[ OUR OPINION ]
VISION teams enable people to steer government leaders toward selected goals and, as such, are valuable tools for building community consensus. The teams should be retained, but should be folded into the neighborhood board system to provide accountability for tax dollars and to eliminate both duplicative efforts and conflicting aims. Combine vision teams,
neighborhood boards
THE ISSUE The duplication of their efforts and the competition for scarce city funds often put the groups in conflict.
The 19 vision teams, established by Mayor Harris four years ago as a way to involve more people in setting priorities for city projects, operate with a small number of guidelines and are not subject to open-meeting laws. Members are not elected, as are those of neighborhood boards, and are generally people who show up for meetings. This leaves the teams vulnerable to special-interest groups who may easily control decision-making by sheer numbers.
Teams have no standard procedures for conducting business. Meeting schedules and posting of agendas and minutes are inconsistent, which makes involvement by other members of the public difficult. With so much money at stake -- as much as $38 million annually in past years -- vision teams should be a process that is open to as many as want to participate. Its members should be held accountable for their actions, which is not the case at present.
Neighborhood boards, which must adhere to defined procedures and laws, often find themselves in conflict and in competition with vision teams. Vision teams say their purpose is long term, while neighborhood boards work on short-term problems. However, the boards were set up in 1972 to increase community involvement and interaction with government officials. Its purpose is to make known its desires in basic services, economic development and land-use issues. Like vision teams, boards advise government leaders about their priorities for capitol improvement projects.
Because the teams' functions are already part of the boards' mandate, there is no reason why the teams should not be combined with the boards. Team members need not be board members, although many board members are also on the teams and visa versa. Teams could be set up as a standing committee so that their work may be focused on projects.
The merger would end the two groups' competition for city attention and money. Vision teams had been allocated $2 million each, while boards were given half that amount, a sore point for the boards. The city's fiscal crisis may necessitate cutting funds for both groups next year and it makes sense that with fewer dollars available the organizations pool their resources and their undertakings.
BACK TO TOP
Published by Oahu Publications Inc., a subsidiary of Black Press.Don Kendall, Publisher
Frank Bridgewater, Editor 529-4791; fbridgewater@starbulletin.com
Michael Rovner, Assistant Editor 529-4768; mrovner@starbulletin.com
Lucy Young-Oda, Assistant Editor 529-4762; lyoungoda@starbulletin.comMary Poole, Editorial Page Editor, 529-4790; mpoole@starbulletin.com
The Honolulu Star-Bulletin (USPS 249460) is published daily by
John Flanagan, Contributing Editor 294-3533; jflanagan@starbulletin.com
Oahu Publications at 500 Ala Moana Blvd., Suite 7-500, Honolulu, Hawaii 96813.
Periodicals postage paid at Honolulu, Hawaii. Postmaster: Send address changes to
Star-Bulletin, P.O. Box 3080, Honolulu, Hawaii 96802.
