MIN CHC 2010-03-12.tif - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

MR. DYSART: Good afternoon Commissioners, and thank you for allowing my testimony today. I am going to read from a letter that I have not yet completed to be sent to your commission. I previously sent you a letter addressing my concerns regarding the 2% Land Fund. I do not need to repeat myself but I would urge you to please re -read my letter of February 6, 2010. I am forwarding it to you again today. On a new note, I have several concerns not addressed in the letter. They are: The administration is on record as adamantly refusing to "have their hands tied by special funds." I interpret this to mean that the administration intends to continue collecting tax money from the people but will continue to ignore the voting public. A great many letters to the editor of West Hawaii Today address the taxpayer's dissatisfaction with the way our money is spent by the administration. Only the 2006 2% Land Fund on the ballot was significant to them; that is where their hands were tied, is their claim, and in lieu of outright destroying the fund - -I think they can't legally do that - -the administration has cancelled all of the mandated contributions to the fund; essentially untying their hands. I will be suitably surprised if the original 2% land fund ever recovers. I appreciate Commissioner Scott Unger's amendment; it signifies agreement with the people's desire for an effective land fund. It seems that a spirit of compromise is reflected in the change of the amount of the land fund from 2% to 1 %. I urge you to consider restoring the amount to 2 %. The total dollar amount of 1% is much smaller than the total dollar amount mandated on the other islands. At the same time, the Big Island is in a different position, as most of the desirable land must be purchased from private owners. The other islands are more developed and their open space land is predominantly government land. Please ignore arguments that address "park maintenance costs" and similar "additional costs." The point of the 2% Land Fund is to purchase appropriate land to preserve it from development, not to add to the park maintenance costs. The administration's budget considerations were the excuse for stopping the contributions to the fund. This does not hold water; $14 million of the budget - -370 jobs that the administration has no intention of filling - -is patently padding to justify the "untying of the administration's hands" by killing the land fund. Finally, now is the time to buy the land, when the prices are low. This is at odds with the administration's decision to stop contributing to the fund's purchasing power when it would have been most effective. Thank you; that concludes my letter which is not yet in your hands. Like someone said earlier, my PC died about the same time that I got this done, so my letter will come to you after this meeting is over. I understand this is the second reading and there may be a third reading to come. CHR. HAITSUKA: Thank you, Mr. Dysart. MR. HIRT: Our final testifier in Kona is Debbie Hecht to speak on CA -15 and CA -16 and she represents the Save Our Lands Citizens Committee. R