Previous Ramblings

Tuesday, May 13, 2014

Looking at the bigger picture through open space.

“The downgrade to AA- is based on the county’s reduced financial flexibility following a substantial reduction in reserves over the past several years,” an April 24 Fitch Ratings report read. 'Expenditure growth has repeatedly outpaced revenue gains, resulting in recurring operating deficits and drawdowns in fund balance.”
- The Garden Island Newspaper, May 11th 2014

“When you're broke what do you do? You continue your spending and you continue putting into this fund? Who’s going to pay the bill? Are you going to raise more taxes?  Are you going to raise more fees?”
-Kaua'i County Council Member Ross Kagawa

“As we all know, the financial situation of this county as we see it today is going to get worse next year.  And the year after that.  So, to expect the economy to turn around.  And the financial condition of this county to turn around, this year and the year after I don’t think is realistic.” 
-Kaua'i County Council Member Mel Rapozo

"...the budget is a moral document.  the budget is a statement of values.  And I believe that we should make that statement strong here today to say that our values are grounded in preserving open space, preserving access, and preserving those benefits for future generations…. we look at what we spend money on in this county.  We lose $1 million a year on our golf course.  We’ve spent millions and millions on bad decisions with the solid waste fund.  And to take those bad decisions and those money losing decisions out on the natural environment and access and open space, is certainly something that I’m not willing to do.  If we need additional funds to fund the budget to make up for this, there’s many options… the visitor industry is a huge beneficiary of open space and public access, whether we have to increase taxes above and beyond what’s already proposed on the hotel victory industry that’s one option and the vacation rental industry that’s another option…
-Kaua'i County Council Member Gary Hooser

“I’m not in favor of reducing.. for one year, two years, or whatever... If you start taking from it, you’re going to get used to taking from it... Need to learn how to live with us putting aside.  It's like putting aside for a college fund or a reserve.  It's a discipline and we need to learn how to do it every year.”
- Kaua'i County Council Member JoAnn Yukimura

I have two guilty pleasures in life: watching Game of Thrones and watching our Kaua'i County Council in action.  Other than one of them existing in a world where winter can last a decade, they've become almost indistinguishable from each other.  There is a palpable rolling ball of power elusively circulating through the room, and you can see each member grasping for it.  I love being a spectator to the constant verbal warfare; watching the alliances form and crumble; and, in times of desperation, watching the reversion to playground racial stereotyping.  While the battle is fierce, I do strongly believe that every member on the council holds Kaua'i's best interests at heart, they are just all pushing drastically different ideological ideas.  And, just like Game of Thrones, every week I find myself applauding for a new hero. 

The ensuing battle over the Public Access, Open Space, and Natural Resources Preservation Commission Fund is particularly exciting.  We have an obvious problem.  A $57 million surplus has disappeared in four years.  County revenue is dropping while expenses are rising.  Our bond rating has been downgraded.  And, for the first time, the county doesn't have the cash available to cover its current liabilities while maintaining an adequate reserve.  In short, we are in a fiscal nightmare.  And there are funds out there (like the Open Space fund) which are, pardon the cliche, ripe for the picking

Now that we are facing a perpetual budgetary shortfall we have two possible solutions:
we can either raise revenue (taxes and fees) or cut expenses.  Those are the only choices.  And, as our government officials go line by line and decide to either tax or cut on a variety of items, they are making continuous ideological decisions. 

With every decision (tax or cut) policy makers are choosing who will bear the brunt of the burden.  Raise property taxes on second homes and you increase the burden on high income folks.  Raise resort taxes and you increase the tax burden of visitors.  Raise excise taxes and you increase the burden on low income families.  Cut government services and you disproportionately impact low income families (who rely on those services).  Out of every line of the budget, the decision that our policy makers make on the Open Space fund is most illuminating as to where they stand on the ideological divide. 

When it comes to Open Space, we have the same two options:  cut the fund or look elsewhere for revenue.  However, Open Space is particularly interesting because it is large land-owners that necessitate the fund.  The more properties that we develop, the less we can access our natural resources and the more open space that we lose.  Forever.  So, the reason that the Open Space fund exists is to mitigate the impact of development on our island so that we can maintain access (Kilauea Falls, Papa'a Bay, etc), preserve our natural resources (Salt Pond, etc) and save open space (Black Pot Beach park, etc). 

So, in summary: we have a system that promotes development as a solution (as I've talked about before).  That development ultimately causes a host of problems including environmental decline and social inequality.  One practical way to mitigate the problems inherent in pursuing development is through the Open Space and Natural Resources Preservation Fund.  But, now there's no money, so our leaders are left with a choice: they can throw in the towel on our environment and our access to it by cutting the fund, or they can look at ways to raise money from those who necessitate the fund in the first place: large land-owners and developers. 

By reducing the fund 66% they are in effect saying "no" to the potential for access to Kilauea Falls, to improved access to Papa'a Bay, and to a buffer zone of open space behind Salt Pond.  By reducing the fund, our policy makers aren't even attempting to fix the situation that both necessitates the fund (over development) and is causing our current fiscal dilemma.  Without a more progressive taxation system we will continue to be in a state of perpetual fiscal crisis. 

As we transition to a balanced budget in the face of diminished growth, we all need to make sacrifices.  But, our policy makers need to ensure that they are not placing an undue burden on the environment, future generations, or on our local community.  There is nothing more valuable than our island's natural heritage.

Mayor Carvalho made his decision clear when he presented his budget (which includes a 66% reduction in funding) to council. The council members will each make their final decision tomorrow (May 14th).



-- In the continual spirit of full disclosure, I am a volunteer commissioner on the Open Space Commission.  

Kilauea Falls is now inaccessible and will be for the foreseeable future.  The Open Space Commission is currently openly deliberating about potential ways to acquire access. 

7 comments:

  1. How much of the Open Space Fund has actually gone to purchase access? How much has gone to attorneys?
    How much to administrative overhead?

    This is the only commission with dedicated staff. What do they do in between meetings?

    Why does Kilauea have no access to Kilauea Falls? Maybe time to change the name of the town - Formerly-known-as-Kilauea. Now lost its namesake speading vapor falls.

    Access is also lost to Kilauea's Slippery Slide. And Kauapea east.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Good questions. To be clear, while I sit on the commission I can't speak in any way for the commission.

    The commission is currently in the process of recommending condemnation of a small strip of property to access the beach in Kukui'ula harbor. The commission also worked on acquiring Black Pot Beach Park. At .5% of real property tax revenue, the fund was short funded for large acquisitions and didn't have the mandate to provide an acquisition plan. With ordinance 936 in 2012, the fund was increased to 1.5% and the commission is now expected to provide an acquisition plan for properties (including assessments and contact with the land-owner). However, the commission remains solely a recommending body. All decisions for purchase or condemnation are made by the county council.

    Only 5% of the fund can go to administrative purposes. I believe that none can go to attorneys fees as the funds can only be used for acquisition. Special counsel for litigation in a condemnation case would come (I believe) from the general fund through the county council. The fund is currently $3.3 million.

    Restoring access to Kauapea east has been a priority of the commission for years and is actively being worked on by staff and the county attorney.

    The majority of the last two months of meetings have been devoted to the subject of Kilauea Falls. Commission staff, on behalf of the commission, just sent a letter to the property owner to try and set up a meeting to discuss options. You can read more about that through the commission's minutes here: http://www.kauai.gov/Government/BoardsandCommissions/OpenSpaceCommission/tabid/294/Default.aspx?ItemId=9723

    You can also read more about the history of the fund and its current priorities here: http://www.kauai.gov/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=S3Ft81oNb7U%3d&tabid=294&mid=1912

    Thanks for taking the time to read and comment.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Any update on the open access to Kilauea Falls or other places mentioned? I read the Commission Docket as recent as 12/18/14 that it was still going to be a "top priority" to meet with the owner Charles Somer to condemn a parcel in order to create public access to Kilauea Falls. It also seems to be a money-making venture, being rented out for pictures, picnics, etc. from other things I've read (??).

    ReplyDelete
  4. Ewans,
    Unfortunately, I had to resign from the commission in early December. And I haven't seen any recent minutes posted on the website. But, in November we were waiting to hear back from the land owner regarding a right-of-entry so that we could check out possible routes to the falls.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Thank you, Luke. Sorry if your resignation was not voluntary. Does the land owner HAVE to respond/propose a possible route? Are there ways we residents can keep up the pressure / support the commission in getting a response?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Completely voluntary resignation- by chance a property came up for reconsideration (originally considered in approx. 2009) that's owned by my parents and I didn't feel comfortable merely recusing myself, so I resigned.

      No-- the land owner doesn't have to respond. But, especially on the chance that it ever does turn into a condemnation proceeding (still a long, long way from that) the county needs to be careful in the way it goes forward. And, since there's not really a precedent for this type of thing it's going to be particularly slow as the county remains extra careful. I bet that it will be at least a year (if not two) before the commission recommends acquisition as they need to identify a route, appraise the route, then vote whether to make it a priority. Each step takes a lot of time for community input and reaching out for land-owner response. And, since the commission is merely a recommending body, the administration and council will then do their due diligence in deciding whether to accept the commission's recommendation. Before pursuing a recommendation for condemnation, the administration would likely try to engage land owner again in a conversation and would also have to look into what litigation would cost (only acquisition cost comes from Open Space budget, other costs (like special counsel for litigation) come from general fund). And, by that point, the original appraisal will likely expire so they'd have to do another appraisal… And so goes the frustrating friction of bureaucracy.

      I think that the most important thing for the Kilauea Community (or anyone who has been to the falls) is to unanimously support one path. That will at least make that part easier, because the commission will have a near impossible time identifying the ideal path (as there are many options) without being able to gain access to the property.

      Unfortunately, there are no upcoming agendas posted at http://www.kauai.gov/default.aspx?tabid=294. But, I believe that Kilauea Falls is an ongoing agenda item, so you should be able to just show up at any meeting (twice a month, 2nd and 4th thursday at 1:00) to testify in support of acquisition of the falls. However, without posted agendas it's hard to know whether the meeting will actually occur (can be cancelled last minute because of a lack of quorum). And, if by chance the Falls is not on the agenda when you show up, the chair will allow you to testify but, because of sunshine law there can not be any conversation or real dialogue on the issue. And again, so goes the frustrating friction of bureaucracy. It's a maddening system and you need the patience of a sloth and the perseverance of an ant to overcome the entropy.

      Delete
  6. Thank you, Luke. I appreciate your wisdom and candor to all of the bureaucratic malaise that plagues the process. I agree that one path would be ideal. It also would be helpful to have commissioners and council members who valued not just the rights of private land owners but also the rights of the public at large. It's a delicate balance but one worth discussion time and again.

    ReplyDelete