um taking a step up here. Um uh let's see u the I guess the one of one discussion point and Danielle touched on it but okay. So we want um the entire board to give input and feedback on um you know the fi the final candidate selection of course but uh but leading into it. So we'd like to have your guys's input. Is that something versus we can designate maybe a couple people. I guess those are the two options. um you know, we can designate one or two board members to kind of lead maybe up to getting potential candidates, you know, narrowing it down to two or three potential candidates. Um or we can have more of a everyone involved in in that decision. So, that's maybe one one question to discuss right now. What's your guys' thoughts on that?
We would just ask for consideration that uh the fees for the second and third review just be confirmed before we proceed. And secondly, we would also um if the commission want to entertain a call between Bowler Engineering and uh GCG to kind of kick this off. I think it'll be helpful for both parties to have an hour, hour and a half call to go through the project, the history where we how we got here through the ZBA and then allow them to do their their review on encumbered. >> Yeah, that that may um >> be an add to scope, but >> okay, >> it's fine with me. All right. Uh, do we need a motion? Yeah. To approve. Yeah. >> Are we approving both peer reviews? >> No. Storm water. GCG. >> Yeah. And GCG. >> I move that we um engage GCG for stormwater review of 1060 Main Street project.
Okay. So, we don't know. We don't think that there's going to be a negative impact. And we think that we can leverage all of the different um funding, federal and state funding to meet our need. Okay. To meet the needs of our students. So, currently, the Promise program is able to cover 100% of all the students that qualify uh for um Promise, you can cover 100% of direct costs. Or you've been covering 100% of direct costs. Pretty much, yes. What What do you mean by pretty much? Yes. Okay. So, >> of part of the problem is because of the way the law is written that it's the the funding keeps having to be repackaged, right? So, every time a student gets, you know, a new scholarship, it comes back into the calculation and then we have to repackage their financial aid, and then we, you know, have to fig you know, uh and then we move the funds on.
So would you be saying like uh like we have a however we winnow the candidates then the option is like a panel interview with all the board or the option would be like we select two or three people to be a representative probably two to be a representative of the board to do like the in-person is that what you're kind of asking right now or not. >> Yeah. So there's two parts of it probably one is to um narrow down the candidates. So let's let's just say we get 20 20 applications and we want to we want six to interview something like that. So that's the first thing >> that would be the an April close session potentially if we're able to do that. So you would have a interview you would have application window of about a month open. >> Again we're on a tight timeline.
>> Second. Roll call vote. >> Acman. I. >> Crow. I. >> Crouch. I. >> Atinson. I. >> Molton. I >> I motion passes. >> Great. >> Okay, Chris, before you sit down, uh so let's have a path forward here for the next hearing as far as an agenda. >> Um so that we're not chasing our tail in two weeks. I know I know initially you wanted to discuss the contaminants. I don't know how quickly we can pull something together. >> Are we going to be ready to do that in in two weeks? >> Be ready in two weeks to have especially on the weekend. What I'm hearing is requesting management. They're going to get to talk to Jeff, but certainly my perspective Yeah, you could say that again. >> Can that be repeated into a microphone, please, for the public? >> Yeah, >> maybe we should discuss at the next meeting the scope of the soil management plan.
So, that If that's part of the problem, I think, with the way that the bill is written, is that it's constantly repackaging based on any kind of additional aid that students get. Which causes, you know, problems when it when you're talking about timing of packaging and um you know, whether the student knows how much they're getting um Okay, so is it is it the intent that we do cover 100% of the students direct needs or should there be some buying by the students and that leave some money for other students to to be able to benefit from these state dollars? Um I think we try to cover as much of the direct cost as we can because we know that that's um what is that that's a that's an equalizer you know if we're looking for equity for economically disadvantaged students uh we know that at least covering the direct costs um will be the thing that could make or break their college success.
So this is not ideal but if we want to be able to have either ambassadors or student board members this is the only way we're going to achieve it. Um, it's not ideal, but it's the only way to achieve it. So, we would open up the application process maybe hopefully on the 20th if we can get our things taken care of. Close it on April 20th. We need to talk about where the applications are going and make sure that it as a board can we have access to them before our 21st meeting so that on the 21st we can hold a close session and everyone can come to the table and voice like, "Yeah, this is my top pick or my top two top top picks." Yeah. >> And I think depending on how many applications we get, I think at that time we can determine, do we want to narrow it down to three people that we're interviewing, 10 people?
Does that work? >> I think that works. >> Does that work for everyone? >> Yes, >> I guess. Sure. >> Instead of the specifics because I think if you spent the next two weeks and never slept, you probably wouldn't be able to come up with >> an appropriate >> that that works. >> Okay. >> Is that the extent of of what we want to do at the next >> hearing or? >> Yeah, I think that's appropriate and we can have a discussion following the sidewalk if there's any additional comments or question or information needed. I I would request if the board can um provide some comments before that hearing. It would be allow us to better prepare and discuss at the hearing. So if you have like we've heard we've heard you want a soil management plan. If there's other comments on the soil contaminants on the site, I think it would be helpful to have a even if it's a preliminary comment letter in advance of that meeting would be very useful I think so we can have a good discussion.
um So you don't think a student should have to at least um have skin in the game as to paying for at least 5% or 10% of the direct cost so that I mean I know whenever I get something free you know lot of times people don't even bother cuz it's free but when they have to pay for a little bit then you actually utilize it because you know you know you put money into it and it means a lot more. Well I think that that we're assuming that they're able to pay the 5% right so I think we what we see is that um students cannot pay right up front. I know we have a lot of programs where if you if a student had to put out money up front they wouldn't be able to enroll. Well maybe it's not up front but it's somewhere.
I mean, and kind of go from there. >> And it may depend on >> I mean, how many we get, >> but we want to make sure every board member, >> we want to make sure every board member can be part of the conversation. I don't think that we can I like honestly I don't know how we would make >> I don't think we can interview this year with every board member at the table. That's a little overwhelming, too. But um for the kids, but also time time wise, I think it's going to have to come down to maybe two people going potentially to the high school like we do with ambassador program or having them doing something where that would happen between April after our April meeting. We have our narrow down list and then through so that we can make that decision by May and bring it to the rest of the board.
>> But you don't want to provide commentary on our comments until you get the peer review. >> Correct. We fully intend to comment and respond to them. I think it'd be more appropriate to do so once we have GCGs and potentially Beiels and Thomas' review if it's uh appropriate. I I would think that for the next meeting, we'd also like to have like a an overview of what contamination is known to be on site. um what can what potential contamination you know what the unknowns are as well um as much for the public as for us I think that's a something a lot of people are u wondering about and uh just so we have a good sense of the scope um probably be a good uh introductory presentation on that >> yeah I think that's that's a good idea and you know if in le of formal comment letter.
Mhm. Well I mean you know, covering direct costs is maybe tuition is tuition and books. Students still have to put in the time, they have to work. You know, they have all the rest of, you know, what it takes to live in Hawaii to as a challenge. I understand, but that's all all of us, right? All of us, I mean, we never None of us here ever had Promise Program or any kind of Promise Scholarship at all. And um you know, we all had to work to to pay for it. People are still working before they pay for their their debts and so forth and their student debt as well as other kinds of debt going on. So, um yeah, I'm just trying to see how we can help more students by giving, you know, everybody maybe 95% versus 100%, then we can cover more students with with dollars.
>> Yeah. I think to get all of us involved with especially like if I'm looking at this right I think like we would the 19th is like the day before commencement. So it's a very robust I mean it's just like the intensity of that last month of school is something else. Uh I think >> yeah I think >> the only good thing is we're we'll be interviewing like sophomores and juniors. >> That's true. Right. So, it's not going to be the seniors that are >> exactly >> kind of on their way out. But >> yeah, >> it's not ideal, but we don't have anything else to work with. >> No, there's no other options. >> And I don't think I mean, at least me, I understand what we're trying to do. And it may look different next year, and that's fine. Right. Because we're trying to >> You guys have done >> Yeah.
If you just want to email us, Miss Alman, a list of the items the commission would like to see, I think we can be prepared that we we're not coming and saying we'll get back to you. If we can address everything, we will. And if we can't, we'll we'll let you know during the presentation items we still need time to provide. But I think that would be more efficient time use of everyone's time if we have that preliminary items such as that. Those are those are good questions and we can be better prepared to answer them >> through the commission. I believe everything that was discussed and brought up by the commissioners tonight is included in the nine pages the that was sent in the comment letter last week. The soil management plan is listed in comment item 1G. Um there's more with other question uh comments on contaminants in regards to dewatering in comment 9E1.
And that's actually, I mean, financial aid packaging, you know, happens in that way so that um our and and community college financial aid is is done um systemically. So, you know, they do try to figure out the best ways to stack and leverage funding so that we can, you know, meet the needs of more students. That's that's You know, that's >> always lower tuition, right? I mean, that would help as well. Okay. Any Any other questions?
>> Yman's job at getting this up and running and getting a framework put together and effectively a month. Yeah. >> To try to look at it. I I have a couple of question. one I it doesn't matter to me whether it's how it's broken apart. I mean I think it needs to be fair and it needs to be appropriate. Some of it needs to be maybe a bit responsive to if we get five applicants or we get a hundred applicants, right? Like talk about that. >> That's a little bit of a different tact that you guys might say we need to pull an audible and I'm happy to help work through as much as I am able with the team here to communicate as I have the ability to do as board president. Um, we will need to check with our attorneys and those in the know about the closed session option if have others done that that you've seen at that.
There are others throughout the uh letter as well. So, if you review that, I think you'll find your list. >> Okay. I just want to make sure if that was a comprehensive list, then that that won't be a problem. >> We'll we'll look at it and if there's anything additional to what's in that already in that letter, we'll we'll provide that for you. >> Perfect. That that would be helpful. Thank you. >> Bless you. Bless you. >> Okay. Are we at the point where we can continue this hearing? Any other comments? So, we're looking at March 30th at 7:05 p.m. >> Okay, that that's that works. Thank you. >> All right. We have to say they're all at 7:05 p.m., but um I think the one before you should go pretty quickly. Yeah. >> Okay. So, they get to go first again. >> It's fine.
Hearing none, thank you. Go ahead, Lois. Next bill. House Bill 2339, House Draft 1. We'll put at the end of the agenda now. I'm just kidding. I know Lois has been sitting here waiting. Okay, this is uh relating to the University of Hawaii revenue bonds, authorizing Board of Regents um to issue revenue bonds for the purpose of financing qualifying priority capital improvement projects. And we have Lois Salveron from the University of Hawaii to testify. Chair, Senators, Lois Salveron, University of Hawaii. We'll stand on our testimony. in support.
So, we just need to make sure that it falls within one of the categories of that. I'm not >> Oh. Oh, the for the selection of >> Yeah. I'm not I'm not saying it doesn't. You may have saying, oh yeah, ISB said do it. I'm just going to get them to check and we'll be good. >> That was the recommend that was on there. The sample was actually from ISB to have the entire board do the interview process um as like a an ability to do that. But >> okay. Yeah. I mean Thomas is looking there's like a line in there where like we think it would be under that. Yeah. >> But it's not like crisply written that seems like it would align. >> And will we need to do a close session? There's only two of us who are >> That's the thing.
Thank you. >> I think the subsequent one Yeah, you'll be first. Yeah. after that. Okay. So, do I hear a motion to continue notice of intent 10 to 60 Main Street, map 14, parcel 128, SLV Ashlin LLC, Carl Lucas Environmental LLC, D file number 95-1018 to March 30th at 7:05 p.m. >> Move. >> Second. Roll call vote. >> I crow I. >> Crouch I. Atinson I >> Molton I >> I >> Jan's I motion passes and >> meetings continue to March 30th. >> Thank you. >> See you on Saturday. >> Mr. Chairman, can we can we confirm the time for Saturday? >> 9:30. >> Yeah. >> 9:30. >> That's right. >> Okay. >> Thank you. We'll see you. >> I imagine we'll see you there then. >> We'll be there. Thank you. Appreciate that. >> All right. Thank you. Okay, take care. >> Anything else?