The subtle ways Puna gets screwed (Bill 79)

[Rob Tucker]

Okay. And if the CoH is able to distribute a few million a year as grants to non profit organizations then I would surmise that it is well within the ability of our County Council to direct a reasonable portion of the Fuel Tax to the maintenance of Puna private roads.

If they choose to do so.

[Bob Orts]

If the laws allow money to be given to nonprofits they can do it. If the law says they can't, they can't. If the fuel tax can only be used for county streets by law, they can only use it for county streets. If they want to use fuel tax money for private streets, they just have to change the county code to reflect that. But that opens a Pandora’s box and I doubt they would make it a broad inclusion.

[james weatherford]

Aloha,
Good talk here. I've been at the farm in Pahoa today.

http://www.co.hawaii.hi.us/countycode/chapter24.pdf

Hawaii County Code, Chapter 24 "Traffic Code":

24-2: Definitions
(49) “Street” means the entire width between boundary lines of every way subject to this chapter when any part thereof is open to the use of the public for purposes of vehicular travel."

Have a look at 24-2(a) where there are some interesting words about "private streets".






James Weatherford, Ph.D.
15-1888 Hialoa
Hawaiian Paradise Park

[Rob Tucker]

I got the following input from Councilman Pete Hoffman (Mahalo Pete for paying attention) and I post my reply below in blue:

On Jul 1, 2009, at 1:50 PM, Pete Hoffmann wrote:

Rob: I've tried to do a little research with my own office files to see what the fuel tax distribution has looked like previously. One distribution appropriation I came up with is dated 10 January 2008 and reflects a reappropriation of lapsed fuel tax funds. Of the $4,595,537, the circle island and bridge program received the lion's share of $3,746,020, and then North Kona received the highest residual amount $550K, and Puna received the second highest residual amount $184K. While I don't know how much of the $3,746,020 went specifically to Puna, your district certainly received some as well as the $184K.

You are correct in how the fuel tax moneys are distributed, by miles of road, usually confirmed by Council resolution. But the County last year included an additional 891 miles of 'roads in limbo' to their total and, as I understand it, a good portion of that mileage is in Puna. Supposedly then, Puna's share this year will be somewhat higher than it has been relative to other districts in the past. If it is a private road, the County cannot spend the funds from the fuel tax, not only in Puna but in other districts are well. We have a large number of private roads in Kohala as well. However, Puna does have the Geothermal fund, from which resources are available for a number of projects and local infrastructure, if your Council representative doesn't wish to spend it all on the purchase of the steam vents.

One other aspect of this issue: the County of Hawaii has the lowest fuel tax in the state. I did try to raise the rate before the current economic downturn, but did not get any support from other Council members. Would have liked your input before we passed Bill 79.

Pete

Aloha and thank you Pete for your comments. We do appreciate your response to this.

One thing we are not sure of is the statement, as fact, that only county owned and maintained roads are eligible for Fuel Tax Revenue.

Can you clarify if this is by law or by habit?

We find the following definitions in county codes:

Section 24-2: Definitions
(49) “Street” means the entire width between boundary lines of every way subject to this chapter when any part thereof is open to the use of the public for purposes of vehicular travel."

Section 22-1.2 Definitions

(16) “Street” means the entire width between property lines of any County owned and maintained street, avenue, road, alley, highway,lane, path or otehr place opened, improved and established for the use of vehicles, pedestrians or both.

Section 24-2 (a)
(2) Such private streets, highways and thoroughfares:
(A) Which have been continuously used by the public for more than six months and designated by council, or

So the action of the county in applying Fuel Tax Revenue to various districts is either a discretionary concept or a non-discretionary concept. We cannot tell which. We understand that a formula for distribution of funds lies with the Department of Public Works.

Somehow it seems possible for the CoH to disburse funds for road maintenance for both privately and publicly held roads as long as the roads in question are fully available for the public at large. It may require a revision of the Public Works formula but the intent and spirit of the Fuel Tax Revenue should be able to overcome quirks of past county history in which county allowed and approved the creation of large private subdivisions with zero provision for impacts. The county extends it's responsibilities into and onto private roads in the application of traffic regulations but then withholds funds for maintenance for a substantial section of the public.

When does history correct it's mistakes? Do past methodologies become self sustaining merely because they were adopted?

Mahalo for listening,

Rob Tucker
FoPF
965-1555

[Rob Tucker]

This came in from Brenda Ford:

Aloha Rob,

You are quite justified in being upset. The same thing happens to West Hawai‘i, H#257;m#257;kua, and Ka’u. The distribution of highway fund is based on existing, paved road miles. Hilo has all the paved roads and very few miles of new, paved roads are added to districts outside of Hilo. There is also the problem that asphalt costs about twice as much in West Hawai‘i as in East Hawai‘i.

This problem needs to be addressed and I will.

Mahalo for your input.

Brenda Ford

Brenda gets it.

[Rob Tucker]

I've been told that Bill 79 was pulled from the CC July 8th agenda at the last minute by J. Yoshimoto.

I wonder why?

[Barbara]

Paying attention to this conversation.
Mahalo Rob, Brenda, Pete, James ... keep it up.

Barbara in Bellevue, WA for awhile.

[Rob Tucker]

Update: J. Yoshimoto had pulled Bill 79 from the agenda in past weeks and that tactic was successful in the bill slipping under the radar and getting passed on July 16th. I email Yoshimoto to check status and I was kind of annoyed that I, and others, missed an opportunity to testify on it.

So then the Council has figured out that with the whole reorganization fiasco they have to redo all the work they completed from June 16th to the present so Bill 79 will once again be up for council vote. I am told by Yoshimoto;s office that the date will be August 5th but I am finding Yoshimoto's office to be a decreasingly dependable source of information.

More to come.

[bewitchedinhilo]

It's my understanding, upon concluding an extraordinary research effort for Eden Roc and a housing assignment for school, that the private roads in the private subdivisions are considered private roads by the county. The county does not pave private roads, nor should it. Should the county pave the parking lot at the Hilo Hawaiian? If you purchased a two acre lot, subdivided it and called the space between a road and told the county to pave it; they'd laugh. That's what they're doing when "punatics" do the whole 'why aren't you paving our private roads'? dance. There's still alot of people who live here who took profits in the last few decades from the hot mess of land deals here. Maybe you should hit them up for paving $$$.

It is Hawaii law that the county may decide, at it's pleasure, to "take over" the maintenance of such private roads once they have been paved to the county's standards. Ours are not by far! The "roads in limbo" would not include private roads in private subdivisions unless, for example, it was a direct route in front of a hospital. It's the responsibility of the tenants in common to pave the roads and, until guavas taste like lilikoi, will continue to be the tenants in common's responsibility. IMAO, most obviously this is due to lack of funding; more than that, it's due to the lack of population, resulting in lack of demand and citizenship. For that, we can thank the many people who protest, the "I wouldn't know" answers, the crappy food and the "NO, we don't need Target or fast food joints or Walmart grocery expansion" attitudes. Even if you pave in front of your property, you can't then sue your neighbors to respond in kind because the tenants in common law says it upholds maintenance, not new work. Suck it up, stop whinning and hope that atleast the bumpy ride gets rid of those kidney stones.

[bewitchedinhilo]

Aye, an after thought. I got a bid from Loffler to pave part of the front road in Eden Roc. Based on that bid I added up the approximate miles (called around to the other subdivision's B.O.D.'s) and multiplied by loffler's cost per foot; I don't remember the figure exactly, but it was a staggering amount of money. I wonder what kind of chaos would ensue when one subdivision received roads and another did not, because I'm sure the County could not foot that bill. That's happening right here, right now. The upper roads are paved well and the lower are not. Unpaved roads where certain, so called "prominent" people live have gravel while others do not. I'm not talking a little more gravel either! I mean 10 or 20 to 1. Anyway, just a thought.