Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0711.141 2008-2010Submitted by: Michael Jasper Moore/ 72 Halaulani Place, Hilo Hawaii 96720 March 28, 2010 9 am Hawaii Count Council: Committee of Finance and Inter'overnmental Affairs This current budeet proposal is not affordable for this County: 1. According to Associated Press January 14 of this year, Hawaii State is now ranked 10 in the entire Nation for foreclosure. In 2009 the rate increased 183 %. As many as one in every 56 households in Hawaii are in foreclosure. 2. After two years of office, Mayor Kenoi proposes that we afford a budget of over $375 million. He was only able to trim $11.7 million from last year's budget. He hasn't looked hard enough or done the work that is required of him. 3. As a resident and tax payer I'm extremely disappointed that the ad hoc committee tasked with budgetary review could find no recommendations for the budget and did not invite public input. 4. As a commercial property owner I am having to sell up and close up my business. AN have had to provide rent reductions to my tenants to reflect the economic downturn B) I have seen the value of my property drop to over half of what it was just three years ago. In spite of these facts, my property tax bill would be increased in Mayor Kenoi's proposed budget. 5. In the coming fiscal year the risks of a shortfall due to reduced revenue is even greater than before (due to reduced `Transitory Accommodation Taxes' /TAT and other revenue streams). There is a good chance that the State will withhold revenue that we have relied on in the past. Mayor Kenoi has been forewarned of this possibility and the dire economics of the entire country and yet he has done little to prepare for this. Billy Kenoi hasn't made necessary cuts: 1. The audacity of this budget is astounding! While property values are plummetting.. Mayor Kenoi proposes to go on draining equity from our property while cutting services (Health Services, Waste Disposal to name just two.) 2. Mayor Kenoi won't cut from the budget of 'Public Safety' and has increased it. Over 28% of the entire budget still goes to the 'Department of Public Safety' He is ignoring a directive from voters in 2008 for new priorities for the Police Department and Prosecution and greater accountability from these two departments where expenditure of public funding is concerned. 3. We are actually seeing the budget of the Police Department increase by $3.9 million with an extra $166,000 going to the Vice Section in spite of the ballot measure that requires new priorities of the Police Department and more accountability of the way it spends money. COMM. No. 71 • j cI Ref. To; F FL Ref. Date IAN y HID Testimony regarding 2010 -2011 Budget proposal. This Budeet will bone more pain to this island community: The County is entitled to auction properties after three years of unpaid property taxes in order to collect revenue. It is not hard to see how property owners of Hawaii will be forced out of their businesses and homes because of poor financial management and a budget that is way too large for the economic situation we are in. This budget doesn't represent any relief from the current economic downturn, but actually increases property tax proposed by Mayor Kenoi. In closing I would address the fact that we will continue to `fail to thrive' as a community when we are only able to spend 1.5 million on non - profits in the community who carry the burden of care for sick, elderly, children and needy in the community. While our expediture on health and welfare is such a small proportion of the budget we will continue to see more crime, more prosecution and more people incarcerated because that is actualy where we continue to spend the most money. FY2010 -2011 Proposed FY 2010 -2011 PROPOSED a Gene: at Government o Public Safety Highways & Streets O Health, Ed :aticn. & Welfare O Culture and Recreation 0 Sanitation & Y: aste Removal Deb: Service Tension & Retirement Health Fund Miscellaneous Image courtesy of Stephens Media — West Hawaii Today March 2, 2010 2 Testimony regarding 2010 -2011 Budget proposal. Financial Blow Out began 10 years ago: 3 1. For the eight years Mayor Kim was in office from 2000 to 2008 The County population increased around 28,000 (149,000 to 177,000). In that time the budget for Hawaii County increased over 100% from around $196.1 million to around $411 million. The financial liablility for every member of the community went from $1000 per person to well over $2000 per person. This represents a huge and unacceptable tax burden for this County. 2. No surprise then that former Mayor Kim is able to show up before council and make the claim that in all the years he was Mayor he never had to target the County Band for cuts! He doubled our budget! Testimony regarding 2010 -2011 Budget proposal. The need for change where our Police and Prosecution are concerned is not addressed. This is `businestas usual' for Hawaii County Police and Prosecution: 4 4. It's much the same budget that Mayor Kenoi passed last year, with very little of the 'fat' trimmed off. We are seeing a raise for the Police Department and only a small reduction in the budget of the Prosecuting Attorney's Office. 5. That spells out for the community 'business as usual'...$ 7,369,725 (over $ 7.3 million) dollars goes to Prosecution, $53,066,353 (over $53 million) to the Police Department. 6. The Police Department is actually seeing a budget increase of nearly $3.9 million in the next fiscal year (2010- 2011) 7. This administration continues to ignore the majority of voters who voted for Lowest Law Enforcement Priority of Cannabis Ordinance at the last election. While there are now zeros next to the 'marijuana eradication' line item, now the Vice squad's budget appears to have been increased by nearly $166,000 since last year. 8. This is reason to suspect that while 'marijuana eradication' is reduced to zeros, the money has just been moved around. By seeing this kind of increase to the Vice Section budget, we believe that the residents of Hawaii County will continue to see funding for helicopter surveillance and funding for Vice Section members to assist federal and state police eradication 'task forces.' This is in spite of the fact that they have been in violation of the law ever since LLEPCO was established by the majority vote November 4, 2008. We strongly object to increases in funding in this area and find it in direct conflict with the wishes of the voters of Hawaii County. 9. The reason the budget remains so large is that over 28% of the entire budget still goes to the 'Department of Public Safety' and Mayor Kenoi has remained adamant that he won't cut from the budget of 'Public Safety.' This is in spite of a directive from voters in 2008 that voters clearly wanted to see new priorities for the Police .Department and Prosecution and greater accountability from these two departments where expenditure of public funding is concerned. 10. Of the entire tax revenue calculated (after another hike scheduled in Property Taxes) very close to half of that money is spent on 'Public Safety' (Police, Prosecution, Fire Department and Civil Defence funds) 11. Nearly $61 million of the 'Public Safety' budget of $105 million goes to Police and Prosecution 12. While we are seeing increases in funding to the Vice Section, we don't see evidence from the budget of more police help in the sub - divisions where residents often have to wait 30 minutes or more to receive help from Police in emergencies! This is where it would be appropriate to see funding increased and such funding increases would reflect a change of the current priorities of the Police Department. 13. The public has enjoyed little accountability from the Department of Public Safety when it comes to seeing how public funds are spent (unfortunately way too much of Testimony regarding 2010 -2011 Budget proposal. 5 it is wasted chasing after an ill- conceived and ill -waged 'War on Cannabis' here in Hawaii County.) The Police Department has failed to account for 'time' and 'money' spent in pursuit of current 'Cannabis Policy' here in Hawaii County. The Prosecution, likewise has not submitted the 'time and money' estimated to be spent by that department in pursuit of Cannabis Policy. Both departments claim they don't keep the records needed in order to calculate these figures in spite of the fact that the law requires that they provide this information to County Council and the tax- paying public on a bi- annual /six monthly basis.