+- Punaweb Forum (http://punaweb.org/forum)
+-- Forum: Punaweb Forums (http://punaweb.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: Punatalk (http://punaweb.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+--- Thread: HPP Cool Towards Proposed Park (/showthread.php?tid=8027)
RE: HPP Cool Towards Proposed Park - Bob Orts - 11-17-2010
quote:In this democracy, the King is bound by four sets of rules, Hawaii State Constitution, Hawaii Revised Statues, Hawaii County Charter, and Hawaii County Code. Those items spell out what the King and his court can do, and how the King can do it. The King is also subject to fairness through the kingdom and that does not always mean you get your fair share. If you want a democracy based on money in money out where collected, that’s fine. But that also means Kona taxes are not going to support Puna needs.
Originally posted by james weatherford
In this democracy, the King has to face voters every few years and that (at least in theory) makes a difference in how well that King listens to the people and what they say they need.
You want some equity? Support Impact Fees. Impact Fees are the best local community funding that keeps the money in the local community where collected. But, truth is, people don’t want it because it's fair to all and that mean everyone pays their share. People don’t want to pay their share; they want everyone else to support them.
HPP is a private subdivision, let HPP pay for their own parks. If they don’t want or can’t pay, well bow to the King for the bread and water everyone else feels they deserve just as much.
Voting out the King and the court may seem like the answer but the new King and court still have those four rules they must follow.
RE: HPP Cool Towards Proposed Park - critterlover - 11-17-2010
Mr. Orts posits: Voting out the King and the court may seem like the answer but the new King and court still have those four rules they must follow.
ME: I agree with everything you have surmised in your foregoing post. And while you reduce the sentiment of James' statement to practical terms, theoretically, each elected government comes into power with an existing set of rules and the power to change through amendment, addition or deletion those rules. Ideally, and yes, I willingly cast myself as an ideologue, I still maintain the sentiment uttered 200 yrs past, 'That government is best which governs least'. I am appalled that the local government leadership would entertain the idea of spending 5.5 million dollars on a park which becomes a public park in an area where the people's wishes seem to lean towards maintaining the 'private' nature of their subdivision. I have no dog in his hunt as I am neither an owner in HPP nor do I expect to use a park in their subdivision, but as a taxpaying county resident, I believe the decision to secure that much through bonds, based on what? Plans? Designs? Equipment? Staff? Was the number pulled out of the air? to be most premature and out of sync with the statement Mayor Kenoi made at the very meeting where the park was the topic wherein he stated regarding his vision for the park, and I quote: "'not one Cadillac park; not one Hyundai or Kia park, but one Honda or Toyota park'" I guess I was thinking in terms of the Cadillac being used as a symbol of 'most expensive' the Hyundai or Kia as 'least' and Honda or Toyota as 'average'. They all have models that rival each other cost wise, in reality, but in terms of metaphor, I am thinking 5.5 million may be more the Lexus or Acura vs Honda and Toyota.
I hope those who have far more experience with this appear to testify and appeal to the council today on this 56 million dollar vote!
Toni, who is a 'critter lover'
www.write-matters.com
RE: HPP Cool Towards Proposed Park - Rene Siracusa - 11-17-2010
In his 11/14 post Seed stated that the HPP hui is not a 501©(3) and applying for one is too costly and involves too much paperwork. My answer to this is "not necessarily". A $750 fee to the IRS is the basic cost. You have to submit bylaws, but that does not have to be done by an attorney - residents can look at the bylaws of other nonprofits and the basic HPP bylaws and create their own mule. The IRS application itself (form 1023) is about 20 pages long, but many of those pages are only applicable to churches or schools and so you would not have to bother filling them out. There is a guidelines booklet put out by the IRS that guides you through 1023 line by line. I have gone through this process many times and gotten 501©(3)s for Puna Friends of the Parks, Malama O Puna, Ka'ohe Homesteads Community & Farm Watch, Metcalf Family Foundation and others. It is doable.
There is at least one lot in HPP designated by Watumull for commercial, and HPP does have a Master Plan that identifies the same lot. The sticking point is a water line. If HPP Board were to approve a subsidiary that is a nonprofit, or apply to be a nonprofit themselves, that would set the stage for a lot of things, including a water line and the ability to access foundation and federal grants to develop park and other facilities. As I understand it, however, the HPP board is very divided and would have trouble coming together on such a venture. Sometimes people are their own worst enemies.
RE: HPP Cool Towards Proposed Park - james weatherford - 11-17-2010
"Was the number pulled out of the air?"
This is really a central problem here.
Even though the HPP Park Committee has collected some input from the community, there is no indication that the County has based it's proposal on anything from the community -- just a Park Planner sitting at a desk in Hilo.
James Weatherford, Ph.D.
15-1888 Hialoa
Hawaiian Paradise Park
RE: HPP Cool Towards Proposed Park - Seeb - 11-17-2010
on the 501c3, as far as the Community Resilience Committee goes if we had $750 a year we would not need to fund raise
All things involving hppoa are tied to a court decree so i dont know how any of that would work
the zoning for hpp does not match the master plans
and the county never plans to spend that money here so why bother working up an estamate
RE: HPP Cool Towards Proposed Park - critterlover - 11-17-2010
"just a Park Planner sitting at a desk in Hilo."
ME: We had an architect voluntarily present redesign for our recreational facility, which was actually really thorough, very nicely done, and would have required some capital to make a reality. Our recreational facility is 5 acres. His renderings were expansive including features we do not currently have, but I don't think it would have come close to more than a million AT MOST to have implemented. We have a fairly good sized pool; we have a baseball area, tennis courts, some work out equipment, enough room for a decent jog. His design would have added an exercise circuit and laid out the facilities in a more aesthetic fashion. It is not something we asked for, it was voluntarily submitted. It had features to accommodate the diversity of our members. Our capital improvements currently are being expensed elsewhere but it is a great design should a board in the future wish to resurrect it. Granted, it is a community recreational facility, not a public park, nonetheless, the dollar for dollar expenditures remain equal. $5.5m is a lot of money. I will be curious to read how the discussion went today.
Toni, who is a 'critter lover'
www.write-matters.com
RE: HPP Cool Towards Proposed Park - Rob Tucker - 11-18-2010
I attended the meeting. There was consistent support for a park from the members. Some fence mending took place as Park Committee members had been alarmed by an HTH article which said that support for the park was waning on the board. This was not so according to the BoD. What was happening was that the BoD wanted to proceed carefully and concisely with the details.
After discussion the Park Proposal was tabled until the next meeting to allow for further research and communication with the county.
HPPOA is proceeding in an intelligent and thoughtful way.
I will add that the administration has back tracked a bit from its earlier presentation. CoH is willing to have the deed of the land revocable if work does not commence on the park within two years. So the definition of "work commence" has the attention of the BoD. "Does this mean knocking down three trees?" asked one board member? There are rational questions which need to be resolved in negotiation with the county.
RE: HPP Cool Towards Proposed Park - oink - 11-18-2010
Thanks for the update.
Pua`a
S. FL
Big Islander to be.
RE: HPP Cool Towards Proposed Park - macuu222 - 11-18-2010
"We already have more than one public park on the ocean in HPP and the public has had use of the private roads to these parks for decades."
=============================================
Could someone tell me where these two public parks on the ocean in HPP are?
RE: HPP Cool Towards Proposed Park - Bob Orts - 11-18-2010
quote:Carol, that is the popular belief and has been repeated so often, it's taken as truth. It has some truth, but the excess fluff clouds the bottom line reality.
Originally posted by csgray
It is my understanding that there is a conflict between what HPP land is zoned for and what it was designated as on the "master plan" under which the subdivision was divided up and sold. Am I correct that regardless of how land is marked on the HPP map, that it is all zoned A-1, and that the county has so far been unwilling to match the zoning with the plan which includes parks, schools, and commercial?
It is true that land intended for other than agricultural use still has AG zoning and the County of Hawaii has not altered the zoning to match the intended use. However, on no less than two separate occasions by two separate County Councils they have affirmed by legally binding legislation that the County of Hawaii will honor the intended land use. That if and when a request is made to rezone property to match the intended use, the County will do so.
The question I have asked before and never received an answer was: has anyone made application to rezone the land from AG to the intended use? If nobody has asked for the rezoning, the County has nothing to rezone.