Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0279.003 2022-2024 P/GOEAG bill u8 CAHM.2?q o - From: Georjean Adams Sent: Sunday, May 14, 2023 3:28 PM . To: Council Testimony Cc: Evans, Cynthia F.W. V' Subject: Testimony on Proposed Bill 48 OSCER w To the Members of the Government Operations and External Affairs Committee, ►� I do not support Bill 48 as currently drafted. It is overbroad and duplicative. I believe the focus of a new office should be climate change risk management. Bill 48 would create yet another department under the managing director called the Office of Sustainability,Climate, Equity and Resilience (OSCER). It's not clear what its purpose would be. The name and scope of the new office is overloaded and overlapping in areas of responsibility. I'm concerned that there will be a lack of focus that will dilute long term planning and execution. Each term in the title is defined extremely broadly in scope: -Sustainability has a broad definition of managing present and future social, economic and environmental needs and "harmony" between economic growth, environmental systems and social well-being. This term is about whatever you want it to be. If the intent is to establish a policy facilitator(Sustainability Guru) who works across agencies and advises the mayor, do not burden it with numerous programs to manage. Focus the effort on coordination and communication. Don't staff it with a lot of people and responsibilities. Regardless, every county department should view its programs and decisions through the lens of sustainability and not delegate it to a separate entity. -Climate-which is to really say Climate Change (that presumably has adverse impacts). Climate change is a subset of the many challenges to sustainability. If Council wants to set up a Climate Guru, OK. But if it expects the office to design and execute specific emission reduction projects it needs to hire new experts and reallocate staff and find funding from other departments (eg, R&D). I suggest changing the name and scopeof this bill to the "Office of Climate Risk Management." - Equity-OSCER programs are to provide benefits to all communities, regardless of income or social status. Not explicitly in the name (it's already long enough as it is) but also throw in "environmental justice"which has a nuanced difference from "equity" insofar as it calls for equal sharing of burdens, as well as benefits- but only for environmental issues. Not needed in the title, as with sustainability, every county department should view its programs and decisions through the lens of equity and not delegate it to a separate entity. -Resilience-the ability to withstand social, environmental, and economic shocks with minimal costs, risks and damages. This is another term not needed in the title, as every county department should view its programs and decisions through the lens of keeping our island and its people thriving. If the scope of this office is focused on climate change, placing resilience-achieved through adaptation-as the top priority makes practical sense because Hawaii County is not going to be able to prevent climate change on its own. (Reducing emissions through mitigation is good life cycle practice, but not where to spend all our resources.) Section 37-2-21 lays out the wide-ranging policy and program "duties": (a)(1) Deal with climate change adaptation and mitigation and resilience: good. Make sure everyone in the county government is not making matters worse by ignoring potential adverse impacts or duplicating efforts. But then it adds "other natural and human caused hazards" that are presumably not caused by climate change. What are these/� - 1 Comm.N `11'9 Ref.To: Ref.Date 2023 volcanic eruptions/emissions?toxic spills?arson set wildfires?earthquakes? mass shootings? Is this office to take over emergency planning and preventative actions being handled by other departments? Stick with climate change. (a)(2) "Improve"environmental justice and equity-does it mean the office is to correct existing issues unrelated to climate change (eg- lack of sewers or transportation). I have no problem with directing the office to practice "equity" and "environmental justice" in designing their programs, but it is a huge scope to expand the office's duties to encompass correcting current inequities. That should be the responsibility of every office in the county in addressing whatever its mandate is. (a)(3) Engaging the wide range of stakeholders should be the primary focus of the climate change [or sustainability] guru. (b) Metrics- Be able to staff this work that is currently being done by R&D or, better, continue to assign R&D to deal with data management. (c) Coordination, collaboration, education - kudos. But within a narrower scope of areas- preferably focused on climate change. (d)(1) Infrastructure recommendations-Avoid duplication and have the office work with other departments to generate these. (e)Grants and funding. R&D appears to have the lead on these and there certainly is a need for timely expertise in applying for grants and selecting financing tools. R&D or Finance need to supply the office technical support to the office, but don't have redundant staff. On the other hand, perhaps the intent is to break out and elevate certain activities currently under the Dept of R&D.This despite the support for sustainability shown by R&D Director Douglass Adams in his department's mission statement: "TO IMAGINE, INVEST IN AND COLLABORATIVELY CREATE A SUSTAINABLE, EQUITABLE, AND THRIVING HAWAII ISLAND." I believe he is a strong voice in the mayor's cabinet in promoting sustainability and managing climate change. However, my reading of the bill is that it would remove at least these areas from R&D responsibilities: 1) Climate Change Action "R&D collaborates to achieve local, state, national, and international targets for achieving climate change mitigation and adaptation goals" 2) Community Well-being Program which "...promotes the design, strategy, and implementation support of innovative programs to improve the health and well-being of Hawaii Island residents and communities. It identifies innovative models of holistic and integrated systems to create opportunities to advance a well-being economy that nurtures our relationship with `aina; addresses economic inequality; and supports individual and community health resilience." 3) Coordination of the Hawaii Island Sustainability Dashboard with its heavy emphasis on climate change, but also waste, emissions and social vulnerability issues. 4) Funding & Grants Resources - tools and contractors that could be used by OSCER. If the intent is to narrow the scope of what R&D does, this should be clearly stated in the bill, including whether the funding for this new office would result in a transfer of money and staff currently assigned to R&D. In conclusion, I think the proposed Bill 48 is too broad in scope and should be focused on coordinating county programs to deal with risks from climate change. Georjean Adams Kamuela 2