WAI-31 Reso 24-161 RESOLUTION 24-161, URGING THE ADMINISTRATION TO PRIORITIZE THE INCREASED PRODUCTION AND EXPANSION OF THE DISTRIBUTION OF RECYCLED R-1 WATER TO PRESERVE POTABLE WATER FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF HOUSING IN THE COUNTY OF MAUI (WAI-31)
Aloha Chair Cook, Vice-Chair Sugimura, and Council Committee members,
Kaanapali Land supports the idea of expanding the R1 reclaimed water distribution system at the Lahaina WWTP. The current County's (DEM-WWRD) plan to develop pump R1 water to various elevation and storage makes logical sense. We stand ready to collaborate on the distribution system planning and program management with specific resources and targets for agriculture and golf course as well as new housing developments (e.g., Puukolii Village Mauka where it reclaimed water could help to offset potable domestic uses).
Aloha and Mahalo,
Jeff Rebugio, Kaanapali Land
We all recognize that water is scarce, that we are in a drought, and that we need to keep wastewater out of the injection wells. and free up more potable water. This proposal to prioritize the increased production and expansion of the distriutuin of recycled R-1 water for the construction of housing in Maui is extremely vague . What housing does it intend to service?Is it for luxury developments or affordable housing or all housing? Although water is a public trust, oftentimes people with money and power get water like the maor resorts in Wailea and West Maui. What is the cost of providing R-1 including infrastructure? Without providing more essential information, the public should be wary about supporting it. We should also focus on water restriction measures.
Aloha Council Members;
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed legislation concerning the use and expansion of R-1 water. While I appreciate the intent behind the legislation, it lacks practical details on how the proposed solutions will be implemented. The recognition of water scarcity is important, but the proposed steps fail to adequately address the realities of cost, infrastructure needs, and community engagement.
First, while the legislation promotes expanding R-1 water production and distribution, the infrastructure to support this initiative is not in place. Expanding wastewater treatment facilities, pipes, and pumps would require tens of millions of dollars and a timeframe of 3 to 5 years. Taxpayers will bear the burden of these costs, and the legislation does not specify how this financial strain will be managed. Additionally, the community must be meaningfully involved in these decisions, which this legislation does not adequately address.
Further, connecting water supply directly to housing development oversimplifies the issue. Prioritizing water for rebuilding efforts, while necessary, restricts new housing developments, and the proposed timelines for new water sources will not meet urgent needs. The legislation also assumes that public acceptance of recycled water is a given, but without a robust public engagement plan, this could face significant resistance.
Instead of pursuing this legislation as it stands, I suggest the Council focus on immediate solutions that could provide relief to our water issues without requiring years of investment:
1. **Rainwater Harvesting**: Promote the installation of rainwater catchment systems for homes and businesses to collect non-potable water.
2. **Water Conservation Programs**: Educate the community on water-saving techniques, including leak repairs and water-efficient landscaping.
3. **Immediate Infrastructure Improvements**: Fund the upgrading of existing water systems to reduce waste and improve efficiency.
In conclusion, while the goal of increasing R-1 water use is positive, this legislation lacks the clear plans, realistic timelines, and public support necessary for its success. I urge the Council to reconsider this proposal and focus on more immediate and actionable solutions that can benefit the community today.
Aloha Chair Cook, Vice-Chair Sugimura, and Council Committee members,
Kaanapali Land supports the idea of expanding the R1 reclaimed water distribution system at the Lahaina WWTP. The current County's (DEM-WWRD) plan to develop pump R1 water to various elevation and storage makes logical sense. We stand ready to collaborate on the distribution system planning and program management with specific resources and targets for agriculture and golf course as well as new housing developments (e.g., Puukolii Village Mauka where it reclaimed water could help to offset potable domestic uses).
Aloha and Mahalo,
Jeff Rebugio, Kaanapali Land
We all recognize that water is scarce, that we are in a drought, and that we need to keep wastewater out of the injection wells. and free up more potable water. This proposal to prioritize the increased production and expansion of the distriutuin of recycled R-1 water for the construction of housing in Maui is extremely vague . What housing does it intend to service?Is it for luxury developments or affordable housing or all housing? Although water is a public trust, oftentimes people with money and power get water like the maor resorts in Wailea and West Maui. What is the cost of providing R-1 including infrastructure? Without providing more essential information, the public should be wary about supporting it. We should also focus on water restriction measures.
Aloha Council Members;
I am writing to express my opposition to the proposed legislation concerning the use and expansion of R-1 water. While I appreciate the intent behind the legislation, it lacks practical details on how the proposed solutions will be implemented. The recognition of water scarcity is important, but the proposed steps fail to adequately address the realities of cost, infrastructure needs, and community engagement.
First, while the legislation promotes expanding R-1 water production and distribution, the infrastructure to support this initiative is not in place. Expanding wastewater treatment facilities, pipes, and pumps would require tens of millions of dollars and a timeframe of 3 to 5 years. Taxpayers will bear the burden of these costs, and the legislation does not specify how this financial strain will be managed. Additionally, the community must be meaningfully involved in these decisions, which this legislation does not adequately address.
Further, connecting water supply directly to housing development oversimplifies the issue. Prioritizing water for rebuilding efforts, while necessary, restricts new housing developments, and the proposed timelines for new water sources will not meet urgent needs. The legislation also assumes that public acceptance of recycled water is a given, but without a robust public engagement plan, this could face significant resistance.
Instead of pursuing this legislation as it stands, I suggest the Council focus on immediate solutions that could provide relief to our water issues without requiring years of investment:
1. **Rainwater Harvesting**: Promote the installation of rainwater catchment systems for homes and businesses to collect non-potable water.
2. **Water Conservation Programs**: Educate the community on water-saving techniques, including leak repairs and water-efficient landscaping.
3. **Immediate Infrastructure Improvements**: Fund the upgrading of existing water systems to reduce waste and improve efficiency.
In conclusion, while the goal of increasing R-1 water use is positive, this legislation lacks the clear plans, realistic timelines, and public support necessary for its success. I urge the Council to reconsider this proposal and focus on more immediate and actionable solutions that can benefit the community today.
Edward Codelia