Two committees in Hawaii’s Legislature were inundated Wednesday by divergent views on a bid by the Office of Hawaiian Affairs to largely reverse a 2006 state law prohibiting residential development in Kakaako Makai.
The Senate committees heard a bill that would allow OHA to develop housing on 31 acres of land it owns in the area, and roughly double the building height and density on three of its nine parcels as part of a conceptual plan OHA has dubbed
Hakuone.
The hearing on Senate Bill 736 was the first opportunity this year for OHA to publicly urge lawmakers to make a change the agency claims is necessary to increase the value of land OHA leaders were swindled into accepting a decade ago from state administrators in lieu of
$200 million the state owed OHA for unpaid ceded land revenue.
Robbie Cabral, a consultant working for OHA, told members of the Committee on Hawaiian Affairs and the Committee on Water and Land that a new appraisal places the value at “way under” $100 million.
Through
SB 736, OHA also is seeking $65 million to pay for infrastructure improvements including bulkhead retaining walls and revetments on part of its land fronting Kewalo Harbor that OHA claims state officials should have disclosed in 2012 as being in need of repair.
Cabral and other OHA representatives said that an appraisal the agency commissioned in 2012, before
accepting the state’s settlement offer, was rushed and didn’t have critical information including soil conditions and deferred maintenance.
“When they gave the land to OHA, many of us knew that it wasn’t a good deal,” Mahealani Cypher, board member of the Ko‘olau Foundation, said at
Wednesday’s hearing. “They were pushed against a rock and a hard place. They had no choice. They were told this is it.”
Sen. Angus McKelvey (D, West Maui-Maalaea-South Maui) asked representatives of OHA, including Casey Brown, the agency’s chief operating officer, if they maintain that the state materially breached the settlement agreement and whether renegotiation should happen.
Cabral responded that OHA wants to keep the land and exhaust all avenues available under the law.
Another argument OHA made at Wednesday’s hearing is that the Legislature in 2012, while the settlement deal was pending approval by lawmakers, indicated residential use would be forthcoming later. The agency has pointed to a few 2012 legislative committee reports that noted such a change could be possible later and would increase the value of OHA’s land.
Sen. Les Ihara (D, Palolo-Kaimuki-Moiliili) pushed back against this claim, noting that the will of the Legislature is determined by more than a few committees in one chamber of
Hawaii’s bicameral Legislature. “Am I missing something?” he asked OHA representatives.
Some SB 736 supporters said OHA should get what it seeks because it would help the agency, which exists to improve conditions for Native Hawaiians through programs, while also benefiting the general public by producing more housing amid a shortage.
Opponents of the bill told committee members that the Legislature made a good decision in 2006 to ban housing in the area, which spans about 200 acres between Kewalo Harbor and Honolulu Harbor, as a way to preserve public use of public land.
At the time, the Hawaii Community Development Authority, a state agency that previously owned much of the man-made
Kakaako peninsula created partly using residue from incinerated refuse, was pursuing plans to turn 36.5 acres of gritty property including warehouses, base yards and ship repair facilities into more of a public gathering place with housing, retail and recreation.
HCDA selected a proposal from local development firm Alexander &Baldwin Inc. via competitive bidding. A&B’s plan included three condominium towers clustered on one inland lot, a hula amphitheater, restaurants, stores, farmers market, public waterfront promenade and pedestrian bridge spanning the Kewalo Harbor
channel.
After public opposition erupted over the housing component, which A&B reduced by one tower to
placate detractors, the Legislature passed a law to overrule HCDA’s zoning power and block the
project.
Only one lawmaker voted against the residential ban, which also applies to land owned by the city, HCDA and Kamehameha Schools.
“We want to make sure that the public maintains its right to the waterways,” Wayne Takamine, chair of the Kakaako Makai Community Planning Advisory Council, told committee members Wednesday.
The two Senate committees received 87 written comments opposing SB 736 and 68 written comments in support. A decision on whether to advance the bill was deferred to give the committees more time to discuss issues at a continuation of the hearing scheduled for 1 p.m. Feb. 16.
