Residents along the public streets surrounding Kalihi Valley Homes have devoted years of effort into calling for, and modeling, a publicly regulated Restricted Parking Zone (RPZ) that grants them exclusive parking privileges close to their residences. They and advocates have tried repeatedly, but unsuccessfully, over several years to get a bill passed to establish the Kalihi RPZ permanently.
Meanwhile, at no cost to these residents, they’ve enjoyed a “pilot” program that restricts evening parking along area streets to those with residential permits over past six years. Frankly, that’s an over-long period of time to grant free, privileged parking access to public streets.
This year, a bill was again introduced to make permanent an RPZ on streets adjacent to the public housing project. Bill 20 received its ninth City Council hearing on Wednesday, but concerns over fairness, delegation of authority and cost to taxpayers again emerged — and Bill 20 was sent back to committee.
The Council should kill this bill — and end the misguided pilot RPZ. No adjustments to Bill 20 can make it fair or proper. It is bad policy and would be bad precedent to set up a city-regulated, fee-generating Restricted Parking Zone in this area, when parking is merely a sideshow to residents’ actual complaints.
Testimony in support of the bill reveals this essential flaw: “Bill 20 will enable law enforcement officers patrolling our streets to remove, on their own, potential threats to public safety without first receiving calls to 911 … removing the potential for retaliation from repeated offenders who choose to break the law by illegally parking, loitering, littering, abusing alcohol, using illegal substances, vandalizing, and disturbing the peace,” wrote resident Kevin Oshiro.
RPZs may have their place in Honolulu’s transportation planning. But in this case, the RPZ would exist largely to control and limit access to public streets, rather than to fairly ensure residents have adequate parking.
If illegal parking, littering or vandalism are concerns, laws and remedies exist to address them. Criminal behavior should be answered with police enforcement and criminal prosecution — not by shutting neighbors out of parking spots with a city-subsidized permit program.
There are other reasons to be dubious of this bill’s value. Calls to create additional RPZs can be expected, and communities including Kaimuki, Palolo Valley, Liliha, McCully-Moiliili and Haiku have expressed interest in the past. That would only spread private use of public spaces, favoring those who can afford it.
Then there’s the cost and toll on city Department of Transportation Services (DTS) resources. During fiscal year 2023, DTS estimated costs to administer the Kalihi Valley RPZ at more than $124,000, including an estimated 2,080 hours of staff time.
If passed, Bill 20 would cost DTS an estimated $194,500 annually, with 700 permits issued. That’s about $278 per permit for this so-far free RPZ. DTS has recommended annual permits cost at least $100.
Finally, there’s a troubling lack of consensus on key provisions in Bill 20’s Committee Draft 2, as revealed by changes offered Wednesday on the Council floor. Most concerning: While the bill delegates authority to create, expand or dissolve an RPZ to DTS, agency Director Roger Morton recommended against this at the hearing. In doing so, he agreed with a bill opponent who called giving that power to DTS an open invitation to “corruption.“
Bill 20 is simply off the mark. By adding guaranteed street parking, in addition to the parking already included on home lots, it encourages residents to own additional vehicles. This undercuts city efforts to encourage use of alternative transportation, and deprives nearby residents of access to simply park their cars, as needed. The City Council should reject this bill.
