COM 0493.121 2000-2002 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Also in almost universal use, revenue bonds for water development are the best financial instrument for low-cost long-term financing of necessary water production and distribution systems. The County Charter specifically allows the Department of Water Supply to issue its own revenue bonds. Such use should be a subject in the General Plan and turning to these instruments encouraged for planned development of the island yet this county has absolute zero use of this most common of government financial aids. In our flagging economy, such public works projects are a source of employment paid for entirely by homeowners and businesses receiving the new water services. Errors in the document are frequently important. And all illustrate careless research: 1 Those preparing the document need to learn that ARS is Agricultural Research Service and PBARC the Pacific Basin Agricultural Research Center -not "Resource" as appears several times in the Revision document. This Center is of utmost important in planning. 2. If it is the case that catchment is a public health hazard, that fact needs to be stated in the document and more about it said than merely, "Develop and adopt standards for individual water catchment systems." A study by CTAHR indicates relatively few homes properly maintain the existing catchment systems in place throughout Puna, Ka' u and other areas. If this is the health hazard many believe it to be, we need to know it and act upon it now. If not then standards that are likely unenforceable are not needed. The place f ndings, not speculation, is in the health section of the General Plan. 3. The loss through liquidation of C. Brewer as a major factor in agriculture should be noted. The Revision refers often to an unchanged C. Brewer. We need discussion on how the vacuum should be filled with community or county coordination of use for the extensive lands that were formerly controlled by a single, privately held entity. This is most notably apparent in the Ka'u section of the economic considerations. 4. The state's ownership of approximately 44 percent of island land should be viewed critically rather than quietly accepted. Not only is the land off the tax roles it is also open to prevention of use by the State Land Use Board as happened in the Oji decision. It now appears likely that what some consider inappropriate state requirements is going to prevent leasing of forest lands at Waiakea Timber Management Area. Roth of these projects tivere supported by countjv governnaen~ Some correction allowing home rule must be reached in the balance of power over the state's massive land holdings. Both federal and state payments "in lieu of taxes" are ridiculously low and will never suffice for the expense the county incurs to serve the unproductive lands. The examples above only scratch the surface of failures county-wide within the Revision to provide what the document itself promises: clear g®als, policies and pa-i®rities to reach a future of shared prosperity. Throughout the document, in almost every policy statement, the words for legal requirement "The c®unty shall are removed. The place to start in making this document better is to replace those words throughout. More work needs to be done -with independent professional consultation -before this Revision is accepted by the County Council. Plan text and maps online: httpa/www.co.hawaii.hi.us/general~lanrev/main.htm Bill Eger HCR 1 Box 5164 Kea`au Hawaii 96749 billeger(~~nethawaii.net 808-966-8565 3