in 
Politics, Commentary, Community
Politics, Commentary, Community Friday
06Jul
Ain't life swell when the county's flush?
Friday, July 6, 2007 at 07:29AM When the new county budget took effect July 1, Council members each got a three-fold increase in their contingency relief fund, giving them $300,000 to parcel out for special projects and favored organizations this year.
How easy and tempting it is to look at this and call it a slush fund. In many places $300,000 is serious walking-around money. There is even timely evidence of the kind of abuse it can engender in the Ethics Board hearing coming up. When Councilwoman Naeole couldn't sell Lucille Chung's fundraising tickets, Naeole tapped into her contingency fund for a contribution to Chung's non-profit group. You see how these things happen.
Maybe rename it the Incumbents Re-election Fund (IRF), since being in office and getting to throw money around that you yourself approved legally like that is a powerful tool for getting voters and fundraisers' attention. The contribution is made legit by funneling it through a cooperating county agency and a resolution is placed on the Council's agenda noting the expenditure. But rarely are any of them scrutinized, vetted or questioned by fellow Council members or the public. It seems an unwritten rule that whatever Council members want with these funds, they get. File that under back scratching.
Not even Councilwoman Naeole's $20,000 contingency fund contribution to Makuu Farmers Market, a non-profit she helped found, where she conducts business, and where her daughter sits on the board, raised an eyebrow -- not even on this forum.
But wait, at the same time, the new budget raises the Council accounts for mailings and travel to $15,000 each. Council members use to go alone to mainland conferences and meetings. Now they often include an aide; even sometimes two aides if the Council member can't go, and that was squeezing their budgets. And I predict the increase for mailings will spark an escalation of the survey-styled political brochures that Dominic Yagong seems to like. Watch your mailbox.
View Printer Friendly Version
Email Article to Friend
Reader Comments (10)
Certainly, other members don't question how one of their colleagues proposes to use their own contingency funds.
As for a county agency concurring, that is often a just a formality, but not always. There have been cases where the respective Dept. did not have the workforce to do the proposed project; and some projects have been turned down and/or scaled way back because they conflicted with other initiatives. Of those cases I am aware of, none had any indication of politics playing a role.
In the parks in particular, there is typically a great deal of discussion with the Dept. of Parks and Rec. and a local "friends of the park" in putting together a proposal. The "friends" will often have a plan and project, and submit a proposal. The member's staff, the Dept P&R staff, and the "friends" work now $300,000). I think a closer examination will reveal that this fund has been increased three times) in the last two years -- going from $80,000 in FY '04-'05 to $120,000 to $200,000 at the beginning of FY '06-'07.
Of course, the argument is made that this District fund is allocated directly to the community, through the Council member, and therefore reflects the needs at grassroots. And, this really should not be underestimated. If a community has a need, they should approach their Council member with a plan and proposal.
Closer scrutiny and accountability? Probably plenty of room for improvement.
I guess a good rule for judging these things might be to ask, "If it were another person giving the money to this group, would I complain?" Of course, anything that comes back into the pocket of the politician in question should be prohibited. At $300,000 per councilperson, we are talking about an aggregate sum that should require checks and balances.
I don't think our newspaper (here in Kona) even questions these funds and how they are used by our Kona council reps but it sure makes a lot of sense now that they would use it as a tool for re-election especially with the examples you provided. I don't like it. I think the council should cut back on this allowance.
I apologise for my childish "paving" comment. It still urks me that this is the value system that is becoming prevalent on this Island.
When it is Honolulu II and you can sell your properties for large profit and left the peoples here w/very little of what they called "life", where will you go?
If Ms. Naeole spend every dime on helping the keike, feeding the poor and trying to preserve Hawaiian culture, KUDOS TO HER!!!!!!!!
The contingency funds are a re-election fund only to the extent that the Council Member chooses to make it so and that happens only to the extent that the community allows it to happen.
In a previous life (1973), I lived on Oahu and was impressed that I could register my car, renew my drivers license, and more (almost certainly pay taxes -- but I was renting then).
Being able to get basic services like the above, plus registering to vote, in Puna or Ka`u or Kohala or Hamakua would be more than a little bit helpful.