by Reed FlickingerWest Hawaii TodayThursday, April 27, 2006 8:34 AM HST
It's philosophy time again as we are subject to ethics and logic handed down from Hilo Councilman Donald Ikeda.Consider this a primer to dispel all doubt about why our county is in the dire straits of poor government that has manifested so many of the problems with which we grapple today.Kona Councilman Angel Pilago introduced Bill 268 as a proposed Hawaii County Charter amendment that would allow the island's voters to decide an important question regarding government access: Should the County Council meet as frequently in West Hawaii as it does in Hilo?Understand this bill does not determine the answer to that question, rather it will -- if passed by a two-thirds majority of the County Council -- allow voters to answer the question in November.Simply stated, Pilago's bill calls for the County Council to meet in Kona on even-numbered months.It is a long overdue effort to compel the council to meet in West Hawaii as frequently as it does in Hilo, something this newspaper has long lobbied to see. When we supported funding of Harry Kim's proposed West Hawaii civic center, it was with the caveat that the building comes with a mandate to force the council to convene in West Hawaii with regularity equal to its Hilo meeting presence.This newspaper has for more than a decade advocated the council meeting in West Hawaii as frequently as it does in Hilo, allowing meetings in other areas, as well.After all, with more than 70 percent of the county's real property tax revenues collected in West Hawaii and the majority of the negative impacts resulting from government decisions affecting West Hawaii, it is only fair to have the council convene here. That compulsion is supportable for several sound reasons: When East Hawaii council members are stuck in traffic for hours, or face the inconvenience of their poor planning decisions, they might exercise more wisdom and caution in future decision making. Also it would place more of the decisions regarding West Hawaii in a West Hawaii venue, allowing residents reasonable access to government and disallowing unpopular decisions to be made in the relative insulation of Hilo. It is harder to look someone in the eye when you vote against his or her wishes than it is to disregard their closed-circuit presence.
Pilago described his measure's goal as "the responsible and correct thing to do. We need to do this in order to heal the divisiveness that prevails between East Hawaii and West Hawaii. We must alleviate the public's frustration and alienation, and we must be all-inclusive in the work we do."He also defused the argument about "additional expense" by offering to defray those costs with his county contingency relief funds.Sound thinking and common sense, it's called logic and is very sensible.Enter the foil, logic from an illogical perspective in the person of Donald Ikeda.Ikeda responded to Bill 268 negatively because of the inconvenience to the six East Hawaii council members who would have to travel to the west side. He also said Hilo residents wouldn't be able to participate in meetings when they are held on the west side.Nonsense.How can Ikeda say it is wrong to inconvenience Hilo residents, those who benefit from our contribution of more than 70 percent of the county's real property tax revenues, yet it is fine and dandy to inconvenience everybody in West Hawaii -- in perpetuity.Can he be so callous as to care only about travel time for East Hawaii council members? Representatives from West Hawaii have been traveling to Hilo for decades.Ikeda said, "I don't think Angel gave it much thought."No. Angel gave it plenty of thought. It's Ikeda who gave it no thought and it is this very thoughtlessness and disregard that has a lot of people in West Hawaii fed up with the mistreatment and disrespect they are handed down by Ikeda and those of like (narrow) mind.Council Chairman Stacy Higa took a far wiser approach to Bill 268, avoiding the direct shot to the foot that rang out in Ikeda's office: Higa said he will vote for the bill. His logic makes sense. While he said he disagrees with having the council meet in West Hawaii, he believes it should be up to voters to decide.Looking forward, in anticipation perhaps, we must ask: Why would voters in East Hawaii, or any other area, feel compelled to vote against allowing West Hawaii equal access to government? Would they vote against the measure if the tables were turned, if government lived in West Hawaii and rarely ventured outside?Access to government should be made more equal. We realize we pay more in taxes, but should we suffer less access to those who spend our money and decide our future? No.Pilago was correct. This single measure, if passed by the council and approved by the voters, would do much to heal the ever-increasing rift between East and West Hawaii. It would reveal that island wide, narrow-minded thinking, like that demonstrated by Ikeda, will not lead this island forward in unity, but continue to drive us apart.rflickinger@westhawaiitoday.com
No comments:
Post a Comment