Wrong budget identified
I was surprised by the headline and story in the April 21 paper, reporting on a large increase to the Parks and Recreation budget, since that didn’t make sense. The article never mentions the Capital Improvement (CIP) budget, but I checked and confirmed the bill referenced in the story is actually an amendment to the CIP budget.
The Parks and Recreation budget is part of the operating budget, which is entirely different. There was no addition of any amount to the Parks and Recreation budget. New items are added to the CIP budget throughout the year if new projects are identified. Adding a project to the CIP budget does not increase the amount of funding for CIP projects. It just adds to the list of projects the funds can be used for. Perhaps the reporter doesn’t understand how the two different budgets work.
Nancy Crawford
Hilo
Tale of 2 meetings
After a day to reflect, I have to comment on two meetings held locally, within one week of each other, to allow public testimony before a government entity. One was held by the DLNR about moorings in Keauhou Bay (inlet), and the other was held by the Leeward Planning Commission regarding the construction of 306 timeshares on land mauka of Kahaluu Bay — a real bay!
At the first meeting, the screen was small and the presentation was all but impossible for most to see. No action was taken to remedy this problem. But at the second meeting, when kupuna could not see the screen, it was moved and their seats were adjusted. At the DLNR meeting, many people wanted to speak, but the time limits were not enforced so some had to leave without an opportunity. At the county meeting, a card was raised to warn speakers of their remaining time. Everyone had an opportunity to speak. Some even ceded part of their three minutes to others who needed it. But the most stark contrast was the demeanor of those who would be making the decisions.
At the Keauhou Bay meeting, Mr. Underwood sat sideways on the edge of the stage, looking only at his smartphone. He appeared disinterested and dismissive of the proceedings. On the other hand, every member of the planning commission faced the speakers, made eye contact, took notes, and appeared completely engaged in the meeting. They were respectful. They took their jobs seriously. I don’t know what the outcomes will be in these two cases, but I have to feel that at least our county officials heard us. It is a shame the DLNR doesn’t show the same respect for the public they are supposed to serve.
Jamie Pardau
Kailua-Kona