Aloha and thank you Honorable Council members, Council staff, and participating Maui residents for this opportunity. My name is Jake Carton, Maui voting resident speaking on behalf of Maui Indivisible.
We are asking the Council Budget Committee today to recommend a “resounding No vote” as pledged by Council Chair Lee on the Council record last week on Trump’s FBI-JTTF contract with Maui Police.
Trump’s FBI-JTTF is abusing America, abusing our democracy, and this new contract abuses Maui. When the Minneapolis FBI-JTTF team leader killed Rene Good, this mother and poet’s last words were “I’m not mad at you dude.” Yet, Trump instantly called her a domestic terrorist and called in the FBI-JTTF to investigate her and her grieving family as domestic terrorists. If that’s not abuse, I don’t know what is.
The Budget Chair sent out a notice for this hearing that avoids her public pledge last week. Missing in that notice is that option to vote “No” Why is a “No” vote important?
Trump and the MPD needs to get the message that the Council opposes this contract. Three weeks ago, the Corporation Counsel’s position was the Police Chief could execute this JTTF contract on behalf of the whole County bypassing a vote of the Council. All the Council had to do was “file” Bill 92 to give the power to an unelected Police Chief. That Corp Counsel position, which has flip-flopped 3 times in less than 3 months, did not arise randomly. This position was prompted by an October 14 memo from the Budget Chair, after the full Council retreated from approving the JTTF contract because it learned from hundreds of Maui Indivisible activists how vastly unpopular this JTTF contract is.
In fact, this bypass is exactly what the Council did a few months ago when it “filed” the contract that the Police Chief made with the National Guard on Maui. This contract helps Trump deploy the Guard to militarize places like LA, Minneapolis, Chicago. The MPD guards this Maui base from intruders as a top priority over responding to Maui resident 911 calls. This will really impact us when the base is emptied on a Trump deployment.
It is clear that if the Council “files Bill 92,” it will leave the door open to an unelected Police Chief again bypassing around holding a Council vote. Vote No today. Vote No at the full Council, and protect our democracy.
We recognize that the Budget Chair has restricted our time to 5 minutes. In that short time, we will not be able to correct all the falsehoods the Budget Chair spent hours collecting to support the Council’s original approval of the proposed JTTF contract. Nor will we have time to run through all of the one-sided, Trump dictates and Maui pays, abusive master-servant aspects of this JTTF contract. Fortunately, the DRIP Committee Chair allowed us to put it on the Council record last week and now we put it in writing. Please ask me questions if you still are unsure the contract places no financial obligation on the County.
With our remaining time, we will focus on the one aspect of this proposed JTTF contract which is most abusive of all. That is the ability of the County to escape it. To get out, we have to get permission from the abuser.
By the way, the MPD and FBI searched for their current JTTF contract and finally found a 19 year old contract a few days ago. Let’s compare. For context, under this current 19 year old JTTF contract, the Council could vote today to terminate it and our County would be out from under it in 60 days.
To put this proposed JTTF termination clause in another context, the Police Chief’s contract with Trump’s Homeland Security now embedded inside the Maui Police station has a good escape clause. Also, since the Police Chief executed this contract on behalf of the County without the vote of the Council, the Council could just declare this contract void today.
Another context is the reasonable time limit in the Police Chief’s contract with Trump’s National Guard mentioned earlier. By the way, did the National Guard ever sign and date this contract? We better look into that. Better to withdraw from that contract before they date it and try to bind us for a whole nother year of Trumpian deployments
We would have more examples of termination clauses to share but the MPD is obstructing our legal rights, leading to the State Office of Information Practices intervening many times while the MPD continues not to comply with our formal requests. It’s safe to assume though that it’s standard to put in a reasonable time limit or have an unconditional escape clause.
Let’s compare the current and proposed JTTF contracts on the duration of police officers under JTTF exclusive supervision. The MPD has yet to reveal those JTTF officers’ terms and current numbers as instructed by the Council two weeks ago. Regardless, anybody who negotiates contracts will tell you that the current contract is weak on Trump’s FBI binding MPD officers to 2 years. This is not so under the proposed contract. In the contract that is likely in effect, officers are not parties to the agreement and "expected" is not equivalent to the mandate on the MPD of "agrees to provide."
To Summarize, the Committee should vote to take a companion action with a vote No recommendation and that is to write formally to the FBI-JTTF to terminate the existing contract and start that process before we find ourselves in deep trouble when Trump expands immigration enforcement and militarization to Maui. The Budget Committee should also begin the process of ending collaboration with Trump’s Homeland Security and National Guard. Thank you.
I bleive that Maui Policer Department should be doing the work of our local polution and not be under contract with the Federal Government to help in the detention of our people. We all our immigrants to Hawaii. Mine came from Maderia and San Miguel (Portuguese colonies). When local police is under contract to seize immigrants because they do not have the right papers we change the aloha spirit we have been living under. We start being afraid to do the needs of the family because the local police may seize you. MPD should not be doing the work of the Federal government. If this agreement is approve, local people will be afraid to welcome the stranger in our midst. Please do not authorize this agreement. Keep the Maui Police protecting all our residents never mind their legal status. Thanks. Deacon Stan Franco
My name is Rachel Coles from Pukalani. I am vehemently opposed to any partnership between the JTTF and the MPD for the following reasons:
1. ICE and the other associated federal agencies have committed frank hostile actions up to and including murder and war crimes against non-violent residents of other states including unprovoked firing tear gas into cars with infants, and we must stand united with them, because if they get the message from us that their actions are tolerated, they will not stop with those states, they will do that here.
2. They have lied about their actions and cannot be trusted in any agreement, bold-faced in contravention of obvious physical and material evidence, without repercussion. They are liars. In addition, the protocol stated by them in the MOU doesn't match what we are being told would be the MPD jurisdiction. According to the MOU, MPD would be subordinate and lose their power for mediation and for mitigation of any actions taken by ICE.
3. As a corollary to that Maui residents will not be able to trust MPD for any crisis call or any other community collaboration for fear of exploitation and assault by ICE, CBP or HSI. That would effectively destroy the good relations between MPD and the community. They are not hunting criminals, they are hunting people of color: working residents and CITIZENS, vulnerable people, and children, and anyone of any background who voices dissent. No one is safe from them, and there is a plethora of evidence for this. They are doing so not to keep anyone safe but to make everyone too afraid of their retribution and targeting as to not speak out in dissent about the mistreatment of others.
As a result of this campaign of internal terrorism, we require the following actions:
1. Budget Chair Sugimura needs to vote NO to a new contract, and dismantle the old one by withdrawing the MPD officers after the two-year term, write a contract termination request to FBI, and give 60 day notice that MPD will withdraw from participation in the JTTF.
2. The Council needs to withdraw from the contract signed by the Police Chief to embed agents in the MPD, since he had no authority to sign, being unelected. Thirty-day notice needs to be given to Homeland Security, since it was not legal execution of the contract by an unelected individual and this violation of contract law cannot be ignored by the Council.
3. The imperative to withdraw from contracts signed by the Police Chief also extends, for the same reasons, to the one he signed to have MPD guard National Guard bases, while National Guard are deployed or engaged on orders of Trump administration against US residents on Maui. Guarding military bases is not the MPD's job, their job is protecting Maui residents. In fact, if they are to partner with the National Guard at all, it should be to help defend Maui residents against unbridled and undeserved assault by the rogue federal agencies who have answered to no residents' constitutional rights as of recently. No contracts of any kind, or MOUs of any kind, with ICE, CBP, or HSI or other related agencies until they no longer demonstrate lawless and violent behavior.
Mahalo to the Council for your time and consideration.
I strongly urge the Council to reject all contracts between our local police department and Trump's FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTI).
Last week I attended the Wala’au Sesh with the local police in Hana, and heard from the new LT and other officers how they feel they are placed in a bad light due to the actions of the federal agencies, and their reputation is tarnished by any association with these lawless, unaccountable, and cruel law enforcement activities. We need our local police to be trusted by the community as servants and protectors as they are intended to be. We must reject any cooperation or affiliation with authoritarian federal agencies.
(2nd submission because combining both would exceed 10K character limit)
Here are some other corrections the Budget Committee needs to make to its prior Report on the proposed IGA with the FBI-JTTF
Will the Budget Committee (BFED) investigate whether there is a current executed FBI-JTTF contract that Bill 92 intends to replace?
Three days ago, the Budget Committee made public with absolutely no fanfare that the FBI and the MPD searched their records and could only find a 19 year old contract that might be a current contract between the FBI-JTTF and the County’s MPD. Hidden on the Budget Committee website for this agenda, this contract is labeled “Correspondence from Committee Chair 02-04-2026.” Since this might be the contract that the Budget Chair and BFED has recommended to replace with Bill 92, the Committee should fact-find to resolve this question. It should also fact-find whether the Council ever approved and the Mayor ever signed this 19 year old contract. Is it properly executed and has the MPD been acting as if it is in effect today? Did the County also ever terminate this 19 year old contract? There are too many questions to list now.
Please fix the falsehoods in the Budget Committee record, especially the important ones
For example, the BFED Report to Council on Bill 92 authored by Budget Chair Sugimura says the MPD “emphasized that the Department would retain supervisory responsibility over assigned County JTTF personnel and the discretion to decline participation in any JTTF action.” This entire proposed contract demonstrates this is patently false.
Upon this False finding, the BFED recommended passing the Bill 92 IGA with the FBI-JTTF last Fall. This should be fixed in the new BFED report to the full Council
The Committee has Yet to Examine What is Not in the proposed FBI-JTTF contract (or IGA), but should be, are
1. A minimum percentage of Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) of an officer position assigned to the JTTF
2. Limits on the number of MPD officers assigned to the JTTF and limits on the JTTF using mandatory on call status on MPD staff in the JTTF. IGA page 3 says “During periods of heightened threats and emergencies, the JTTF may need to operate 24-hours a day for an extended period of time... During these periods, all JTTF personnel are expected to support JTTF activities unless released to the Participating Agency.” – So JTTF can define and declare a threat, and then take exclusive control of even part-time MPD officers to force them to work 24/7.
Why does this matter?
The County is taking great risk that a hypothetical un-elected and authoritarian Trumpian Police Chief permits the FBI to deputize the entire MPD staff, detailed to the JTTF at 5% for each FTE. When the JTTF declares a heightened threat at their discretion -remember those regular Orange alerts by Bush after 911?- the JTTF can mandate the entire MPD to be under JTTF command. Do we want the risk of one person standing between Trump and his take over of the MPD, a $83M County Department?
This Budget Committee needs to fact-find on reasonable limits and require contracts to be negotiated with safeguards to Trump’s take over of MPD and our civil liberties.
The BFED should recommend that the full Council Vote NO on Bill 92, terminate and unwind from the current MPD contract with Trump's FBI-JTTF ASAP, and terminate all Trump Police State contracts with the MPD including but not limited to the Homeland Security contract embedding them in the MPD police station and the National Guard contract protecting their base helping Trump deploy them to Mainland civilian spaces.
Jake Carton, Maui voting resident and on behalf of Maui Indivisible
The BFED should recommend that the full Council Vote NO on Bill 92, terminate and unwind from the current MPD contract with Trump's FBI-JTTF ASAP, and terminate all Trump Police State contracts with the MPD including but not limited to the Homeland Security contract embedding them in the MPD police station and the National Guard contract protecting their base helping Trump deploy them to Mainland civilian spaces.
This is the Context of Bill 92 as it comes to BFED now:
The full Council voted initially to approve the FBI-JTTF IGA (contract) based on a BFED Committee recommendation and report with many falsehoods. Later the Council voted to send the FBI-JTTF contract back to the BFED Committee to review its approval after it realized that Budget had failed to analyze the contract in the context of Trump’s mission for the FBI-JTTF. The BFED Report had also placed several falsehoods about the contract on the record that need to be fixed.
What are the Legal Duties of the Council on Intergovernmental Agreements (or IGAs)?
STATE LAW 46-7 says “Agreements with federal government; use of funds.
The governing body or the planning commission or department of the various counties, with the consent of the council, may enter into agreements (which may extend over any period, notwithstanding any provision or rule of law to the contrary) with the federal government or any other public body or bodies respecting action to be taken pursuant to any of the powers granted to it by law and furnish, expend, and receive any funds or other assistance in connection with projects being or to be undertaken pursuant to the powers.”
Does the Council Give Blanket Consent Under Certain Conditions and How Does the Council Decide If IGA Meets Those Conditions?
The Answer is: By vote of the Council after fact finding.
The Fact-finding the Council needs to do is partly defined in
COUNTY CODE, Chapter 2.20 – which says “INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENTS
Unless authorized by ordinance, the mayor shall not enter into any intergovernmental agreement or any amendment thereto which places a financial obligation upon the county or any department or agency thereof.”
B."Obligation" means any commitment, promise, or similar representation contained in an intergovernmental agreement that the county or any agency thereof will provide funds, documents, statistical data or any professional or technical service, or establish any rules, regulations, or other law within the county to any other governmental or quasi-governmental agency.”
Has the Council engaged in public fact-finding on the Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) and on whether it contains a financial obligation on the County? NO, Not Yet. Hopefully, that starts today
Has the Council voted to declare this IGA places no financial obligation on the County? NO
Conclusion: Until the Council publicly examines the IGA for a financial obligation placed on the County and votes on that finding, it is not yet meeting it’s statutory responsibility to consent.
The County Code requirement of “Financial Obligation” is found in the IGA (FBI-JTTF contract) and acknowledged in the previous BFED record
• Page 2 of IGA btw MPD and FBI-JTTF: “SUPERVISION AND CONTROL. All JTTF personnel, once on-board, will be under the supervision of the FBI while working on the JTTF to which they are assigned.”
• Page 8 says “SALARY/OVERTIME COMPENSATION/FUNDING… The Participating Agency shall be responsible for the pay, overtime, leave … relating to its employees detailed to an FBI JTTF.”
• Page 3 says “STAFFING COMMITMENT AND RESPONSIBILITIES. In light of the significant cost and effort in on-boarding new JTTF personnel, as well as the need for continuity to successfully combat national security, criminal, and cyber threats, attacks, and intrusions, the Participating Agency agrees to provide its personnel to the FBI JTTF for a period of at least two (2) years.” This not an expectation of the JTTF staffer. This is a contractual obligation of the County agency.
• Page 5 says “The Participating Agency will not knowingly act unilaterally on any matter affecting the JTTF“
• BFED September Report to Council on Bill 92 says: “The proposed agreement would commit the County to provide personnel whose salaries, benefits, and agency-required training remain County costs”
No IGA sections establish any MPD supervision or operational control in the JTTF Chain of Command. Thus, the argument that MPD retains full supervision of JTTF officers deputized from the MPD is not supported anywhere in the IGA. The County pays for officers while the FBI-JTTF commands.
On Pages (2-8), Many more IGA sections prohibit the MPD from Chain of Command and operational control among other restrictions on MPD activity. The MPD is paying our County taxdollars to JTTF staff but the County doesn’t have full control and is locked into that financial obligation for 2 years. The contract establishes a one-sided relationship between the master FBI-JTTF and the servant MPD. It is not collaborative in decision-making. Going back to the County code, the County is financially obligated to pay for professional and technical services (MPD officers in the JTTF) over which the FBI-JTTF is in full control by contract.
The Council Budget Committee Needs to Correct Its Record With a Proper Fact-finding Hearing on the Legally Binding IGA Itself.
Past Practices or MPD promises regarding Supervision and pay are irrelevant to a vote on Bill 92. In fact, the Council has yet to begin to fact-find into dangerous parts of this proposed contract
For example, the Council Budget Committee should do proper fact-finding on…
• How many MPD officers are in the current JTTF, their tenure, and what are the average annual hours spent in the last 5 years? The MPD has yet to reveal those JTTF officers’ terms of service and current numbers as instructed by the Council two weeks ago. Deputy Maeda named 4 MPD officers in his 8/5/25 memo to this committee. Another MPD representative stated only one part-timer on the Council record last week. Chief Pelletier evaded this question in his 2/4/26 memo to the DRIP Committee Chair. Answering these very simple questions have to stop being a moving target
• Will this Committee do fact-finding on the FBI-JTTF contract’s overbearing dominance on Maui County’s independence and free voice? Especially on pages 4 to 7, this proposed FBI-JTTF IGA binds a muzzle to the MPD, Council, and County independence. It’s not just dissenters’ rights at stake, it is our County government too. Trump’s FBI gets to define terrorism in this contract. How has Trump’s FBI definition changed lately especially in light of Trump’s NSPM-7 and charges lodged at victims Good and Pretti? Why does this matter? Because this proposed contract gives the FBI-JTTF a free hand to define any investigation as about terrorism. This then triggers FBI nondisclosure agreements. What do these non-disclosure agreements look like and require? It also triggers the FBI-JTTF banning the MPD and the County from holding press conferences, issuing press releases, releasing JTTF-related body-camera footage and any information deemed by the FBI-JTTF as under investigation by them
• Will this Committee do fact-finding on how this contract signs away Maui County’s Right To Access Evidence, Investigate, and Adjudicate crime and liability? When the FBI has a free hand to name any alleged act as terrorism, it also then triggers a page 5 clause in the contract that prevents the County and the MPD performing its own police and prosecutorial work. This matters because we are watching in real time FBI’s behavior and practice in Minneapolis and across our nation preventing local police from investigating killings, kidnappings, and brutality by federal agents of white American citizens with no criminal record in residential neighborhoods in broad daylight. If Trump’s Police State is doing this to them, imagine what it is doing to People of Color, immigrants who also have rights, people who are criminally charged but not convicted who also have rights too.
Jake Carton, Maui voting resident and on behalf of Maui Indivisible
Strongly Oppose Bill 92 February 8, 2026
Aloha Chair Sugimura and Maui County Council Members,
My name is Lisa and I am Maui County resident writing to strongly oppose Bill 92.
Recognizing many contracts already exist within this framework, the time is now to oppose Bill 92 and update the old Maui Police (MPD) contract with Trump’s FBI-JTTF (Terrorism Force), the same force being used to frame Constitutionally protected Renee Good and Alex Pretti as “domestic terrorists.” As you may know, I was arrested by Maui County Police with the support of both the Mayor’s office and the Chief of Police by merely attempting to provide transparency (which I have done in partnership for a decade) in basic processes last fall. All charges were dismissed with prejudice and I have yet to receive any acknowledgement for the hardship this created for me and many who worked tirelessly to prove my innocence. Sitting in the jail cell, knowing I was arrested with no evidence of my wrongdoing was an exercise in wasted resources and a emotional/financial hardship no one should go through. These contracts are on steroids compared to the hardship I encountered for upholding my Constitutional Rights. The ripple effect is both damaging to the spirit of this County and the reputation that those elected and PAID to protect us are in fact, doing the opposite.
The timing is perfect to update these procedures and reflect the voices of this community, and I urge this committee to vote “No” on the new FBI-JTTF contract (Bill 92) AND also lead the Council to order MPD to withdraw its officers from under the FBI-JTTF as soon as their 2-year terms expire, write a contract termination request to the FBI immediately, and give the 60 day written notice to the FBI to withdraw from participating in all ways.
• I urge the Council to withdraw from the contract that the Police Chief signed with Trump’s Homeland Security to “embed” their agents inside the Maui Police station, among other collaborations, as the Chief had no authority to sign on behalf of the County. To do this, the Council needs to give 30 days’ written notice to Homeland Security. I urge this Chair and the committee not to bypass Council votes by giving power to the unelected Police Chief.
• I urge the Council to withdraw from the contract that the Police Chief signed with the National Guard. This contract enables Trump to deploy the Guard to invade civilian spaces while the MPD protects their base as a top priority over responding to Maui resident 911 calls. Please cancel and give written notice to the National Guard that the County intends to terminate ASAP and publish the exact 2026 date.
• Please fix and maintain transparency on all of the inaccuracies about the FBI-JTTF contract put on the Council record by the MPD and your comments, Chair Sugimura.
Much appreciation for the enormity of this decision and know your actions will deeply affect generations to come.
Lisa Seikai Darcy, Kula, HI
I strongly oppose Bill 92 in agreement with Councilmember YUKI LEI SUGIMURA per her communication to Chair, Hon. Tamara Paltin dated 1/28/2026 when she stated, "I am supportive of disapproving Bill 92 and will be making
that recommendation moving forward.).
I have reviewed all the documentation available on this site for Bill 92, “A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING
THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
FOR A JOINT TERRORISM TASK FORCE”.
I oppose any agreements proposed under the "Presidential Authority" of a 32 times convicted felon who should never have been given any such authority.
I support the Maui County Council in all efforts to resist fascism in all its forms.
Thank you for your very kind attention,
Joseph Kohn MD
Unable to submit this comment when logged in and adding attachments already on file. (Also unable to remove attachments.)
I strongly urge you to reject Bill 92 authorizing the mayor to enter into an intergovernmental agreement with the FBI for a joint terrorism task force . It is extremely important to stop funding Trump's police state forces on Maui including Homeland Security and the National Guard. Vote No on Bill 92
Rev. Dr. Robert W. Nelson
I disapprove of bill92. Please remove Maui County and Maui Police Department and the Mayors Office from any and all collaborative efforts with Trump's anti immigration actions and policies. I support a “No” Vote on New FBI- Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) Contract.
secondly
I propose a council joint statement voicing our disapproval and calling for an immediate end to current Federal ICE tactics around our country.
Aloha and thank you Honorable Council members, Council staff, and participating Maui residents for this opportunity. My name is Jake Carton, Maui voting resident speaking on behalf of Maui Indivisible.
We are asking the Council Budget Committee today to recommend a “resounding No vote” as pledged by Council Chair Lee on the Council record last week on Trump’s FBI-JTTF contract with Maui Police.
Trump’s FBI-JTTF is abusing America, abusing our democracy, and this new contract abuses Maui. When the Minneapolis FBI-JTTF team leader killed Rene Good, this mother and poet’s last words were “I’m not mad at you dude.” Yet, Trump instantly called her a domestic terrorist and called in the FBI-JTTF to investigate her and her grieving family as domestic terrorists. If that’s not abuse, I don’t know what is.
The Budget Chair sent out a notice for this hearing that avoids her public pledge last week. Missing in that notice is that option to vote “No” Why is a “No” vote important?
Trump and the MPD needs to get the message that the Council opposes this contract. Three weeks ago, the Corporation Counsel’s position was the Police Chief could execute this JTTF contract on behalf of the whole County bypassing a vote of the Council. All the Council had to do was “file” Bill 92 to give the power to an unelected Police Chief. That Corp Counsel position, which has flip-flopped 3 times in less than 3 months, did not arise randomly. This position was prompted by an October 14 memo from the Budget Chair, after the full Council retreated from approving the JTTF contract because it learned from hundreds of Maui Indivisible activists how vastly unpopular this JTTF contract is.
In fact, this bypass is exactly what the Council did a few months ago when it “filed” the contract that the Police Chief made with the National Guard on Maui. This contract helps Trump deploy the Guard to militarize places like LA, Minneapolis, Chicago. The MPD guards this Maui base from intruders as a top priority over responding to Maui resident 911 calls. This will really impact us when the base is emptied on a Trump deployment.
It is clear that if the Council “files Bill 92,” it will leave the door open to an unelected Police Chief again bypassing around holding a Council vote. Vote No today. Vote No at the full Council, and protect our democracy.
We recognize that the Budget Chair has restricted our time to 5 minutes. In that short time, we will not be able to correct all the falsehoods the Budget Chair spent hours collecting to support the Council’s original approval of the proposed JTTF contract. Nor will we have time to run through all of the one-sided, Trump dictates and Maui pays, abusive master-servant aspects of this JTTF contract. Fortunately, the DRIP Committee Chair allowed us to put it on the Council record last week and now we put it in writing. Please ask me questions if you still are unsure the contract places no financial obligation on the County.
With our remaining time, we will focus on the one aspect of this proposed JTTF contract which is most abusive of all. That is the ability of the County to escape it. To get out, we have to get permission from the abuser.
By the way, the MPD and FBI searched for their current JTTF contract and finally found a 19 year old contract a few days ago. Let’s compare. For context, under this current 19 year old JTTF contract, the Council could vote today to terminate it and our County would be out from under it in 60 days.
To put this proposed JTTF termination clause in another context, the Police Chief’s contract with Trump’s Homeland Security now embedded inside the Maui Police station has a good escape clause. Also, since the Police Chief executed this contract on behalf of the County without the vote of the Council, the Council could just declare this contract void today.
Another context is the reasonable time limit in the Police Chief’s contract with Trump’s National Guard mentioned earlier. By the way, did the National Guard ever sign and date this contract? We better look into that. Better to withdraw from that contract before they date it and try to bind us for a whole nother year of Trumpian deployments
We would have more examples of termination clauses to share but the MPD is obstructing our legal rights, leading to the State Office of Information Practices intervening many times while the MPD continues not to comply with our formal requests. It’s safe to assume though that it’s standard to put in a reasonable time limit or have an unconditional escape clause.
Let’s compare the current and proposed JTTF contracts on the duration of police officers under JTTF exclusive supervision. The MPD has yet to reveal those JTTF officers’ terms and current numbers as instructed by the Council two weeks ago. Regardless, anybody who negotiates contracts will tell you that the current contract is weak on Trump’s FBI binding MPD officers to 2 years. This is not so under the proposed contract. In the contract that is likely in effect, officers are not parties to the agreement and "expected" is not equivalent to the mandate on the MPD of "agrees to provide."
To Summarize, the Committee should vote to take a companion action with a vote No recommendation and that is to write formally to the FBI-JTTF to terminate the existing contract and start that process before we find ourselves in deep trouble when Trump expands immigration enforcement and militarization to Maui. The Budget Committee should also begin the process of ending collaboration with Trump’s Homeland Security and National Guard. Thank you.
I bleive that Maui Policer Department should be doing the work of our local polution and not be under contract with the Federal Government to help in the detention of our people. We all our immigrants to Hawaii. Mine came from Maderia and San Miguel (Portuguese colonies). When local police is under contract to seize immigrants because they do not have the right papers we change the aloha spirit we have been living under. We start being afraid to do the needs of the family because the local police may seize you. MPD should not be doing the work of the Federal government. If this agreement is approve, local people will be afraid to welcome the stranger in our midst. Please do not authorize this agreement. Keep the Maui Police protecting all our residents never mind their legal status. Thanks. Deacon Stan Franco
Aloha to the Council,
My name is Rachel Coles from Pukalani. I am vehemently opposed to any partnership between the JTTF and the MPD for the following reasons:
1. ICE and the other associated federal agencies have committed frank hostile actions up to and including murder and war crimes against non-violent residents of other states including unprovoked firing tear gas into cars with infants, and we must stand united with them, because if they get the message from us that their actions are tolerated, they will not stop with those states, they will do that here.
2. They have lied about their actions and cannot be trusted in any agreement, bold-faced in contravention of obvious physical and material evidence, without repercussion. They are liars. In addition, the protocol stated by them in the MOU doesn't match what we are being told would be the MPD jurisdiction. According to the MOU, MPD would be subordinate and lose their power for mediation and for mitigation of any actions taken by ICE.
3. As a corollary to that Maui residents will not be able to trust MPD for any crisis call or any other community collaboration for fear of exploitation and assault by ICE, CBP or HSI. That would effectively destroy the good relations between MPD and the community. They are not hunting criminals, they are hunting people of color: working residents and CITIZENS, vulnerable people, and children, and anyone of any background who voices dissent. No one is safe from them, and there is a plethora of evidence for this. They are doing so not to keep anyone safe but to make everyone too afraid of their retribution and targeting as to not speak out in dissent about the mistreatment of others.
As a result of this campaign of internal terrorism, we require the following actions:
1. Budget Chair Sugimura needs to vote NO to a new contract, and dismantle the old one by withdrawing the MPD officers after the two-year term, write a contract termination request to FBI, and give 60 day notice that MPD will withdraw from participation in the JTTF.
2. The Council needs to withdraw from the contract signed by the Police Chief to embed agents in the MPD, since he had no authority to sign, being unelected. Thirty-day notice needs to be given to Homeland Security, since it was not legal execution of the contract by an unelected individual and this violation of contract law cannot be ignored by the Council.
3. The imperative to withdraw from contracts signed by the Police Chief also extends, for the same reasons, to the one he signed to have MPD guard National Guard bases, while National Guard are deployed or engaged on orders of Trump administration against US residents on Maui. Guarding military bases is not the MPD's job, their job is protecting Maui residents. In fact, if they are to partner with the National Guard at all, it should be to help defend Maui residents against unbridled and undeserved assault by the rogue federal agencies who have answered to no residents' constitutional rights as of recently. No contracts of any kind, or MOUs of any kind, with ICE, CBP, or HSI or other related agencies until they no longer demonstrate lawless and violent behavior.
Mahalo to the Council for your time and consideration.
I strongly urge the Council to reject all contracts between our local police department and Trump's FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTI).
Last week I attended the Wala’au Sesh with the local police in Hana, and heard from the new LT and other officers how they feel they are placed in a bad light due to the actions of the federal agencies, and their reputation is tarnished by any association with these lawless, unaccountable, and cruel law enforcement activities. We need our local police to be trusted by the community as servants and protectors as they are intended to be. We must reject any cooperation or affiliation with authoritarian federal agencies.
(2nd submission because combining both would exceed 10K character limit)
Here are some other corrections the Budget Committee needs to make to its prior Report on the proposed IGA with the FBI-JTTF
Will the Budget Committee (BFED) investigate whether there is a current executed FBI-JTTF contract that Bill 92 intends to replace?
Three days ago, the Budget Committee made public with absolutely no fanfare that the FBI and the MPD searched their records and could only find a 19 year old contract that might be a current contract between the FBI-JTTF and the County’s MPD. Hidden on the Budget Committee website for this agenda, this contract is labeled “Correspondence from Committee Chair 02-04-2026.” Since this might be the contract that the Budget Chair and BFED has recommended to replace with Bill 92, the Committee should fact-find to resolve this question. It should also fact-find whether the Council ever approved and the Mayor ever signed this 19 year old contract. Is it properly executed and has the MPD been acting as if it is in effect today? Did the County also ever terminate this 19 year old contract? There are too many questions to list now.
Please fix the falsehoods in the Budget Committee record, especially the important ones
For example, the BFED Report to Council on Bill 92 authored by Budget Chair Sugimura says the MPD “emphasized that the Department would retain supervisory responsibility over assigned County JTTF personnel and the discretion to decline participation in any JTTF action.” This entire proposed contract demonstrates this is patently false.
Upon this False finding, the BFED recommended passing the Bill 92 IGA with the FBI-JTTF last Fall. This should be fixed in the new BFED report to the full Council
The Committee has Yet to Examine What is Not in the proposed FBI-JTTF contract (or IGA), but should be, are
1. A minimum percentage of Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) of an officer position assigned to the JTTF
2. Limits on the number of MPD officers assigned to the JTTF and limits on the JTTF using mandatory on call status on MPD staff in the JTTF. IGA page 3 says “During periods of heightened threats and emergencies, the JTTF may need to operate 24-hours a day for an extended period of time... During these periods, all JTTF personnel are expected to support JTTF activities unless released to the Participating Agency.” – So JTTF can define and declare a threat, and then take exclusive control of even part-time MPD officers to force them to work 24/7.
Why does this matter?
The County is taking great risk that a hypothetical un-elected and authoritarian Trumpian Police Chief permits the FBI to deputize the entire MPD staff, detailed to the JTTF at 5% for each FTE. When the JTTF declares a heightened threat at their discretion -remember those regular Orange alerts by Bush after 911?- the JTTF can mandate the entire MPD to be under JTTF command. Do we want the risk of one person standing between Trump and his take over of the MPD, a $83M County Department?
This Budget Committee needs to fact-find on reasonable limits and require contracts to be negotiated with safeguards to Trump’s take over of MPD and our civil liberties.
The BFED should recommend that the full Council Vote NO on Bill 92, terminate and unwind from the current MPD contract with Trump's FBI-JTTF ASAP, and terminate all Trump Police State contracts with the MPD including but not limited to the Homeland Security contract embedding them in the MPD police station and the National Guard contract protecting their base helping Trump deploy them to Mainland civilian spaces.
Jake Carton, Maui voting resident and on behalf of Maui Indivisible
The BFED should recommend that the full Council Vote NO on Bill 92, terminate and unwind from the current MPD contract with Trump's FBI-JTTF ASAP, and terminate all Trump Police State contracts with the MPD including but not limited to the Homeland Security contract embedding them in the MPD police station and the National Guard contract protecting their base helping Trump deploy them to Mainland civilian spaces.
This is the Context of Bill 92 as it comes to BFED now:
The full Council voted initially to approve the FBI-JTTF IGA (contract) based on a BFED Committee recommendation and report with many falsehoods. Later the Council voted to send the FBI-JTTF contract back to the BFED Committee to review its approval after it realized that Budget had failed to analyze the contract in the context of Trump’s mission for the FBI-JTTF. The BFED Report had also placed several falsehoods about the contract on the record that need to be fixed.
What are the Legal Duties of the Council on Intergovernmental Agreements (or IGAs)?
STATE LAW 46-7 says “Agreements with federal government; use of funds.
The governing body or the planning commission or department of the various counties, with the consent of the council, may enter into agreements (which may extend over any period, notwithstanding any provision or rule of law to the contrary) with the federal government or any other public body or bodies respecting action to be taken pursuant to any of the powers granted to it by law and furnish, expend, and receive any funds or other assistance in connection with projects being or to be undertaken pursuant to the powers.”
Does the Council Give Blanket Consent Under Certain Conditions and How Does the Council Decide If IGA Meets Those Conditions?
The Answer is: By vote of the Council after fact finding.
The Fact-finding the Council needs to do is partly defined in
COUNTY CODE, Chapter 2.20 – which says “INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENTS
Unless authorized by ordinance, the mayor shall not enter into any intergovernmental agreement or any amendment thereto which places a financial obligation upon the county or any department or agency thereof.”
B."Obligation" means any commitment, promise, or similar representation contained in an intergovernmental agreement that the county or any agency thereof will provide funds, documents, statistical data or any professional or technical service, or establish any rules, regulations, or other law within the county to any other governmental or quasi-governmental agency.”
Has the Council engaged in public fact-finding on the Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) and on whether it contains a financial obligation on the County? NO, Not Yet. Hopefully, that starts today
Has the Council voted to declare this IGA places no financial obligation on the County? NO
Conclusion: Until the Council publicly examines the IGA for a financial obligation placed on the County and votes on that finding, it is not yet meeting it’s statutory responsibility to consent.
The County Code requirement of “Financial Obligation” is found in the IGA (FBI-JTTF contract) and acknowledged in the previous BFED record
• Page 2 of IGA btw MPD and FBI-JTTF: “SUPERVISION AND CONTROL. All JTTF personnel, once on-board, will be under the supervision of the FBI while working on the JTTF to which they are assigned.”
• Page 8 says “SALARY/OVERTIME COMPENSATION/FUNDING… The Participating Agency shall be responsible for the pay, overtime, leave … relating to its employees detailed to an FBI JTTF.”
• Page 3 says “STAFFING COMMITMENT AND RESPONSIBILITIES. In light of the significant cost and effort in on-boarding new JTTF personnel, as well as the need for continuity to successfully combat national security, criminal, and cyber threats, attacks, and intrusions, the Participating Agency agrees to provide its personnel to the FBI JTTF for a period of at least two (2) years.” This not an expectation of the JTTF staffer. This is a contractual obligation of the County agency.
• Page 5 says “The Participating Agency will not knowingly act unilaterally on any matter affecting the JTTF“
• BFED September Report to Council on Bill 92 says: “The proposed agreement would commit the County to provide personnel whose salaries, benefits, and agency-required training remain County costs”
No IGA sections establish any MPD supervision or operational control in the JTTF Chain of Command. Thus, the argument that MPD retains full supervision of JTTF officers deputized from the MPD is not supported anywhere in the IGA. The County pays for officers while the FBI-JTTF commands.
On Pages (2-8), Many more IGA sections prohibit the MPD from Chain of Command and operational control among other restrictions on MPD activity. The MPD is paying our County taxdollars to JTTF staff but the County doesn’t have full control and is locked into that financial obligation for 2 years. The contract establishes a one-sided relationship between the master FBI-JTTF and the servant MPD. It is not collaborative in decision-making. Going back to the County code, the County is financially obligated to pay for professional and technical services (MPD officers in the JTTF) over which the FBI-JTTF is in full control by contract.
The Council Budget Committee Needs to Correct Its Record With a Proper Fact-finding Hearing on the Legally Binding IGA Itself.
Past Practices or MPD promises regarding Supervision and pay are irrelevant to a vote on Bill 92. In fact, the Council has yet to begin to fact-find into dangerous parts of this proposed contract
For example, the Council Budget Committee should do proper fact-finding on…
• How many MPD officers are in the current JTTF, their tenure, and what are the average annual hours spent in the last 5 years? The MPD has yet to reveal those JTTF officers’ terms of service and current numbers as instructed by the Council two weeks ago. Deputy Maeda named 4 MPD officers in his 8/5/25 memo to this committee. Another MPD representative stated only one part-timer on the Council record last week. Chief Pelletier evaded this question in his 2/4/26 memo to the DRIP Committee Chair. Answering these very simple questions have to stop being a moving target
• Will this Committee do fact-finding on the FBI-JTTF contract’s overbearing dominance on Maui County’s independence and free voice? Especially on pages 4 to 7, this proposed FBI-JTTF IGA binds a muzzle to the MPD, Council, and County independence. It’s not just dissenters’ rights at stake, it is our County government too. Trump’s FBI gets to define terrorism in this contract. How has Trump’s FBI definition changed lately especially in light of Trump’s NSPM-7 and charges lodged at victims Good and Pretti? Why does this matter? Because this proposed contract gives the FBI-JTTF a free hand to define any investigation as about terrorism. This then triggers FBI nondisclosure agreements. What do these non-disclosure agreements look like and require? It also triggers the FBI-JTTF banning the MPD and the County from holding press conferences, issuing press releases, releasing JTTF-related body-camera footage and any information deemed by the FBI-JTTF as under investigation by them
• Will this Committee do fact-finding on how this contract signs away Maui County’s Right To Access Evidence, Investigate, and Adjudicate crime and liability? When the FBI has a free hand to name any alleged act as terrorism, it also then triggers a page 5 clause in the contract that prevents the County and the MPD performing its own police and prosecutorial work. This matters because we are watching in real time FBI’s behavior and practice in Minneapolis and across our nation preventing local police from investigating killings, kidnappings, and brutality by federal agents of white American citizens with no criminal record in residential neighborhoods in broad daylight. If Trump’s Police State is doing this to them, imagine what it is doing to People of Color, immigrants who also have rights, people who are criminally charged but not convicted who also have rights too.
Jake Carton, Maui voting resident and on behalf of Maui Indivisible
Strongly Oppose Bill 92 February 8, 2026
Aloha Chair Sugimura and Maui County Council Members,
My name is Lisa and I am Maui County resident writing to strongly oppose Bill 92.
Recognizing many contracts already exist within this framework, the time is now to oppose Bill 92 and update the old Maui Police (MPD) contract with Trump’s FBI-JTTF (Terrorism Force), the same force being used to frame Constitutionally protected Renee Good and Alex Pretti as “domestic terrorists.” As you may know, I was arrested by Maui County Police with the support of both the Mayor’s office and the Chief of Police by merely attempting to provide transparency (which I have done in partnership for a decade) in basic processes last fall. All charges were dismissed with prejudice and I have yet to receive any acknowledgement for the hardship this created for me and many who worked tirelessly to prove my innocence. Sitting in the jail cell, knowing I was arrested with no evidence of my wrongdoing was an exercise in wasted resources and a emotional/financial hardship no one should go through. These contracts are on steroids compared to the hardship I encountered for upholding my Constitutional Rights. The ripple effect is both damaging to the spirit of this County and the reputation that those elected and PAID to protect us are in fact, doing the opposite.
The timing is perfect to update these procedures and reflect the voices of this community, and I urge this committee to vote “No” on the new FBI-JTTF contract (Bill 92) AND also lead the Council to order MPD to withdraw its officers from under the FBI-JTTF as soon as their 2-year terms expire, write a contract termination request to the FBI immediately, and give the 60 day written notice to the FBI to withdraw from participating in all ways.
• I urge the Council to withdraw from the contract that the Police Chief signed with Trump’s Homeland Security to “embed” their agents inside the Maui Police station, among other collaborations, as the Chief had no authority to sign on behalf of the County. To do this, the Council needs to give 30 days’ written notice to Homeland Security. I urge this Chair and the committee not to bypass Council votes by giving power to the unelected Police Chief.
• I urge the Council to withdraw from the contract that the Police Chief signed with the National Guard. This contract enables Trump to deploy the Guard to invade civilian spaces while the MPD protects their base as a top priority over responding to Maui resident 911 calls. Please cancel and give written notice to the National Guard that the County intends to terminate ASAP and publish the exact 2026 date.
• Please fix and maintain transparency on all of the inaccuracies about the FBI-JTTF contract put on the Council record by the MPD and your comments, Chair Sugimura.
Much appreciation for the enormity of this decision and know your actions will deeply affect generations to come.
Lisa Seikai Darcy, Kula, HI
I strongly oppose Bill 92 in agreement with Councilmember YUKI LEI SUGIMURA per her communication to Chair, Hon. Tamara Paltin dated 1/28/2026 when she stated, "I am supportive of disapproving Bill 92 and will be making
that recommendation moving forward.).
I have reviewed all the documentation available on this site for Bill 92, “A BILL FOR AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING
THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
FOR A JOINT TERRORISM TASK FORCE”.
I oppose any agreements proposed under the "Presidential Authority" of a 32 times convicted felon who should never have been given any such authority.
I support the Maui County Council in all efforts to resist fascism in all its forms.
Thank you for your very kind attention,
Joseph Kohn MD
Unable to submit this comment when logged in and adding attachments already on file. (Also unable to remove attachments.)
I strongly urge you to reject Bill 92 authorizing the mayor to enter into an intergovernmental agreement with the FBI for a joint terrorism task force . It is extremely important to stop funding Trump's police state forces on Maui including Homeland Security and the National Guard. Vote No on Bill 92
Rev. Dr. Robert W. Nelson
I disapprove of bill92. Please remove Maui County and Maui Police Department and the Mayors Office from any and all collaborative efforts with Trump's anti immigration actions and policies. I support a “No” Vote on New FBI- Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) Contract.
secondly
I propose a council joint statement voicing our disapproval and calling for an immediate end to current Federal ICE tactics around our country.