Ethics hearing against Building Department

[Seeb]

Any correction or violation letter should cite the code section verbatim

[PauHana]

Another nutty example of ignorance in action:


(Noting the requirements were tailored to fit Hawaii's environment, Hoffmann said he can't understand why people feel energy-efficiency construction would cost them extra money.

"The payback on this is almost immediate," he said. "Given the amount of our energy bill, this is a huge savings for the people on the island." )


Speaking down to us from Elisium, Pete Hoffman also said airtight houses were a "no-brainer" because of all the money everyone would save on air conditioning costs.

Sadly I had already saved the maximum on air conditioning by not owning one.

A building code is a good idea, but it has gone so over the top preparing for other locations problems, and 1000 year events it has become ridiculous.

[PaulW]

Good luck Rob!

[kalakoa]

The county has become a consistent source of bad information.

Perhaps this is the best they can do, and so should be fired for incompetence.

Maybe they're doing it on purpose to milk more money from the public, and should be fired for collusion.

It could be a growth management strategy, in which case they should be fired for not addressing the infrastructure problems.

[Rob Tucker]

The hearing is tomorrow, Tuesday, at 10 a.m. Council Chmbers at 25 Aupuni St in Hilo.

I'm ready.

[Wao nahele wahine]

Good luck, Rob. Will be rooting for you.

Wahine

[2liveque]

The county has become a consistent source of bad service and information. I 100 percent concur.

I hope that your ethics complaint yields good change.

[knieft]

Sending ju ju!

Cheers,
Kirt

[randomq]

I know people who have had good experiences with the building department. I also know people delayed several months, nitpicked, and arbitrary requirements set and then changed later. I honestly don't know if it's incompetence, malice, or both, but at some point it doesn't matter. Of course, no one wants to go public for fear of reprisal.

Good luck Rob.

[Guest]

Once the imbeciles in the State Supreme Court held the state liable for a natural disaster (hurricane Iniki) over 'building code' issues, the path has been predictable. Make building codes so stringent that a direct hit from a Category 5 hurricane will not result in successful litigation against the state. It has absolutely nothing to do with safe, affordable structures for people to live in. It is about limiting liability.

Problem is, building such structures is unaffordable.

Hawaii, you have a lawyer problem. Worse than terrorists.

---------------------------

You can't fix Samsara.