Letters for Wednesday, January 10, 2007

• Is the council willing to act?

• Who is the voice of reason

• The ‘no plan’ option

Is the council willing to act?

I thank Kaua‘i County Councilmember Mel Rapozo for laying aside the mantle of authority bestowed by his office and venturing into the public square to voice his concerns and share his perspective via the letters column of The Garden Island.

The main question Mr. Rapozo’s letter (“Letter to the citizens of Kaua‘i,” Letters, Jan. 8) raises for me is this: Are councilmembers willing to initiate impeachment proceedings, either by spearheading a citizens’ petition drive or by bringing complaints to the Ethics Board — the two channels by which impeachment charges may reach the circuit court?  A petition may allege impeachable offenses of malfeasance, misfeasance, or nonfeasance.  The Ethics Board may file impeachment charges based on ethics violations.

Mr. Rapozo alleges, apparently with good reason, lawbreaking, lying, waste of taxpayer money, endangering the coastline, and supervisory failure on the part of administration officials. One or more allegations apply, at a minimum, to the mayor (see Charter Section 7.05A) and two department heads (the administrative assistant may be exempt because he is not technically an officer of the county, and it is not clear if any deputies or members of the county attorney’s office are liable).

If councilmembers shy away from impeaching salaried officers — something they did not shy away from in the case of volunteer police commissioner Mike Ching — are they willing to act on the basis of Charter Section 23.10, which provides for the prosecution, as a misdemeanor, of any violation of the charter, ordinance, or rule having the effect of law?

I do not see how Mr. Rapozo’s defense against Mr. Ivison’s criticism of the council can be sustained unless the council is willing to act, not just talk, to uphold the law in accordance with Mr. Rapozo’s eloquent description of their responsibility. He said, “…all of us as councilmembers take an oath before taking office and are bound to faithfully abide, fairly execute and ensure lawful compliance with the U.S. Constitution, Hawai‘i Constitution and all the state and county laws. Remember that the ends never justify the means.”

In the absence of meaningful accountability, we will be left with the familiar round of fulminations, accusations, and self-serving justifications leading nowhere except to the next round. On the other hand, if county officials knew that impeachment and/or prosecution is a live option rather than a dead letter in the charter, what effect would the knowledge have on their behavior and how often would the live option need to be exercised?

Kapa‘a

Who is the voice of reason?

In a recent letter to The Garden Island, the letter writer wants to credit Councilman Jay Furfaro as the voice of reason in the inquiry into the bike path pavilions. I think the letter’s author does not see the serious underlying problem. Councilman Furfaro, in asking that procedures be established to prevent future problems, is simply sweeping a fundamental issue under the rug.

We repeatedly hear of private projects that have deliberately, or accidentally, failed to get the required permits and waivers. Many of these have been allowed to continue, even though they would have been stopped if the existing procedures had been followed.

The Planning and Building departments are supposed to enforce rules and regulations to protect Kaua‘i from developers and environmentally insensitive individuals. When the heads of these departments cannot get it right, even on county projects, something is seriously wrong. The county ends up looking as if it does not take the required permitting seriously.

The county loses an opportunity to be a role model.

If I were the mayor, I think I would be considering asking for the department head’s resignations, rather than bureaucratically improving procedures.

Kapa‘a

The ‘no plan’ option

Who does the Department of Land and Natural Resources represent?

It can’t be the people of Kaua‘i who have repeatedly, and in almost one voice, asked the state to keep their hands off our mountain. What are meetings and extended comment periods attempting to accomplish?

We have spoken and keep saying the same thing … leave the mountain alone.

What do we hear from DLNR’s Peter Young? We get this quote from last night’s meeting at the War Memorial Convention Hall: “I suspect after this meeting, there will be further changes to the plan to make sure the people of Kaua‘i have a plan they want for Koke‘e.” It seems pretty unanimous that we want “no plan.” Why does the DLNR make decisions to give us plans that we don’t want while ignoring the one we do want, which is “no plan”? The “no plan” option doesn’t seem to be one of our choices, and it should be.

So what is behind this? Is it money? Is there nothing left that cannot be bought and sold? Is this a push to generate money or just spend it on unwanted, unwarranted, and I use the term loosely, “improvements,” to bring more tourists and generate more money? Or does the state not have enough funds budgeted for regular maintenance of Koke‘e?

In Nancy Budd’s letter (“Mandatory attendance,” Letters, Jan. 7) to The Garden Island, she states, “We seem to be on the brink of allowing the ever-increasing tourist demands to exceed our political resolve to protect our cherished Koke‘e.” Well, our visitors are taxed, and if funds are needed for Koke‘e’s upkeep then let’s get it from the Transient Accommodations Tax Revenues which are mainly going into advertising to bring an ever-increasing amount of visitors to our islands. In fact the amount of money in the advertising fund of the State Tourism Authority budget for 2006-07 is $70.7 million and for 2007-08 is to be about $84 million. This is money taken from taxing visitors and using it to get more visitors. Let’s put more of it where it is needed to benefit tourists and residents alike by maintaining our parks in as much of a natural state as we can. If visitors want to come to Koke‘e I would hope it’s to see an unusually beautiful, peaceful place in all its natural beauty, not more paved lookouts, larger parking lots with full-sized idling diesel buses, food concessions, larger signage and informational leaflets blowing all over the place.

Kapa‘a