2016-09-28 BDHRA Minutes - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

responsible and acceptable, absolutely, only if the cost benefit analysis showed that the citizens, especially of our county, but beyond, would be best served by that investment. In other words, if your plan would actually make the citizens coffers so much richer than any other alternative and not only return more money but had better overall impact, the difference being investments in medicine and education don’t immediately produce dollar results, they produce quality of life results. We are a community who cannot afford enough medical technicians. We’re famous for it. I’m a psychologist. We have the embarrassment in Hawai‘i County of being the county in the United States least well served by licensed psychologists. Tremendous need. If you go to the courts you see what happens to these people when they don’t get therapy. They become a management problem for everybody. We have needs in our schools. We’re short several hundred teachers. That’s ultimately a matter of money, ultimately a matter of spending; it’s a matter of investment. What is it that has justified this rush to redevelop resorts? This isn’t a question and answer session, but I’ll put the question to you, and if it’s only answered at the end of the process as part of, ‘we responded to what people said,’ as opposed to, ‘we gave it serious consideration.’ That, I think, would be very unfortunate. But we really need to know whether or not Banyan Drive needs expansive citizen input. For one thing any of us who looks up the definition of blight as it’s used when it refers to developed areas, will tell you that, at most, the Japanese restaurant at the Naniloa, the one between it and Country Club, that was blighted. The pool behind it, blighted. The out buildings, the three of them, blighted. Country Club, blighted‒‒no. Reed’s Bay, blighted‒‒under what fraudulent misrepresentation is full-capacity use considered blight? I put it to you that you are trying to force down the throats of this community a plan that is reckless, will put us into tremendous debt at a time when we don’t have money, certainly not for that. If we had money, even money to borrow under deficit spending, I think our community would rather see it go to the creation of jobs, the creation of affordable housing, improved education, improved medical care for a start. Way ahead of helping private industry. And you guys told us last time you had no cost benefit analysis, you had no responsible comparison of what this would ever cost. We’re going to need entirely new utilities for all of this; not just patch work, new. That’s an expense to the taxpayer. You’re going to authorize because you feel it pays us back. You need to know the answer to how. So I’m going to ask you guys to publish a cost benefit analysis that justifies this decision or face a legal challenge to whether you acted with gross negligence or willfulness conduct. You cannot recommend something you have no idea what it costs. And beyond that, please add into the cost benefit analysis what it costs to relocate about 400 families. We need affordable housing in this community desperately. Currently there are about 400 families living on Banyan Drive, at least. So they don’t matter. The tourist matters. In fact, let us tear down their buildings because the tourists want to see the nice water. Very nice. DELIMA: Thank you very much. Any questions? We call on Peter Kubota. KUBOTA: Thank you for having me and allowing me to testify here. Ladies and gentlemen, thank you for all of your work that you guys do. As a lifelong resident of Page 6 of 19 Banyan Drive Hawai‘i Redevelopment Agency September 28, 2016, Minutes