2009-02-AU Limited Scope Performance Audit of the Highway Fund

Home

Chapter 4: CHALLENGES FACING THE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 1981 Hawaii, Senate Standing Committee Report No. 753 on House 8111160, Eleventh Legislature, 1981. "The purpose of this bill is to clarify the assignment of responsibility for all county highways ... to the several counties." 1993 Act 288, Session Laws of Hawai'i 1993, formally declared that the Department of Transportation was responsible for the State Highway System and that all other public highways are to be maintained by the counties. 2005 The Legislature appropriated $2,000,000 in funding to the County of Hawai'i for repairs on these roadways. Hawaii County Managing Director Dixie Kaetsu said Mayor Harry Kim's administration had been trying for several years to obtain state funding for so- called roads in limbo -- over which the state and county could not agree on ownership. The state mandated the county to take over the roads. The county has been lobbying the Legislature for four years for funding to repair these roads and county officials were happy when the money was approved this past session. Kaetsu said the county has about 425 miles of these roads to repair and upkeep and many of them are in poor condition and are located mainly in rural parts of the island. Hawaii Star Bulletin, September 9, 2005 The City and County of Honolulu has attempted to clarify the issue through further local legislation. The Honolulu City Auditor's 2005 Audit of the City's Road Maintenance Practices stated: "The ownership of disputed roads appears to be settled by separate statewide and city legal acts from 1993: Act 288 of 1993 Session Laws of Hawai'i (Act 288) and CCR 93 -287. A plain reading of these two documents together suggests that there are no disputed roads on Oahu. The statewide act appears to have transferred ownership of all disputed roads from the state to the counties, subject to acceptance by the counties. The city's 1993 resolution appears to be an unqualified acceptance of the transfer." The audit further stated: "However, the division presently holds the opinion that the transfer of all disputed state roads to county jurisdiction within CCR 93 -287 does not mean that all disputes are settled. The division believes that because the resolution did not have a comprehensive list of all roads transferred, not all state roads were included in the transfer. Unfortunately, this interpretation does not appear supported by language or intent of Act 288 or CCR 93 -287, 23