My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2022 Report of the Cost of Government Commission
PublicDocuments
>
Office of the Mayor
>
Cost of Government Commission
>
Reports
>
2022 Report of the Cost of Government Commission
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/28/2022 3:14:55 PM
Creation date
10/27/2022 3:29:54 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
87
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
transmitting internal correspondence and being copied. More direct contact <br />between COGC and responders would have been beneficial. <br />• The new Permitted Interaction Group (PIG) process was cumbersome, confusing <br />and complicated communications and progress. <br />• Several different Corporation Counsel lawyers were involved with meetings and <br />advice. <br />• Required biweekly and special meetings were too frequent allowing little time to <br />prepare meaningful agendas and meaningful reports. <br />CONCLUSIONS: <br />Change the timing of term/deliverable to coincide with a non -lame duck legislative body. <br />Current report is delivered to County Council that leaves office within weeks unless they're re- <br />elected. Allow 2 years for the Commission to run during the middle 2 years of the Mayor's 4- <br />year term. This will allow acquisition of additional specific data and vastly improve report <br />recommendations. <br />If this recommendation is not adopted, we recommend that the County Council conduct a <br />thorough examination of this Commission's efficacy and value. Given the limited adoption of <br />past COGC recommendations, the significant workload and frequency of meetings compared to <br />other commissions and difficulties mentioned above, we question the Commission's further <br />need. Audits by contract or the County Auditor could be more useful and effective. <br />Transportation Commission <br />Prior to 2021, almost all taxi license applications, renewals and revocations as submitted by the <br />Mass Transit Agency (MTA) to the Transportation Commission (TC) were approved with little <br />or no discussion. The TC had practically no involvement or decision -making with County bus <br />matters and did not set rates as delineated in the County Code (see below). The lack of purpose <br />and usefulness of the TC was brought to the County Council's attention years ago; while there <br />was some concern, nothing was done to evaluate the TC's viability. Although "rubber-stamping" <br />of taxi license matters still prevails, in the past year or so, the TC Chair and TC has provided <br />valuable assistance/advice to the MTA and is much more involved in bus matters than previous <br />commissions. <br />Given the current, extraordinary Mass Transit Agency progress, and as long as qualified, <br />experienced and involved commissioners are appointed, the TC should remain in force. <br />An existing MTA clerk provides assistance to the TC; there is no full-time employee needed for <br />support. Special knowledge of MTA business is essential here. <br />Suggested County Code change: <br />Section 18-9 of the Hawaii County Code (2016 Edition, as amended) states, in part, that rates <br />are set by the Transportation Commission, and that the commission by order shall fix, prescribe, <br />and establish rates. However, while the Commission may review and recommend revisions <br />suggested by the Mass Transit Agency, the County Council actually authorizes/sets such <br />changes. This and other Code modifications are being reviewed by MTA. <br />24 <br />2022 Cost of Govemment Commission —County of Hawai'i - Final Report <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.