The In Our Opinion editorial appearing on July 3 in The Garden Island sagely observes that citizens “cannot afford to pick up the tab for the county’s irresponsible contract agreements.” The comment related to the recent administration request for council
The In Our Opinion editorial appearing on July 3 in The Garden Island sagely observes that citizens “cannot afford to pick up the tab for the county’s irresponsible contract agreements.”
The comment related to the recent administration request for council approval of an estimated $28,000 in costs for a short segment of the Eastside path by the Kapa‘a Sands resort. The council routinely approved the request, but there was a vigorous dissent from Councilman Mel Rapozo demanding additional information.
When the administration report finally arrived it disclosed that the estimated costs for the path segment would be $338,500 not including at least $100,000 for acquisition of the necessary land for the segment.
Culpability abounds. The request by the administration for funding was clearly ill conceived and incomplete. The council members other than the shrewd Mr. Rapozo were gullible in their consideration of the request and not probing for further details.
The path was described in The Garden Island editorial as a “noble initiative.” Others might not be so generous. The whole path episode has been blemished by the shrouding of information as to its costs. The public has never been provided with a comprehensive accounting as to the money that has been expended or the money that should be budgeted if the path is to be completed.
Earlier this year the Hawai‘i State Highway Department issued a spread sheet that estimated the cost of the “planned” segment of the path from Nawiliwili to Lydgate Park would exceed $60 million. Costs for the about five miles of completed path have been rumored to be over $50 million and the costs required to extend the path to Anahola remain unknown. These are staggering amounts of money to be committed to a project that does not benefit the bulk of our citizens.
The fact that the path serves only a limited number of residents and visitors to the Eastside area of our island magnifies the vast amount of money that has been or will be expended.
A circumstance irrevocably tied to the path is that, at least up until now, about 80 percent of its cost has been defrayed by payments to the county by our federal government. This was done under an interpretation of applicable law that such funds were available for projects which aided a local transportation system. County officials were eager to accept what they considered to be “free” money and chose to overlook that the actual usage of the path would be a fraud on the purposes of the law involved.
This illusion that federal subsidies to local and state governments comes at little or no cost is pervasive and misleading. What is not appreciated is that federal support for one locality is replicated by similar support in myriad other locations. The “free” provision of federal funds masks the reality that taxpayers across the country must meet the totality of all these programs.
In the final analysis taxpayers foot the bill for many expenditures that may be questionable. The whole notion of inter-governmental subsidies is seductive to encourage projects some of which may be inappropriate. The attitude that federal monies are a largesse without consequences is insidious and disruptive of thoughtful planning for controlling costs in a frugal budget.
Under our County Charter the administration requests funds for its operations, but the council is responsible for authorizing county expenses and controlling them. As taxpayers we want our money to be spent wisely.
In my view, the council should establish two important guidelines for its review of proposals for the expenditure of county moneys.
First, the council should require that satisfactory and complete justification be received before it authorizes any expenditure. The type of cursory estimate that was provided for the Kauai Sands path segment should never have been given by the administration or accepted by the council.
Second, for any expenditure as to which there would be a contribution from the state or federal government, the council should consider carefully whether the expenditure could be justified if the state or federal funds were not forthcoming.
It would be quite sobering if the full cost of the project had to be met from county funds and that criteria should be examined before the propriety of the cost is authorized.
It is always important to be careful to avoid wasteful or unnecessary expenditures and it is particularly so in these times of economic stresses.
Without intending to circumscribe the discretion that our council should have, observance of these two guidelines would serve to assure that spending of our citizens’ funds would be better safeguarded.
• Walter Lewis is a resident of Princeville and writes a regular column for The Garden Island.
