Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0715.036 2022-2024 P/ Fc J a 1I `f FSill l)l AZ' 0014H.715 DATE: Feb. 5, 2024 02-'i FPS -5 AN 11: 15 TO: Hawaii County Council Finance Committee FROM.: Eileen O'Hara, Lower Puna resident since 1980 RE: SUPPORT FOR BILL 131-24 at Finance Committee Hearing Feb. 6th at2PM Aloha Councilmembers, I'm submitting this testimony to the Finance Committee meeting on Feb. 6th at 2:00PM which I'm unable to attend in person due to my teaching schedule at UH-HILO. First, I want to commend Councilmember Kierkiewicz for finding a way to honor the needs of Puna residents and putting together Bill 131-24. We, the people of Puna, unlike the majority of the County Council on Jan. 24th, are not going to squander this funding opportunity to take a serious and professional look at a problem that affects everyone in the Puna district. That problem is the lack of sufficient roadways given the huge growth in population in our district over the last four decades. We are a populous district with over 50,000 people; '/4 of the island's population. Yet we have only one road into Lower Puna, and one road through Upper Puna connecting at Keaau on the border of the S. Hilo and Puna Districts. Did the Lahaina event not make the Councilmembers understand how dangerous this situation has become? The population has tripled since I moved to Lower Puna in 1980 and quadrupled for older Hawaiians who were born in and still reside in Puna. We have DHHL lands with beneficiaries in Puna as well, and many need access to medical and other services only found in Hilo. There are more native Hawaiians living in Puna and its massive subdivisions than the 4,000 beneficiaries in Panaewa. Still, it's important to recognize that in finding new routes between the Puna and S. Hilo Districts, we must try not to disrupt existing communities as much as possible. I sat through the meetings on Bill 107 listening carefully to the deliberations, and also to the discussion on Resolution 416-24 on Jan. 24th. As noted by your own Corporation Counsel, having a policy directive in a resolution accompanying an appropriations bill is the best way to move forward with this important issue. Yet, after unanimously adopting Resolution 416, wherein there were comments from councilmembers indicating you felt the elephant in the room had been addressed, you then voted NO on Bill 107. There is no excuse for making poor policy decisions! The comment about "it's the State's fault" reminded me of a wonderful local orator and statesman who I worked with, Billy Kenoi, who once said that finger-pointing and name calling were the lowest form of political behavior. Mr. Araceley politely reminded testifiers to keep their speech respectful, yet accusations were levied against the few Puna folks who dared to testify calling them "Racists", "Colonialists" and accusing them of "land theft'. If the land was "stolen" it happened long before any of us were born: This bullying left many in Puna either afraid to speak up or outraged by the bias the Council showed during that hearing. One councilmember 1 Comm. No. Ref. To: Ref. Date FEB d 6 2024 referred to testifiers from Puna as "entitled". A shameful display of biased policy-making at best. But we, the people of Puna, will not be cowed by such biased language or threats. We successfully filed a federal Civil Rights Complaint against the State and County in 2000 for not expending sufficient funds on Puna infrastructure and we will do it again if need be —this time with more teeth and compensatory damages. Further, as it is bound to happen, when someone dies on Hwy 130 trying to get to the Hilo hospital, but is caught in a 3-hour traffic snarl with no alternative routes, there will be lawsuits filed against the people who have blocked an opportunity to plan relief for the situation. Yes, people moved to Puna knowing there was one road, but in any other jurisdiction where the population has quadrupled in their lifetimes, the Planning Authority would make an attempt to alleviate the roadway congestion by studying where new connectors could be built. The County and State Highway chiefs are in agreement that something has to happen, but this Council voted down accepting this funding to do a comprehensive study on the issue. That was simply unbelievable so please don't do it again. Bill 131-24 must be passed. Even if it takes some tweaking to Resolution 416-24 to align with the two separate funding sources and the logistics of connecting to Puna Mauka, this appropriations bill needs to be adopted. The idea that a commercial center could be developed in Puna to accommodate the jobs needed for its 50,000+ population is a pipe dream. First off, the main plantation village in the center of Puna, Pahoa Town, is in Lava Zone 2 where NO commercial insurance is currently available. The jobs where Puna workers are employed are in Hilo town at the State, the County, the hospital, the university, schools, and in all the offices and stores that operate in Hilo. Those jobs are not moving to Puna. Some Puna residents pass through Hilo commuting to West Hawaii for their work. Much of the workforce that drives the Big Island's economy lives in Puna. Imagine what would happen if all those workers stayed home just for a day. It would shut down the island! We can arrange a Puna Strike if necessary, but prefer to see you do the right thing. We need every one of you to think long and hard on this matter and fully support Bill 131-24. ‘J,W9 a` 2