Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOMM. 177 Planning Dept - CA-15 Land FundWilliam P. Kenoi Mayor January 21, 2010 County of Hawaii PLANNING DEPARTMENT Aupuni Center • 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Phone (808) 961-8288 • Fax (808) 961-8742 Edmund Haitsuka, Chairman and Members Hawai'i County Charter Commission County Council Chambers 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, Hawaii 96720 BJ Leithead Todd Director Margaret K. Masunaga Deputy RE: Planning Director BJ Leithead Todd's Testimony in Opposition to Charter Amendment Proposal No. CA -15 Set-aside Of A Percentage Of Real Property Tax Revenues For Land Acquisition Dear Chairman Haitsuka and Members: This letter is submitted in opposition to the proposed Charter amendment to set aside a percentage of real property tax revenues for the purpose of acquiring land for open space and creating a related fund and commission. This proposal as drafted would amend the Charter by adding a new section to provide for the "Public access, open space, and natural preservation fund or Land Fund." There are a number of concerns that I have over the proposal and therefore ask the commission to not put this proposal on the ballot. MANDATORY SET ASIDES IN THE CHARTER DIMINISH BUDGETARY FLEXIBILITY, ESPECIALLY IN A DOWN ECONOMY I share the Finance Department's concerns over the establishment of this fund in the Charter. Mandated funding, set asides and special funds for specific purposes in the Charter takes away the flexibility of the administration to administer the budget and meet other obligations of the county, especially during tough economic times. The county is currently undergoing an unprecedented decrease in revenues. Having mandatory set -asides may force the county to raise taxes or other revenues to meet its obligations that are required by federal law, state law, other rules and regulations and union contracts. Hawaii County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer Hawai'i County Charter Commission Page 2 January 21, 2010 The existing 2% fund was set up in a time of ever increasing county revenues. We are now faced with decreasing revenues and face the possible loss of the transient accommodations tax revenue in addition to the decrease in real property tax revenues. At the same time the county will be facing increased salaries and wages for police and fire under their collective bargaining agreements and may see increased payments for other expenses. The current fiscal crisis faced by county is the best example of why it is a bad idea to have a mandatory set aside in the Charter. THE PROPOSAL AS DRAFTED IS FLAWED AND NEEDS TO BE AMENDED IF IT IS PLACED ON THE BALLOT In the event that this measure does go forward to be voted upon, I recommend that the language regarding the effective date be changed. The language currently makes the proposal effective upon approval and provides that deposits are to be made on December 10, 2010 and June 30, 2010. Since the election is held in November, such language would impact the budget as approved for fiscal year 2010-2011 when there is no ability to amend the real property tax rates to provide additional revenue for other county functions. Making the amendment effective upon approval will require the administration to cut funding for other departments mid -year and could impact the delivery of services and county operations. I suggest that the effective date be July 2011 so that the county does not have to amend its budget mid -year and can plan for the set-aside of the monies. The proposal changes the nomination process by replacing the mayor with council members as the nominating authority and is inconsistent with the nomination process for all other boards and commissions. It also changes the process for removal of members of the commission and is inconsistent with the process for removal of other members of boards and commissions. The language regarding reimbursement for necessary expenses and per diem "pursuant to article 16" is unnecessary and confusing. Article 16 of the Hawaii County Charter governs transitional provisions and has nothing to do with reimbursements or per diem. The author is probably referencing Article 16 of the Hawaii County Code by mistake instead of Article 13 of the Charter. Much of the language is unnecessary as the appointments and filling of vacancies is covered by Article 13 of the Charter. All of this language could be deleted. The proposal states that "[t]he affirmative vote of a majority of those members present shall be necessary to make any action valid." This language is inconsistent the County Charter which requires a majority vote of the "entire membership to which a board or commission is entitled shall be necessary to make any action valid; except that in the case of a board or commission which has only advisory functions, the affilniative vote of a majority of those present shall be sufficient to make any action valid." Article 13, Hawaii County Charter, Section 92-15, HRS. Hawai'i County Charter Commission Page 3 January 21, 2010 The proposal in its current form increases the authority of the commission by requiring the Director of Finance to "enter into negotiations for the acquisition of these lands in the order of the prioritized list developed by the commission." The commission would no longer be merely advisory but have actual decision making authority. This removes the council's role in determining which properties should be acquired first and does not provide flexibility in negotiating for particular properties that may come up for sale, be in bankruptcy or may otherwise be available for purchase. The proposal includes substantial language defining the duties and roles of the commission, mandated staffing by the Finance Department, a website, monthly reports and includes other sections setting up the process for the commission to conduct its duties and prioritize a list of lands. Much of this language is either unnecessary as it is already provided for in other sections of the Charter, covered by state law or is better placed in the county code instead of the Charter. The Charter is intended to be a relatively short, concise document setting out the organization of county government. If the proposal does go forward to the ballot, it should just set up the fund but allow the council by ordinance to set up procedures for the commission to follow. Sincerely, BJ LEITHEAD TODD Planning Director