MIN CHARTER 2018-12-14 (2018-2020)

Home

Hawaii County Charter Commission -6 December 14, 2018 Two, while other County Charters can certainly provide examples for alternatives, our charter provisions are not correlated to the provisions in other County Charters. Third, Hawai`i County's Charter is tailored to serve the needs of Hawaii County which are unique and distinct from those of the other counties and not to mention those seem to be struggling with over development, ecological degradation, and exponential loss of open space and public access. Finally, Hawaii County is drastically larger than the other counties so our capacity to preserve PONC lands is significantly greater. With respect to recommendation two, placing a cap on the PONC fund could prevent the County from purchasing particularly valuable parcels most in need of preservation. For example, Pohue Bay is priced at 18 million. The Kaiholena parcel acquisition was over 10 million, the fund only has 16 million right now and the total purchase amount to date is almost 30 million so if an especially valuable parcel comes on the market, the PONC fund needs to be able to cover the purchase price because PONC fund is only two percent of the property tax, any fluctuations in property tax revenue are reflected across the other 98% as well, so if the County has a high revenue year, the PONC fund should benefit accordingly. If property taxes are down, the PONC fund will equitably suffer, so the provision is proportional and fair as written. With respect to recommendation three, what is being referred to as the perpetuity clause, these types of restrictive covenants are the primary mechanism for insuring real estate interests are not transferred on a whim by subsequent owners. If any of us wanted to leave land in perpetuity for our grandchildren, this is the same language we would use to insure our children don't sell it off to make a quick buck. In the context of the PONC program, these restrictions are intended to prevent liquidating invaluable public assets in the event of temporary budget shortfalls or serving political pressures and special interests. The vigorous process involved in selecting and purchasing these lands insures that not only the most important parcels are purchased but because these parcels are deemed too important to leave on the market. Restrictive covenants are entirely appropriate in this context. With respect to recommendation four, this recommendation is extremely vague. It does not specify how the maintenance fund would be amended to quote facilitate the maintenance and improvement of the lands. However, considering that recommendation, in light of Finding C, it seemingly implies the committee is recommending removing the prohibition on construction of facilities and infrastructure. Kawa is a perfect example of how PONC lands can be improved and maintained without conventional bathrooms, waterlines, parking lots, and storage facilities. This prohibition directly furthers the protection and preservation policies underlying this program. Without that prohibition, we end up with the same problems that face traditional County parks like Punalu`u, Kolekole, and all the other spots where people take advantage of the amenities to the detriment of the space and its ecosystem. Page 30