(James Weatherford lives in Hawaii because he loves it. Â This is the second time he has lived here and this time it is by design and with dedication. From the time he left Hawaii in 1975 to his and his wife Elizabeth’s permanent return in 2001, he studied, received university degrees, and worked in various aspects of agriculture. A former legislative aide to then-Councilman Bob Jacobson, James Weatherford is interested in island politics but his heart lies with his and Elizabeth’s organic farm in Puna.)
The title of the Resolution indicates the intended outcome is for all four Counties, â€œHawai`i, Maui, Kauai, and the City and County of Honolulu, to collaborate and pursue a single solid waste proposal.â€
I am urging my Council member and all members of the Council to vote NO on Resolution 66-09, because in both intent and contentÂ I find it without merit.Â â€¨â€¨First, the relationship between Resolution 66-09 and the Countyâ€™s 2009 update of the State-mandated Integrated Resource (formerly Solid Waste) Management Plan is not even mentioned as having a bearing.Â
Next, while there are many assertions in the â€œWhereasâ€ clauses, there is no evidence to support those assertions. This concerns me.Â Besides it simply not being good government to make policy on unfounded assertions, it would seem plausible that some very good evidence will be necessary to attract the billions of Federal dollars that are touted by Resolution 66-09.
Finally, Environmental Management Director Lono Tyson, at the Councilâ€™s April 22 meeting, was asked what he thought about Resolution 66-09. Lono was diplomatic. He did not reject it as I do. Neither did he embrace the concept. Lono did indicate that he looked favorably on “discussion.” I very much like that idea.
However, Resolution 66-09 does not call for discussion among the counties about possible common interests and opportunities for mutual benefit. Rather, it says just do it!
No evidence. No plan. No discussion. Just do it!
As an additional note, during Council deliberation of Resolution 66-09, there has been reference made to a â€˜mirrorâ€™ resolution from Oahu. Comments from a Council Legislative Assistant were forwarded to me in email communication fromÂ a blogger on the island. Those comments referred to the so-called â€˜mirrorâ€™ Resolution and made a couple of gross misrepresentations about what was (or not) in each of the Resolutions.
This is a link to the â€˜mirrorâ€™ Resolution:
I have taken the opportunity to carefully read and compare the two Resolutions — the original, ‘mirror’ Resolution from Oahu and Hawaii County Resolution 66-09Â — and will be addressing that comparison in my own testimony next Wednesday. So, I will not elaborate on that here and now. Instead, I strongly encourage anyone who places importance on the kind of words we say and write for any purpose, and certainly for government policy, to have a look. If so inclined, let us know, here, what you find. If you would like to submit testimony to the County Council do so via email at email@example.com.