Questions for Water Use and Development Plan
1. objectives
* What are the top one to six "objectives" you would like to see
accomplished with this plan? Some examples could be to: maximize
availability, maximize resource protection, maximize reliability,
maximize quality, minimize costs, maximize efficiency, maximize
stream flows, you don't need to stick to any of these possibilities,
and they need not be stated as maximize or minimize. For instance,
perhaps one objective would be to set a reasonable pace of resource
use or to develop an implementable capital plan that will bring the
system to standards, or to obtain adequate funding for all other
objectives. Or others. Please think for a minute and write down
YOUR top few objectives. We will give you a chance to edit these
after the discussion, but we want to collect them. Strictly
Anonymous.
2. conformance with community plans and related land-use issues
* where are the key "disconnects" between water and land use policies?
* In some cases within one community plan district, stated policies
indicate one thing, but changes to designation on the map would
indicate another. Should the wudp water estimates be based upon
the map, map as modified by policy statements forecasts prepared for
the CP plan
a combination of the three options above
DWS more recent forecasts
known project approvals
percent build-out assumption
other system
* should every parcel be entitled to a 5/8" meter? if so, what
set asides, in terms of resource, system and financial, would be
appropriate to cover that presumed property right? should this
entitlement be "on-demand" or upon system adequacy only? if that
right is desired, should people pay a set-aside fee for the
equivalent of a 5/8" meter per lot upon subdivision?
* at what point in a permit approval should water be considered
"committed"? At this time, dws does not consider that any guarantee
of water exists until the meter has been approved or the
reservation for meter accepted.
* In modeled wellhead protection areas, should the most important
zones of contribution be subject to restrictions on specific
(example, industrial) uses, or to density restrictions?
3. financial issues, pricing policies and implications
* Should new development pay to buy in an equivalent share of
existing systems or (i.e., should they "buy in" to the existing system)
...or since new system capacity is more expensive, should new
developments cover the full cost of new system infrastructure
needed to cover their new demands?.
* should the county have all one rate or should rates reflect the
cost of service in different areas?
* should water rates reflect customer uses / use classes, meter
sizes, location on the island or any other breakdowns?
* pretend that 100% reliability was available 100% of water you want,
whenever you want it regardless of weather...but at $10 per kgal, vs.
75% at 5$/kgal (up to 25% restrictions) vs. 50% (up to 50% restrictions
...or lesser restrictions up to 50% of the time...) at $1.50 per kgal.
what would you choose?
* should water pricing be designed to encourage conservation, i.e.
should there be progressively higher rates for higher use?
* should we retain alternate pricing structures for ag? Should ag
rates also be tiered in some way? If so, how?
* should a "life-line" amount of water remain quite inexpensive? This
would mean that higher users may pay even more.
* should water rate and fee structures be designed to allow for revenue
to cover any other specific community values or priorities? if so,
which ones?
* charter requires dws to be fiscally independent and financially
sound... yet some people have expressed that imposing system
improvements to protect structures for small businesses or sups
is too hard on the "little guy". suggest a way to ensure that
people are protected without over-burdening a small business or
a single agency to pay for all of it?
* Requirements for small v. big development - are they equitable?
If not, why not?
4. resource issues and implications
* what do you think the role of bws/dws is &/or should be in
resource protection?
* does dws , as county agency, have responsibilities for resource
protection beyond dws-owned infrastructure? (e.g. should we try to
protect all county aquifers, surface waters and etc. or just pumps,
pipes, etc. for which we hold deed)
* should development be targeted to areas away from key aquifers,
to keep them pristine?
* how do you think resource issues are handled now? Is it working?
Why or why not? How could it work better?
* how should "available water" be determined? infrastructure-based,
resource-based, pace-of-commitment of new resources, other? is all
technologically feasibly deliverable water fair game as "available"
at any time?
* should new developments be able to use conservation offsets to
meet source development requirements? i.e. install conservation
measures in pre-existing developments to obtain right to water use?
if so, what safety factors should be required?
* should conservation be used to restore habitat only, or to allow
for additional development? whichever way you choose, how would
you insure that it was implemented that way?
* should the wudp include specific recommendations for stream flow
issues?
*
* several committee members have suggested that the wudp incorporate
the concept of the mauka to makai connection. how would the committee
suggest this best be handled in the planning process & document?
* should ahupuaa management be systematized ? right now several agencies
look at different aspect of water. Is there a need for a more coordinated
joint review process? if so, how would you suggest it be structured?
* the wudp is required to comment upon resource impacts. should the
wudp and dws in general comment on all water resource issues including
wetlands, stream, surface, near-shore impacts?
* the issue is often raised that cumulative impacts are not adequately
addressed, neither during permit review, nor in ongoing monitoring programs.
does the committee agree/disagree, and how could this be improved?
* once permits are issued, there has traditionally been very little chance
that they be withdrawn or altered even in the event of certain adverse
effects occurring ....(salinification, algae blooms, etc.)....should
this be changed, and if so how?, and what sorts of permits can realistically
be subject to such on-going evaluation?
* what criteria do you think dws should consider when commenting on permit
reviews?
* what criteria would you recommend for determining water allocations?
* what criteria would you recommend for determining total amount of water
to be allocated over the next 20 yrs?
* the comment has been made that... "compiling environmental reports and
ensuring that monitoring is done in a consistent, comparable manner should
be the responsibility of a central agency at the county level. None of the
state agencies address this adequately for neighbor islands."...does the
committee agree or disagree, and if so, what does the committee recommend
that we do about it? how would adequate staffing & funding be obtained?
* are water recharge, restoring stream flow, and wetland protection given
appropriate priority under the current review process as vs. drainage
management? the comment has been made that they aren't, and that, though
it is easier to continue channelizing streams and making storm drains for
development. we need to deal with discharge into the ocean and other
environmental impacts in the future. does the committee agree, and if
so, what does the committee suggest be done to improve this?
* Should there be any sort of rebate program for either water or sewer
bills or both - either for certain efficiency measures, or for demonstrating
certain efficiency standards - and if so, how would you think it should work?
* should water users be required to report to the county? should the state/
county impose penalties for failure to report? if the county took this on
in addition to the state - what additional manpower would we need, admin
costs, etc.?
5. administrative / legislative context ; system design / charter set-up,
etc.
* how should we "reserve" or acknowledge water for hawaiian homelands?
hhl has over 700 acres in lahaina, but has so far not submitted any
proposals for this land for the next 20 years.
* for that matter, should hawaiian water rights be addressed beyond what
is provided for in the state water code? if so, how would that best be
accomplished?
* Should water follow land? In other words, should land use decision
bodies dictate development, and water utilities & agencies simply
provide water at the dictated pace? Or....
* Should land follow water & other resources? should land use decision
bodies be required to weigh water availability, as well as possibly the
status of other resources in making land use decisions?
* Should there be a county water resource agency? If so, should that
agency be the DWS? Is that agency already the DWS in the committee's
opinion?
* should each region have an on-going water advisory committee, or
only those areas where there is no representative on the board? If
the former, how often should they meet? Bimonthly while wudp update
for the region is in progress, and annually in-between, or?
* should the county water dept be under the county, semi-autonomous
or entirely privatized? Why?
* if an allocation policy were developed - how should implementation
and enforcement be structured? (roles of DWS, Plng Dept, Plng
Commission, Council, etc.)
6. infrastructure issues
* should the water system be sized according to safety standards?
* who should be responsible for fire protection?
* should the county general funds be used to help bringing the
system up to standards in certain areas?
* should there be community improvement districts? if so, once
an area is up to standard, should first and second homes in the
surrounding regions be able to be built without conformance to
standards?
* is it adequate to provide sprinklers in lieu of system improvements?
or are both important?
* where should the line be drawn as to who needs to make improvements
- are "dwelling" vs. non-dwelling defined adequately in the rules?
* at what point should improvements be enforced, upon community plan
amendment, zoning, subdivision, building, change in use?
* should improvements be made to bring an entire property up to
standards, or just the actuve building permit?
7. public process & other issues
* what questions have been raised, or should be raised, that need
broader public discussion in the context of the wudp process?
* what sort of outreach & how much of it do you think should be
done with this plan? with the public? with other agencies? internally?
* what do you see as the most important questions to have answered
by the public? by the plan?
8. your personal "bottom line"...
* Congratulations !! Or should we say condolences ? You have just
been appointed king of Maui, and received sole decision making
authority over the last remaining 10 million gallons of new, fresh water.
About half of this 10 MG comes from groundwater sources, and about half
comes from surface water sources. You have the following options for
distributing that water. next to each of these categories, write down
the amount of the 10 MG you would allocate to that use.
ag agricultural uses
eco aquatic/ecosystem/stream restoration
comm commercial uses
gov government uses
(including military, schools, offices, c- centers. etc., but not parks for this ex.)
green greenway, park, irrig open space
(remember, green does not necessarily always mean irrigated)
hhl Hawaiian Home Lands
hot/mot hotel/motel uses
(including time-share, condo rental, b&b, etc.)
ind industrial uses
(including refinery, gas distribution, airport, other intensive uses)
mf multi-family residential
sf single family residential
trad hi traditional Hawaiian uses (other than HHL)
