Positive Change: Good Government and Sustainable Livelihood
February 26, 2010
Goals
My prime goals as a Council member are to:
- Be responsive to my constituents;
- Be a creative and productive force in helping to bring about positive change in my own community here in Puna and island wide.
- Influence the conduct of the Council’s business to be and to be perceived to be, in spirit and in fact law abiding, ethical, and clearly in the long-term interest of the wider community;
- Influence the work of the Council, as a legislative body, to be open to scrutiny and meaningful participation by the public at large; and
- Provide leadership in Food and Energy Sustainability.
Good Government
In the 2010-2012 Council term, the overriding issue is good government. Reform is required in conduct of certain aspects of the County’s business and that of the Council in particular. This needed reform includes:
- expansion of public participation in meetings of County Council and Committees
- expansion of online access to County services
- formal establishment of protection of life and property as the County’s highest law enforcement priority
- funding local government policy and planning of, by, and for the people of the island instead of paying non-resident consultants for these services
- enactment of a ‘good character’ ordinance that prohibits the county doing business with people and/or companies with recent felony conviction or adverse civil judgment
- funding only high-standard sustainable design for new construction and/or remodeling of County facilities
- enactment of ‘green’ procurement policy, to minimize environmental impacts related to the County government’s activities
Priority Policy Initiatives
Along with reform in the conduct of certain aspects of the County’s business, my Priority Policy Initiatives are:
- Grow sustainable economic livelihood in Puna. Economic survival in Puna is now excessively reliant on commuting to low-paying jobs outside of the District, and doing so with expensive gasoline, on dangerous roads, in bumper-to-bumper congestion. A viable alternative is village-scale, land-based, community-focused, stewardship-conscious livelihood that rewards creativity and sustainability.
- Do whatever it takes to improve road safety so as to change this County’s roads to being the safest in the state whereas now our roads are the most dangerous. The County Council has policy responsibility and authority to work within a wide framework for making this happen, by way of the “three e’s ” – engineering, education, and enforcement.
- Rezone agricultural land to non-agricultural uses only in the case of public services and affordable housing, and then only when it is demonstrated that no other site of comparable value for money is available in the same community on non-agricultural land.
- Fund and implement whatever is necessary to put county parks into topmost condition and to keep them that way as a matter of trust to ensure enjoyment of the parks for generations to come.
- Adopt wide ranging, proven policies that transform what has been called ‘waste management’ into ‘resource management’ for our island community to be resourceful instead of wasteful.
- Fund and implement mass transit service that every work day and every school day offers a viable alternative for commuting to work and school, with express routes and schedules targeted at getting daily commuters to switch from driving private vehicles to riding the bus.
My previous years of policy and legislative experience allow me, immediately upon taking office, to go directly to work on these priority initiatives.
Some of the above initiatives will be addressed in the context of planning processes now underway, for example:
- Implementation of the Puna Community Development Plan (PCDP) will be a major item on the agenda of the Council during 2010-2012. In the Final PCDP ‘Implementation Table’, the County of Hawaii Council is designated as having a ‘Lead Responsibility’ for several of the ‘Action Items’ and a ‘Support Responsibility’ for many more. Other Community Development Plans around the island will be at various phases during 2010-2012 and those communities will be looking to Council as an enactor in both a lead and in a support role.
- The County’s 2009 Update of the Integrated Resource and Solid Waste Management Plan is being completed. Implementation of this plan will include several action items for the Council in 2010-2012.
- The County’s Agriculture Development Plan, now in draft form, will also have several action items for the Council in 2010-2012.
Having been actively involved as a community member in all of the above planning processes, I have a good understanding of the issues that will be before Council.
Other ways I will pursue these priority policy initiatives include the annual budget process and, when appropriate, with legislation — Bills and Resolutions – tailored to specific aspects of the issues.
Conduct of Council Business
The credibility of the Hawaii County Council has been substantially degraded by a perceived disregard for their own rules of procedure and code of ethics, as well as an apparent disrespect and contempt for open meetings law that requires transparency in the conduct of their business.
Whether or not the perceptions of unethical conduct and disrespect for open government are valid for any of the members, the perception nevertheless is hampering the ability of the whole Council to function as a legislative body and to do so with the trust of the public.
Hawaii County Council’s conduct of the people’s business must be carried out in a manner that is and that is perceived to be accessible and responsive to the public.
Immense potential exists and there is much to be done by way of engaging communications technology to increase public access and participation.
There is also great value in direct interaction of the Council, as a convened legislative body, with constituents in the communities where those constituents live and work day-to-day with the outcomes of Council decisions. For example, wider public participation is evident when the Council holds public hearings in rural communities. Also, Council and Committee meetings in Kona have demonstrated the unquestioned boost local meetings provide to open government by means of direct access and participation for a wider portion of the citizenry.
Finally, it is not enough for the Council to listen to the public, in whatever form or forum. The Council must hear and be responsive to what constituents have to say.
Campaign Finance
There is a perception that a few special interests have, by means of generous campaign contributions, secured a position ensuring policies that are favored by those few and that may not necessarily be to the long-term benefit of the wider community. For example, in the 2008 election campaign, contributions of $1,000 up to the maximum of $2,000 from off-island and out of-district sources were received only by the campaigns of four candidates who are now Council members among the majority.
No matter whether the perception of undue influence of campaign contributions is accurate for any Council member, the perception exists and it hinders the whole Council in the conduct of its affairs.
I will be a public-funded candidate, therefore, my campaign may not and will not accept monetary or non-monetary contributions beyond the $5 contributions from 200 registered voters from District 5 required in order for me to become a candidate.
Volunteer services may and will be accepted.
Reliance on a limited amount of campaign funds means I especially need volunteer support.
Keaau-Pahoa Road
November 20, 2009
Inevitably, when discussion turns to what to do to make life better in Puna, the Keaau-Pahoa Road is mentioned. Throughout the Puna Community Development Plan this road has been a point of concern. Rightly so. There is a general understanding within the community that ‘Kea`au–Pahoa Road’ is the deadliest public road in the State of Hawai`i. It is for sure the only road in and the only road out.
First, to be perfectly clear: neither the Hawaii County Council nor any other part of Hawaii County government has any authority over the design of Highway 130 – it is a state road. Other than intersections of a few County roads and access to County owned parcels fronting the highway, the prime responsibility Hawaii County government has along the Keaau-Pahoa Road is law enforcement.
Hawaii County Council Resolution 573-08, introduced by Council member Naeole, sought to garner cooperation between the State Department of Transportation and the County Department of Public Works; and, furthermore, to bring that cooperation to focus on the emergency situation at hand on ‘Kea`au–Pahoa Road’.
Has the County DPW taken any initiatives to foster this cooperation? An excellent question for an incumbent Council member to ask of the DPW. Maybe a good one for a journalist to ask? A fine one for a private citizen to ask. The Council member has the best chance of getting the most complete and timely answer. After that, maybe the journalist?
In addition to the County and State, it would also be productive to bring the relevant community associations into the dialogue, sooner rather than later. Several intersections along ‘Pahoa–Kea`au Road’ involve private roads for which private community-based associations have some form of responsibility.
A state of emergency exists on ‘Kea`au–Pahoa Road’; as evidenced by the number of injuries and deaths resulting from collisions.
There is a general understanding within the community that ‘Kea`au–Pahoa Road’ is the deadliest public road in the State of Hawai`i.
According to information from Hawai‘i State Department of Health, of victims of motor vehicle collisions in the state of Hawaii in 2001-2006, “Nearly one third (140, or 30%) were killed in Hawaii County, which is notable since only 13% of the population of the state resides in this county. The 2004 and 2005 fatality totals in Hawaii County exceeded those in Honolulu County.” More current and comprehensive data is being sought and will be included in future posts at jamesweatherford.com.
In the Puna Community Development Plan, the transportation action with highest priority is safety at nine (9) intersections on ‘Kea`au–Pahoa Road’. At every stage of the Puna Community Development Plan the community clearly indicated that widening of ‘Kea`au–Pahoa Road’ was not desirable. I am in agreement with the community.
There is an extreme level of illegal and unsafe driving on the Kea`au – Pahoa Road. It is the County’s responsibility to enforce traffic laws and it is in this area where the County has failed to fulfill its obligation to serve and protect the community.
Widening to relieve congestion? Congestion relief from widening is not a sure thing. There are plentiful cases of experiences where more lanes generate more traffic and congestion returns. Rather than belabor this here, I recommend Google “congestion”, “generated traffic”. There are some very practical alternative solutions to congestion and there is something the Hawaii County Council can do about some of those alternatives. More in later posts on these.
About Railroad Avenue. Almost everyone who first looks at the situation immediately points to this as an alternative (six years ago, me included). However, the right of way is not public for much of the distance, and the road bed itself is not amendable to “paving” without substantial costs. Reliable local sources indicate severe flooding on some parts. Railroad Avenue, as is, is not a feasible option for the standard the County is required to apply in building roads for motor vehicles. Railroad Avenue has been proposed as a pedestrian and bike path, which is desperately needed and can, when necessary, be used by emergency vehicles.
The Puna Community Development Plan website includes several proposals from the community regarding transportation and many other issues.
Here is one submitted by Rob Tucker and one I submitted, both regarding a Puna Parkway; and one I submitted regarding the Plan’s ‘Growth Management’ theme.
Submission to the Hawaii County Agriculture Development Plan
November 2, 2009
Early in the 2009 Hawaii County Agriculture Development Plan project, public input was sought regarding a “vision of agriculture on Hawaii Island in the year 2014″ and what was “necessary to achieve the vision.”
Below is what I submitted in September 2008.
- A. Vision of agriculture on Hawaii Island in the year 2014
A good starting point is the goal identified by the Kohala Center: increasing local market share.
The central organizing principle is capacity building for import substitution.
In general, a doubling or more of agricultural products — food, fiber, and fuel — produced on Hawaii Island and marketed on Hawaii Island and beyond, notably metropolitan Oahu.
The vision is for it to be logistically and financially possible on any day of the year for any Hawaii Island family to have the choices available that allow them to prepare and eat a nutritious meal of food all produced on this island. Importantly, these choices may include a meal with some, none, or all items either homegrown or purchased in local markets.
The context of this vision is an island-community economy founded on a mutual commitment to local self-reliance, land care, and social justice in a clean, productive, peopled, rural landscape.
- B. Necessary in order for our island community to achieve this vision
Four factors of agriculture development: land, markets, people, and capital.
Land –
Adopt zoning and subdivision policy that, in print and in practice, does not abide capricious irreversible conversion of agricultural land. When proactively and consistently implemented, this policy must change expectations regarding land use options so as to create a clear differentiation between the market price of land to be used for agricultural purposes and the market price of land to be used for non-agricultural purposes. This differentiation will in turn make agricultural land more affordable for farming.
Markets –
Of the four factors of agricultural development, markets are perhaps the most constraining, and therefore, offer the greatest opportunities for private and public investment in:
- physical infrastructure for assembly, processing, transportation, storage, selling and buying of agricultural products — food, fuel, and fiber produced on agricultural land; and
- information channels to connect buyers and sellers in a transparent market.
People –
Essential skills are:
- agricultural science / production;
- business management and marketing / entrepreneurship;
- food, biofuel, and fiber science / post-harvest processing, handling, and storage; and
- culinary arts / food preparation.
Investment is required in formal and non-formal education and training in the above skills.
Capital –
Investment in:
- farm production credit, for both long- and short-term costs;
- market infrastructure;
- market information; and
- skills development.
Farm production credit is a private function.
Physical market infrastructure may present an opportunity for public-private partnership.
Market information and skills development are public goods and require public investment.
Public policies regarding all factors of agricultural development can create a business environment that attracts private investment in production credit, skills, market infrastructure, and land.
Three experiences over recent years highlight a problem with Hawaii County’s use of experts from somewhere else to do the people’s business here at home:
- The County’s search for a ‘waste reduction technology’, in which consultants were paid more than $1.5 million plus expenses; and the search ended in Council rejection of an incinerator that was an expensive, dirty deception;
- The Puna Community Development Planning process, in which the principal consultant was regularly hostile to ideas of community-based working groups, and in which the transportation consultant was eventually dismissed after months of conflict with the community; and
- The Puna Regional Circulation Plan, in which the consultant held several meetings and then drafted a report that did not accurately reflect community input at those meetings.
Local government administration has come to rely on non-resident consultants, so that local government policy and planning is often done by high-paid ‘outside experts’. County funds are paid to non-resident consultants who arrive with a predetermined solution and proceed to demonstrate minimum knowledge of the local community plus little regard for what local residents have to say. These experts are from, and return to, somewhere else with county revenue in their pocket, unbothered about how it is living day-to-day with the outcomes of their own counsel.
Outsourcing of local government policy and planning has, at best, become stale and ineffective. A harsher assessment, to which I subscribe, is that the paradigm has become corrupted and serves interests other than those of the local community.
The expert-from-somewhere-else paradigm is based on an underlying implication that people in the local community are not capable of managing their own public affairs.
Interests of the local community are best served when the residents of the local community have charge of their own local government policy and planning.
When public employees do policy and planning ‘in-house’, there are issues regarding long- and short-term commitments to costs of salaries and benefits and overhead costs of office buildings. These issues deserve a fair evaluation of the impacts.
A fair evaluation would also recognize that outsourcing of local government policy and planning has direct costs (for example, the $1.5 million above for ‘waste reduction’), and, it is submitted here, outsourcing of local government policy and planning has substantial indirect costs in the form of corruption and an inherent absence of compulsion to serve local community interests.
What is needed and achievable is local government policy and planning of, by, and for the people of our island instead of non-resident consultants.
The Puna Community Development Plan process, especially by way of working groups and the steering committee, clearly demonstrated that dedicated community volunteers can deliver know-how to the task at hand.
Among residents and ohana of this island, there are talents sufficient in quality and quantity to accomplish policy and planning tasks now outsourced to nonresidents whose relationship to the community is only transactional.
Residents and ohana of this island, as grassroots community volunteers and as in-house public employees, are the experts best able to do the work of local government policy and planning for Hawaii County.
In 2008 the majority of voters of Hawaii County approved an ordinance regarding certain circumstances being designated the lowest priority for law enforcement.
It is the sworn duty of those in public service, including the Police Chief, the County Prosecutor, and the Mayor, to put this mandate into action with total commitment and sincerity.
To fulfill this duty, a practical place to begin is by concentrating resources on the highest priority for law enforcement: protection of life and property.
For example, these violations would be among those included in this priority:
- Traffic violations that have resulted in this County’s roads being the most dangerous in the State of Hawaii: speeding, illegal passing, impaired driving, aggressive driving, and unsafe condition of vehicles.
- Violence in public places, in the workplace, in schools, and in the home.
- Vandalism of public and private property.
- Theft, including, but not limited to, shoplifting, agricultural theft, and automobile theft.
- Home invasion.
- Arson.
- For some of the above there are cases that remain unsolved and outstanding warrants for known and/or alleged violators.
It is imperative that internal allocation of Police Department resources be focused on protection of life and property as the highest priority for law enforcement, including not only prevention and intervention, but also unsolved cases and outstanding warrants.
It is the responsibility of the Police Commission, the Police Chief, Mayor, and Prosecutor to do all within their power to ensure that protection of life and property is the highest priority in resource allocation for law enforcement and in the administration of law enforcement.
