Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Mahalo Emily Naeole-Beason
#1
Mahalo Emily

On Tuesday a little bit of history was made. Resolution 321-10, which calls for a Grant-in Aid program for the maintenance of roads in private subdivisions passed it’s first vote at council committee. Two more to go. It could not have happened without the support and vote of Emily Naeole-Beason. Emily stepped up to the plate and did the right thing for her people. So let me say it again.....

Mahalo Emily
.

You have to first understand that for fifty years the private subdivisions of the Big Island, created long ago by council, had been left to their own devices in maintaining hundreds of miles of sub standard road. The situation had become so institutionalized most assumed that nothing could change it. Status quo. Last year FoPF set out to change it.

Reso 321-10 asks the council to take the first steps in creating a Grant-in-Aid program modeled on the long history of county grants to serve community needs via private nonprofit organizations.

The Public Works Committee, chaired by Guy Enriques (District 6) took up the proposal as submitted by Dominic Yagong. Dominic, one of our most experienced council members and former chairman of the Finance committee, had done an excellent job of preparing and anticipating the structural components of the effort. Dominic gave the overview and the discussion was underway.

Emily led off with clarity on the needs of the district and the responsibility the county bore in originally creating the current situation. She was in fine form and I have to say that it makes me happy to tell you she stood up and told it like it is.

Kelly Greenwell was on the fence. Kelly’s vote was also needed to achieve a majority. It was Brenda Ford who gave Kelly a concise summary of the moment and Kelly was won over. Mahalo Kelly.

I do not want to over look the continued performance of Yagong, Ford and Pete Hoffman who have all consistently shown an ability to look at the island as a whole and vote for the general island well being. They are dependable, they are experienced and they have been, in this council term, as marginalized as the Hilo crowd can make them. And still they get the job done.

Ikeda, Onishi and Yoshimoto all voiced valid concerns and expressed them well. There was a very civil stretch of questions and answers. Liability issues, law. The county attorney, Lincoln Ashida and the county Director of Public Works were called in to testify. They gave very pragmatic assessments.

Through all of this committee chairman Guy Enriques was very quiet and just managed council traffic.

There developed a sense from the Hilo crew (Yoshimoto, Onishi and Ikeda) that there were a bunch of things to consider and Gee, why be in a hurry? We can delay this and grind away at it slowly over time.

Two hours of testimony and discussion finally had them ready to vote. It was time for Guy Enriques to speak.

Guy frankly gave the same rather unstructured concerns he had raised when he first heard of the proposal some months ago. It was a familiar Enriques tune. He did admit that a Grant-in-Aid program just might benefit his district even more than Puna. But he had his concerns and ran through them again. Repetition of poorly constucted points does not improve them. His problem remains that he has a weak grasp on the base issues. Once he develops a bad idea he refuses to let it go.

A motion to approve had been made. Call the role.

Enriques, No
Ford, Aye
Greenwell, Aye
Hoffman, Aye
Ikeda, No
Naeole-Beason, Aye
Onishi, No
Yagong, Aye
Yoshimoto, No

Mr. Chairman, you have five votes in favor. The motion carries.

So Puna public listen up, it is not a done deal yet. There are some miles to go and you should pay attention and be prepared to support the first structural change in the way Puna is treated.

Reso 321-10 will proceed to full council this summer for two readings (votes). Will you come down and testify in favor? Will you send written testimony in support?

Once passed the Reso calls upon the state legislature to make changes in law language to clarify the Fuel Revenue statute and limit the county’s liabilities in funding private road work. That is something for 2011. we will get there sooner than you think.

Given the legal authority the county can then, in the next council, create and pass an ordinance putting the Grant-in-Aid program in place. Between now and then there are details to work out.

We have taken the first hurdle. We are on the road. It is your road and with your assistance help is on the way.

Aloha.

Rob Tucker, president
Friends of Puna’s Future
www.fopf.org
Assume the best and ask questions.

Punaweb moderator
Reply
#2
Well done, Rob.
Thank you.



James Weatherford, Ph.D.
15-1888 Hialoa
Hawaiian Paradise Park
Reply
#3
This is an important first step in two ways. It sets the stage for what, if it eventually becomes law, will be the only substantial gesture to date on the County's part to take some responsibility for allowing the creation of the subdivisions in question without the usual infrastructure. Secondly, this shows what can happen when Emily Naeole-Beason joins with the right Council members to form an alliance for Puna's benefit. I have criticized her for failing to do so in the past, and I will now praise her for doing it now. Thank you, Emily.

I also want to thank Rob and Friends of Puna's Future for supporting this measure and testifying in favor of it. As Rob notes, this still has quite a way to go before becoming law, and we need to maintain vigilance and support.

Finally cautiously cheerful about something political,
Jerry
Reply
#4
Thank you, Rob, not only for working so hard to bring the resolution forward but for your reporting! Mahalo nui loa!
Reply
#5
http://www.westhawaiitoday.com/articles/...ocal01.txt

West Hawaii Today's article fairly supports what Rob has written. I was a little shocked at the low turn out for this discussion. Rob has done everything he can to mobilize people but for some reason there were very few people there to testify publicly. For a moment I thought it wasn't going to pass ... I believe the suggestions made by Lincoln Ashida were great suggestions and I could see Mr. Ikeda was trying to get Lincoln to make his points for him but Lincoln resisted, admirably. There are still two more readings for this to pass and I hope the public learning of the narrow passage will come out in support of this. I have come to the conclusion with community politics, there are lots of people who have opinions, sometimes quite averse to the powers at be, but when given the opportunity to face the public and put it out there for discussion they remain in the jungle sniping instead. I have thus concluded if they believe something so strongly as to share it why not follow through with action. If not, and things do not go the way they wish, they have no one to blame but themselves. If the public does not come out at least for the 1st reading of this and one of the 5 who has voted in support is somehow dissuaded then they have no one to blame but themselves. That would be all the people in HPP, in Orchidland, Hawaiian Acres and Eden Rock where some of the roads are dismal at best.

I think what continued to amaze me during the discussion was the inability for some to understand the concept. Though it was explained umpteen times some of the folks were living in dense-city!

I will continue to promote it here. I may make it a matter for our August 14th forum, an announcement of sorts.

Thanks Rob for working with Dominic to move this along.

“A penny saved is a government oversight.”
"Q might have done the right thing for the wrong reason, perhaps we need a good kick in our complacency to get us ready for what's ahead" -- Captain Picard, to Guinan (Q Who?)
Reply
#6
"August 14th forum" ...?

James Weatherford, Ph.D.
15-1888 Hialoa
Hawaiian Paradise Park
Reply
#7
Rob mentioned a very important point that should not be overlooked or downplayed. Even if Resolution 321 was passed unanimously, and every other vote was unanimous, you are still beholding to the State Legislators and the Governor. Resolution 321 by itself will not mean anything if HRS 243-6 is not changed by the State Legislation and signed by the Governor.

“BE IT RESOLVED, that implementation of the grant-in-aid program for non-profit organizations for the purpose of road maintenance on private streets utilizing fuel tax revenues shall not precede without the appropriate language change to HRS §243-6 or any other section of the state fuel tax code.”

This is where I see the greatest hurdle and probably defeat. Outside of the impacted districts of Puna and Kau, the rest of Hawaii County residents, and the rest of all the residents of the State of Hawaii are hearing:
Taxpayer money to be given away to private developers for private streets in private sub-divisions.
That is what they are hearing. You also have problem where they are also hearing that the main impacted area had a hard time getting their own local Council person to reluctantly agree. And, that there already exist road maintenance assessments in the largest sub-division and they have a history of mismanagement and this is the organization that would receive it.

I want you all to think not about what this means to you, but how it sound to everyone else. You don’t have to convince yourself and your little corner of Hawaii, you have to convince the majority of the rest of the State.
Reply
#8
Aloha Bob,

We are working on it. Step by step.
Assume the best and ask questions.

Punaweb moderator
Reply
#9
My understanding is that the money made available would come from the Hawaii County allocation, which would not increase due to this change. The Hawaii County allocation would merely be distributed differently. That seems like a simple message to communicate to the State, et. al. And as Ron said, step by step. This was a great first step. Thanks Rob, for all your hard work. And thanks to all those who attended and testified. Well done!
Reply
#10
Also, I was under the impression that Emily had changed her vote (from earlier in the year when the first vote, which would have gone 5-4 the other way, was delayed). But I just heard from a friend (who is also a Board member of FoPF) that Emily was always willing to vote Aye on 321-10, and that it was Greenwell who changed his vote from No to Aye. Is this correct? If so, apologies and much Mahalo to Emily...
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)