Posts: 14,107
Threads: 424
Joined: Aug 2012
Yes, all residents should be required to acknowledge the pitfalls of living on a volcano -- along with "private" roads, county indifference, etc.
However, if government is forcing acceptance of a waiver, then government must also step aside when those residents seek to create their own services.
What we have now is "we won't fix it, nor will we allow you to fix it", which is utter crap.
Posts: 2,244
Threads: 396
Joined: Nov 2011
quote:
Originally posted by imemine
If elected (it’s election season, one can imagine yeah?) I will advocate, tirelessly, for legislation that acknowledges that Kilauea is an active volcano. That it is erupting, and is expected to continue to erupt into the foreseeable future, and that all government policies take into consideration that all but a very small portion of the land within Kilauea’s boundaries is a hazard zone that has the potential for catastrophic eruptive activity within a short period of time. As such all government expenditures shall be limited to the bare necessities required for safe access to and from the homes in the area, a minimum police and fire department presence, and recreational infrastructure, and, going forward the government will not participate in any other infrastructure development.
Further I will insure that a clause is added to all deeds of land in the entire area that must be signed by all land owners upon transfer of title by which they acknowledge the dangers of an active volcano and wave all rights to claims for damages due to volcanic activity, and expectation of governmental services beyond the minimum described above, within an active volcanic zone. All current land owners will be expected to sign said acknowledgement or have their property taken through the imminent domain process.
As part of this legislative act it will be made clear that while it is considered reasonable by some to establish communities within an active volcano’s boundaries that the government itself, to the extent that it does elsewhere, does not condone these activities and as such the citizens are free to do so but entirely at their own risk. As such the government will continue to issue residential building permits and oversee private development in the area but it will not issue permits for commercial development.
(BBM) Not going to happen (we won't sign anything of the sort, as owners of land in Puna). The government can already exercise imminent domain at will.
JMO.
Posts: 14,107
Threads: 424
Joined: Aug 2012
we won't sign anything of the sort, as owners of land in Puna
I would, if the terms of the deal included meaningful concessions -- government is already providing the minimum possible services, might as well get something out of it.
Posts: 1,522
Threads: 13
Joined: Apr 2014
Signing a petition of that sort would only be a nail in the coffin, as it would show unanimously to government that Puna is too hazardous to live in, so eminent domain would take over and expand into part of VNP land. Tough cookies on compensation, as their "weasel out" is that " it is designated Ag land because of the hazard, there is not supposed to be a residence there", you have thirty days. As a family leaves, the house is demolished along with all the abandons, returning Puna to its natural state.
Again, be very, very careful in what you wish for.
Community begins with Aloha
Posts: 14,107
Threads: 424
Joined: Aug 2012
their "weasel out" is that " it is designated Ag land because of the hazard
Disagree: it's designated "ag" to avoid any "requirements", which fact is well-documented.
show unanimously to government that Puna is too hazardous to live in
Government already uses that excuse at its convenience. "Too hazardous to build public infrastructure -- yet magically not very hazardous when we require building permits."
Again, be very, very careful in what you wish for.
Enough people are invested in constructive ignorance that these will remain just that, wishes.
Note, however, the recurring theme: let's all commit to something and move forward with it.
Posts: 3,202
Threads: 108
Joined: Jun 2010
Cease enforcing any and all nanny-state laws.
Adopt the castle doctrine.
Put big warning signs on all the entrances to Puna that you have to accept personal, adult responsibility for all your actions here.
Posts: 14,107
Threads: 424
Joined: Aug 2012
Delegation weakens authority. Better we seek permission for every little thing.
Posts: 1,557
Threads: 50
Joined: Oct 2012
Perhaps Puna should be its own county.Then all the fees collected in Puna ...stay in Puna instead of Kona district taking all the money.
..And the people bowed and prayed... to the neon God they made...
Posts: 1,858
Threads: 46
Joined: Apr 2015
No, then we would just be sending our tax money to Oahu and be begging to get some of it back.
Posts: 1,219
Threads: 52
Joined: Dec 2014
Puna is not the only district on this Island at risk of volcanic hazards! Much of the population on this island who don't live in Kohala or on the flanks of Mauna Kea is also at risk, this just isn't about Puna, it is most of this island who are vulnerable to what can happen when you live on a live volcano.
|
