Posts: 1,779
Threads: 73
Joined: Aug 2006
The County ordinance establishing the Geothermal Funds Community Benefit includes HPP, Orchidland, Pahoa, Nanawale, Leilani, H. Beaches and Shores and other communities "proximate" to Pahoa.
Wesley Owens did not have his facts straight.
And, neither does Rob on this: until proof in print is provided to the contrary, it should not be believed that I ever said that Fred Blas would vote with the "Hilo" crowd. That was said, but not by me.
Posts: 2,149
Threads: 90
Joined: Feb 2006
I have to strongly defend James when it comes to Wesley Owens and the HPP Committee on PMAR. I am the Chairman of that committee, and for over a year now we have followed a deliberative, open process to acquire information, share information, and assess the community's opinion and will on PMAR. We have spoken to and with literally hundreds of people in HPP, an accomplishment one observer called "monumental" in view of HPP's history of apathy. Mr. Owens and a lot of other people both on and off the Puna Community Development Plan AC are unhappy because our committee has posed some serious questions regarding the whole process around PMAR, something they seem to see as a lynchpin of the CDP.
Using terms such as "lack of performance" and "conflicting positions" in reference to the work or our committee is insulting. Our "performance" has been to get more HPPOA members involved in the discussion of PMAR than most people could have imagined. Our "position" has been clearly outlined some time ago in a letter we sent to the Governor asking him not to release funds for PMAR until the scope of the project was better defined.
So tell me, Rob, why do you persist in attacking James when that is not what this discussion is about? And why do you unflattaeringly pass along comments about a committee and process in HPP that you know next to nothing about? I know you don't like our position, and we don't like some of yours, but we haven't felt the need to insult you.
Once more, let's have a discussion about Fred Blas' job performance without any more smoke screens and red herrings!
Posts: 8,476
Threads: 1,033
Joined: May 2003
Jerry, Please correct me if I am wrong but from what I saw of your committee's presentation to the Action Committee after a year of discussion you were unable to take a position. The closest thing to a position I heard was that the funds for studying all possible routes for PMAR should not be spent until a route for PMAR was determined. That is one example of conflicting positions. The conflict that Wesley Owens pointed out was that folks like James Weatherford talk about the importance of "connectivity" in our transportation system except when it comes to HPP when suddenly connectivity is discounted. Wes Owens made a very legitimate point on that in my opinion.
The same thing happened on the PCDP Transportation Working Group, which James participated in. After two years of effort no recommendation was made about a route for PMAR except that PMAR was needed. Now four years later the same attitude seems to prevail.
Anyone who wants to talk about Fred is free to. I have stated my view on Fred. I don't know if he is intending to run for another term. Maybe he is, maybe he isn't. The only person I know of that is apparently running for the soon to be new District 4 is James.
I was very impressed with James' campaign in 2010. I was astonished and appalled at his performance after he lost badly in the primary.
Assume the best and ask questions.
Punaweb moderator
Posts: 2,149
Threads: 90
Joined: Feb 2006
I'm sorry you didn't get it Rob, but you pretty much had your mind made up about PMAR a long time ago. Some others at the meeting did manage to understand our position, including at least one Action Committee member who also questioned the scope of the project the County Planning Department is currently flogging. I'm done with this discussion except to state for the record that the Action Committee, despite having know about HPP's committee on PMAR since last March, never bothered to ask us to meet with them and present our point of view.
Posts: 8,476
Threads: 1,033
Joined: May 2003
Jerry, I am sorry if you are indeed done with it because I have always considered you one of the more level headed people I know and your point of view and your contributions to your community are respected.
HPP is a big part of the Puna District and HPP has unfortunately been unable to find much consensus on much of anything. Failing to take a position on PMAR will most likely mean others will simply make the decision for you. HPP needs leadership and I haven't seen much sign of it yet.
Assume the best and ask questions.
Punaweb moderator
Posts: 180
Threads: 3
Joined: Oct 2006
From what I observed the committee took a strong stance: the County has not provided either sufficient information or sufficient forum for discussion focussed on this topic. The PCDP was just a start of that discussion. Of note, the transportation group showed a route and it was summarily discarded. Then the County hired a consultant who came up with yet another route and it was tossed. So finally Yuen simply drew a line and Planning got Ms. Hanohano to write an appropriation around it. meanwhile HDOT accepted responsibility to handle projected volume up to a population of 80,000 residents on route 130.
The Hawaiian Homes organizations on both ends of the road reject routes that touch them; it became apparent that the route Planning classifies as "A" goes through and destroys hundreds of acres of productive agriculture. In the midst of this mess, is there any question why HPP - seeing that any route through the subdivision impacts at least 500 lots - calls for a halt until there is a more thorough discussion and better understanding? To call for engineering and an EIS at this point seems very premature.
Getting back to Fred, what leadership has he shown to help his district sort through all of this? Has he even noted the cost ($150 - $180m) and asked whether this is the best way to spend our money?
Posts: 5,050
Threads: 84
Joined: Feb 2009
I'm wondering what you folks in HPP think Fred can do for you?
He can't spend taxpayer funds on a private subdivision that has private roads.He can't use the Geothermal funds either.
I believe that you if brought your main roads up to county standards,you could dedicate them to the county and then you would really see how long you have to wait to get your highway paved.
Hooray to Fred for using Geothermal Funds to get projects done that would otherwise wouldn't be funded !!
The county had no money and no intention to pave Pahoa Village Road !
Hooray for Fred !!
Posts: 1,779
Threads: 73
Joined: Aug 2006
Obie,
First, the Geothermal Funds CAN be expended in HPP. Look it up in the law.
Second, it is not about whether "he" (Fred) or any other Council member can "spend" those Funds somewhere -- they are NOT his (or any other Council member's) to spend. They belong to the community. Fred Blas and I (as candidates) promised members of the community and other Council members that we would change the disposition of those funds so that they were controlled by the community and could not be used for political patronage as Emily did and it seems Fred is doing -- Fred has not done what he promised.
Posts: 8,476
Threads: 1,033
Joined: May 2003
So James, How would you use/spend/allocate the Geothermal Community Benefit Funds?
Assume the best and ask questions.
Punaweb moderator
Posts: 1,779
Threads: 73
Joined: Aug 2006
It is not for any Council member to decide how those funds are spent.
It should be for the community to bring forward proposals through a community based structure -- sitting in your house, Rob, that is what Fred and I promised Angel, Dominic, and Brenda that we would do.
|
