Laserfiche WebLink
• The Trust for Public Land opposes reducing the maintenance fund amount. Interviewing applicants <br />for maintenance funds would have been helpful in understanding how difficult the application <br />process is for maintenance funds — while the use of public funds should always be monitored and <br />best practices followed, the County process needs to be simplified. Applicants, who are unpaid <br />volunteers, should not be put through trial -like cross examinations. The process as it currently stands <br />does not encourage groups to apply. <br />• The Trust for Public Land opposes changes to Section 10-16 of the Charter that would expand use of <br />the maintenance fund to large capital projects such as buildings, roads, and restrooms. The voters <br />who approved this provision clearly intended, as stated in Section 10-16(g), that these types of larger <br />expenditures should be handled by the County in the capital improvement budget or via the general <br />fund. A single large capital improvement, such as road, could easily drain the entire annual fund for <br />maintenance/stewardship. This provision was intended to give grass roots community groups an <br />opportunity to take ownership in the lands protected and apply for stewardship grants to foster <br />community aina based stewardship. That said, The Trust for Public Land would support expanding <br />the uses of the maintenance fund for smaller projects that would not drain the fund and support <br />community stewardship — e.g., educational buildings/facilities, sheds for storage of equipment, <br />portable restrooms for remote locations. <br />• The Trust for Public Land opposes removing the protective covenant. This could affect the County's <br />ability to secure matching funding, which accounts for approximately one-third of the County's <br />funding to date. Further research would be required to determine if it would be permissible to allow <br />transfer of the protected to land to qualified partners like the National Park Service, the State, or land <br />trusts like the Nature Conservancy or the Hawaiian Islands Land Trust, subject to permanent <br />restrictions preventing development that run with the land. <br />• The Trust for Public Land supports the Ad Hoc Committee and PONC Commission's <br />recommendation that dedicated full-time staff is needed to support PONC's work. PONC has <br />accomplished incredible conservation work. The Trust for Public Land is eager to work with PONC <br />to help leverage other funding — federal, state, and private — to stretch PONC dollars further and to <br />have a greater impact. Recently, The Trust for Public Land assisted the State of Hawaii in acquiring <br />2,900 former pineapple lands in Central O'ahu for over $15.1 million — only $1.5 million of those <br />funds were State funds. The Trust for Public Land hopes that it use its national expertise in land <br />conservation to assist the County of Hawaii in meeting its conservation and preservation goals. <br />Mahalo for this opportunity to testify. Unfortunately, we will not be able to testify in person due to scheduling <br />conflicts. <br />Mahalo — <br />Lea Hong <br />State Director <br />Edmund C. Olson Trust Fellow <br />2 <br />