Comm No 0021.082 - Testimony - CA-7 - PONC fund and Maintenance fund

Home

TO: Hawaii County Charter Review Commission Douglass Shipman Adams, Chair, Jennifer Zelko-Schleuter, Vice -Chair FROM: Susan Dursin, Captain Cook, writing on her own behalf DATE: January 24, 2019 RE: CA -7. CA -9, CA -13 CA -7: I oppose CA -7, which would reduce the funding for Public Open Space to the point where it is not able, as an entity, to purchase the highly -valued properties that are identified as important to the people of this county or to attract the grants and donations which have been so significant to operation of the program. The public made it clear that they wished to set aside sites vulnerable to development -- and permanently protect those lands. Their wishes were established through the hard-fought initiative process; they do not want to fight that battle again. The fact that this Commission would create several propositions to challenge their decision brings into question the Commission's belief in the wisdom of the people and the dedication to democratic process. CA -9: While this proposal may not be on the agenda today, I would like to say that much has been learned about the operation of the fund since its inception. Some of the criticisms leveled against it could be answered by hiring a staff person and moving operations into the Finance Department. CA -13: There are numerous problems with this proposal. First, giving additional authority over special funds to a mayor who has already voiced strong opposition to the Public Open Space shows that this proposal is designed particularly to impact the two -percent land fund. The Charter says an emergency can exist when the peace, life, property, health or safety of the County's inhabitants is at risk. That encompasses just about any problem that arises. Without the agreement of Council, a mayor can declare an emergency and use moneys from any special fund. I believe that is a case of executive overreach, much like we see continually at the federal level. Next is the question of special funds. While the Public Open Space Fund is not the only one, it may be one of the very few not to be protected by restrictive clauses. Third is the replenishment clause. If nothing else, the interest which would have been earned will have disappeared into the great County revenue stream. More to the point, the promise to replenish such funds are brave words that may never, for whatever reason, (further "emergencies," extensions of time on the repayment) be fulfilled. Depleting the fund, even for an interval, inhibits the possibility of buying new properties and attracting grant money. Finally, I believe that some members of this Commission seriously lack vision. Yes, the County is responsible for dealing with day-to-day problems, some of which seem almost insoluble. There is a larger picture, however, and — as many Hawaii Island voters apparently believe — sometimes government can work with the public to bring about the future we've envisioned. Comm. No. 21.82