1. CA-9 with our preferred amendment have one staff member who works ONLY on the 2% Land fund Program and
2. CA-18 where we will be asking to be able to pay people who work on the land.

PLEASE PLAN TO ATTEND AND TESTIFY.

Here is my testimony from the Pahoa Charter Commission meeting on April 1, at which seven people testified, all in support of these two amendments:

Aloha,

I have lived in Hawai`i for twenty-five years, working in the fields of regenerative agriculture, alternative children’s education, and ecosystem restoration.  I voted in favor of the original PONC proposal in 2006, and repeated this vote for the charter initiatives of 2010 and 2012.  I serve my local community, Koa`e, as a board member, and I volunteer time regularly caring for the forests and coastal lands in our region.

Regarding the PONC provision, I firmly maintain that the strongest reason for maintaining the original spirit of the Program is that 63% of participating voters favored the 2% Land Fund on three separate occasions over the course of 8 years.  This is no simply majority, but almost 2/3 of the electorate.  Apparently, Big Island voters feel strongly that the natural beauty of our Island should be protected, and are willing to commit 2% of our property taxes towards this cause.  I ask that you seriously and honestly honor this commitment.

As to the spirit of the Program, I believe that the following attributes are essential.

1. That the lands are held in perpetuity.  This is the only way that we citizens can meaningfully look our children in the eyes and say that we are protecting the land for use by future generations.  Also, this is the only way that we’ll continue to be able to seek matching funds for the purchase of these properties, which I see as a powerful mechanism in which tax dollars can be used as leverage for conservation action.
2. That no less than 2% of property taxes be maintained as a baseline funding amount for the program.
3. That the fund cannot be accessed for any use, other than expenses directly related to purchase and maintenance of targeted lands.

Regarding these essentials, I ask that you not allow any proposed amendments which violate them to advance beyond a first reading of this body.

Additionally, you are currently considering two amendments which strengthen and enhance the spirit of the Program.

CA-18 is an excellent amendment, which will lubricate the ability of public and NGOs to get boots-on-the-ground caring for PONC acquisitions.  I live in an area where partnerships among a half-dozen community 501c(3)s have managed volunteer networks doing invasive species control and restoration work in the Forest Reserves and the coral reefs.  These conservation volunteers, already mostly in lower income brackets, somehow find the time to do this work because we love the land.  Like similar groups in other areas, we are always appreciative of ways in which our work can find some fiscal support, especially from a fund that is earmarked for such use and currently flush.

CA-9, as originally sponsored by Commissioner Galimba, maintains the spirit of the PONC Program, by specifying that a single salaried position be created to administer the Program.  This specificity is necessary, because it is clear that the scope of the job requires no more than one person.  This amendment needs to be returned to its original language, or have Commissioner Hopkins’ substitution further amended to include this one staff member specificity.

I urge you to pass both of these amendments through second reading and add them to the ballot.

As to the big picture of why it is imperative to protect our heritage and wild lands?  We are blessed with a corner of the world which still maintains substantial natural beauty.  There is an inherent pricelessness to this which indigenous people and certainly our native Hawaiian predecessors knew intrinsically.  Wild lands are a repository of biological diversity, they stabilize the weather and bring rains, and they are precious settings for ecology education.

As the Big Island makes its way towards declared renewable energy and food self-sufficiency goals, we will continue to rely upon the visitor industry as part of our economy.  As fossil fuels become more scarce, prohibitive air travel pricing will reduce the mass tourism sector, while increasing the luxury and eco-tourism sectors.  Already, far-seeing jurisdictions like the State of Florida and the countries of Palau, Costa Rica, Uruguay, Botswana, and others have implemented strict policies protecting the use of their territorial natural beauty resources.  Specialty income, and a more place-sensitive visitor demography, are already flowing to such destinations.  By contrast, other places like the Greek island of Rhodes and so many parts of the Asian Pacific, have been devastated by the encroachment of cheap, short-term mass tourism.  Let us not choose that route.

Also, as we learn to limit the extent of greenhouse gas emissions, and to draw down carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, it should be noted that protecting forests keeps carbon in the ground and discourages fossil fuel intensive activities like development.  For instance, one 157 acre forest on the PONC priority list, Wai`ele, sequesters over 15,000 metric tonnes of carbon every year.  We can join with the 1.4 million students worldwide who marched last month for climate justice and a live-able future, by keeping and defending this wonderful Hawai`i program, of which we all should be justifiably proud, the 2% Land Fund.