A measure prohibiting trucking trash from Hilo and Puna to the West Hawaii landfill passed from council committee unanimously, with little fanfare and no public testimony.
A measure prohibiting trucking trash from Hilo and Puna to the West Hawaii landfill passed from council committee unanimously, with little fanfare and no public testimony.
County Council Chairman Dominic Yagong introduced the measure, Bill 233, after learning the Environmental Management Department was running a pilot program, taking trash from several East Hawaii transfer stations and trucking it to the Puuanahulu landfill in West Hawaii. Rubbish trucking proposals have been a contentious issue for island residents for years, and the revelation a pilot project was ongoing came days after Mayor Billy Kenoi told West Hawaii residents the county had no plans to transport the trash.
Rubbish from transfer stations as far east as Laupahoehoe and Pahala already comes to West Hawaii. Yagong’s bill explicitly prohibits the county from hauling rubbish from the Honomu, Papaikou, Hilo, Keaau, Glenwood, Pahoa, Volcano and Kalapana transfer stations anywhere but the Hilo landfill.
“We did not inform the public” about the pilot project, Yagong said during the Environmental Management Committee meeting at the West Hawaii Civic Center Tuesday afternoon, explaining why the news upset many island residents. “This will once and for all make it very clear. If we add another landfill into the county equation, we make it very clear where it goes. It gives us the option to move trash around. This is clear as far as the directive we want to give the department.”
South Kona Councilwoman Brenda Ford said she has taken a number of phone calls from angry constituents.
“It’s unfortunate that we have to legislate things like this,” she said.
Solid Waste Division Chief Greg Goodale said the pilot project had ended; department officials previously said the project would run only through the end of April. Ka‘u Councilwoman Brittany Smart said she expected to see a full report on the project and its results.
Hilo Councilman Donald Ikeda, who ultimately voted in favor of moving the measure to the full council with a positive recommendation, expressed some concerns about the bill.
“The landfill probably will be closed in about three years,” Ikeda said. “What do we do then?”
The county doesn’t have to worry about that just yet, Yagong said, and the Department of Health will provide the county with plenty of notice if the landfill needs to be closed. Ikeda reminded Yagong the DOH had issued the county a notice to close the landfill with just four months’ warning, when Ikeda took office eight years ago.
The Finance Committee moved forward a proposed charter amendment that would require the council to approve all new county positions. Yagong said the county has two ways to add positions: either the mayor brings a resolution to the council with the new positions or the administration includes new jobs in the annual budget proposal. The former is transparent, Yagong claimed, but the latter is not.
“The budgetary process is very voluminous,” he said. “Unless you’re someone that goes line by line, it’s very difficult to catch. For the general public, it’s basically invisible.”
Deputy Finance Director Deanna Sako disagreed. Those positions aren’t just listed as line items in the budget, she said, but are also summarized in a report with the budget proposal.
“I think we are being very fair and open,” she added.
Since Mayor Billy Kenoi took office in December 2008, the county has held the line on adding positions, Yagong said. But during the county’s boom years, under Mayor Harry Kim from 2001 to 2008, employee rolls grew by 442 employees, from 2,681 to 3,123, and the salary paid by the county increased $59 million.
Kohala Councilman Pete Hoffmann said holding positions is good, but noted what he sees as a broader issue.
“What we have not done in this administration is reduce the size of government as a reflection of the size of our budget total,” Hoffmann said. “Regardless of how many positions we have … the real meaning for the taxpayer is a reflection of what percentage of the budget goes to salaries, wages and benefits. That’s what we should be addressing.”
Sliding down what some council members called a “slippery slope,” the Planning Committee approved Leslie and Betty Jean Botelho’s request to have their property subdivision request exempted from the county’s fair share assessment. The Botelho’s said they should not have to pay the assessment because a county ditch and road already encroach on their property. An amendment, which Ikeda introduced on the couple’s behalf, passed with five votes.