Editor, (Hau`oli Makahiki Hou!)
One man at a Public Land Development Corporation meeting said it best; “The PLDC is like selling a kidney to pay your hospital bill.”
When Governor Abercrombie came to Kona recently, I told him the PLDC was THE worst idea the legislature has ever come up with. Neil then challenged me – “so what’s your idea to raise money?”
Here is my idea. State Auditor, Marion Higa, has just retired. There is not a single person in the state that doesn’t trust and respect her. We should beg her to come back for a short while. Give her helpers and free reign to go through every department to root out every inefficiency and follow herdirectives to a T before we prostitute our public lands and buildings on the altar of privatization and cronyism.
We don’t want time shares or garbage dumps on our special places being decided by three O’ahu PLDC board members and there’s not much in the PLDC rules to stop such a thing. This kind of anti-democratic legislation is sweeping the country and we should be on guard that it doesn’t get a foothold here. All of our current laws are in place for a very good reason; to protect the public. Beg Marion Higa to take on this special task and DO exactly what she recommends if we are serious about finding money.
The legislature starts in two weeks. If any of us are paying attention to the serious dangers of the Public Land Development Corporation, we should be contacting our legislators to repeal this rotten to the core legislation that is the PLDC and any future, similar legislation, now. Also, complain about bills such as this being changed and passed in a matter of hours, shutting out public comment completely.
If you think your comments will not be taken into consideration by the very legislators who voted for this abomination of a bill, you can donate now to the Repeal the PLDC Defense Fund, (attorney Margery Bronster) at: PPK Legal Fund 4865G Nonou Road, Kapaa, HI 96746 and also on PayPal.
Mahalo!
Shannon Rudolph
December 30th, 2012 at 7:39 pm
Where were these people when this measure was passed in legislature?
December 30th, 2012 at 7:47 pm
Which people? This awful bill passed the House in a record 1 day, the Senate in a record 1 day and our Gubner signed it into law on the 3rd day.Nothing happens in Hawaii that fast, and we know it is because of corporate greed and contributions to our representatives who don’t seem to give a darn about the public…
While we are at it, we need to repeal Act 97 also.
December 30th, 2012 at 10:00 pm
I watched this bill (PLDC) for two years. It went through the usual legislative process of House and Senate committees and versions of the bill, and what came out of it could be a useful tool for reforming the “use” of state lands.
I believe the focus of the PLDC should and will be placed on already developed lands such as harbors, marinas, parks, industrial areas, hotel and commercial developments, etc. This state is unique in having so much of its developed lands under state ownership and control. Instead of individuals and businesses deciding what to do with the lands, controlled of course by city, county, state and federal laws and rules, we have state employees. Our lands are effectively controlled by statutes that are then interpreted by state bureaucrats, who have been known to write and interpret rules and policies that conform with their personal opinions.
The results can best be seen locally at Mauna Kea State Park, the Hilo Industrial Area, and Banyan Drive.
All are dilapidated, inefficient, and failing in their purpose. They are hobbling our economy and costing jobs, recreational opportunities and revenues to the state.
Opponents of the PLDC skip over the parts of the bill that aren’t of interest to them and focus on ” what if’s” that may occur in some worst case scenario. This author also complains of an ” anti-democratic process” and then, seemingly without irony, promotes reaching out to a single individual to be the arbitrer of what’s efficient and whats wasteful in various departments of state government. Not very “democratic”. BTW, this is what Ms Higa did as state auditor, and how much changed on her watch? Are any of the departments she audited now running at 100% efficiency?
PLDC is meant to remove systemic inefficiencies in state land use caused by statutes that are not adaptable. If this author really believes that ” all of our current laws are in place for a very good reason…” then I suggest she read HRS171 a 2nd time.
Finally, no state lands are to be transferred to PLDC without the consent and support of the agencies currently controlling them. I suggest you attend some BLNR meetings and observe the process of that Board passing any action. It may alleviate some of your concerns.
December 30th, 2012 at 10:33 pm
Hugh
Shannon lives in Kona, I live in Puna, it has been almost impossible to keep up with bills like this. This one for example was not only passed at record speed, it was amended two hours before the vote. The vast majority of legislators that voted for it never even read it!
What do you suggest we should have done?
We are at a distinct disadvantage to participate in the legislative process on the outer islands. Act 55, act 97, SR25, and the PLDC further strips us of any meaningful ability to participate at the county level as well by removing county land use and zoning laws for these developers.
An example of what can and was done is SB 755 that was killed/held in part because of outer island resistance…..
We all owe I Aloha Moloka’i and the other activist big time for helping kill SB755….Puna Pono Alliance intends to pay that debt by joining the inter island coalition of activist that has formed to repeal acts 55 and 97, and by working together going forward on many issues.
WHAT IS IAM? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=taSoeu4Id74
I am grateful to people like Shannon and for the people that give their time without expecting to get paid.In many cases paying there own way to travel to Honolulu to hold our representatives accountable while working to protect home rule in Hawaii county and all the outer islands.
This is what we are fighting against.
http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/session2012/bills/SB755_HD3_.htm
SB 755
SECTION 1. The purpose of this Act is to promote economic development by temporarily removing regulatory restrictions to the expeditious construction of certain state and county projects.
The legislature finds that the economic recovery has not been robust. One strategy to promote economic revitalization is by way of capital expenditures on public infrastructure projects. This strategy will generate jobs and infuse dollars into the local economy. Additionally, the public infrastructure constructed will benefit the general public.
Part II temporarily exempts airport structures and improvements from the special management area permit and shoreline setback variance requirements when the structures and improvements are necessary to comply with Federal Aviation Administration regulations.
Part III temporarily authorizes the heads of the department of land and natural resources and department of transportation, with the approval of the governor, to exempt department projects from the special management area permit and shoreline setback variance requirements. This part is repealed on June 30, 2015.
Part IV exempts all work involving submerged lands used for state commercial harbor purposes from any permit and site plan review requirements for lands in the conservation district. This part does not sunset.
Part V temporarily authorizes a more streamlined process for exempting state projects from the environmental review process of chapter 343, Hawaii Revised Statutes. This part is repealed on June 30, 2015.
PART II
SECTION 2. The purpose of this part is to temporarily exempt airport structures and improvements from the special management area permit and shoreline setback variance requirements when the structures and improvements are necessary to comply with Federal Aviation Administration regulations.
SECTION 3. Section 261-4, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by amending subsection (c) to read as follows:
“(c) Structures and improvements. [All] Notwithstanding any law or provision to the contrary, all structures and improvements to land, to be used for airport purposes[, may]:
(1) May be planned, designed, and constructed by the department[.]; and
(2) Shall be exempt from requirements to obtain a special management area minor permit, special management area use permit, or shoreline setback variance; provided that the structures and improvements relating to airports are necessary to comply with Federal Aviation Administration regulations.”
PART III
SECTION 4. The purpose of this part is to temporarily authorize the heads of the department of land and natural resources and department of transportation, with the governor’s approval, to exempt their department projects from the special management area permit and shoreline setback variance requirements.
SECTION 5. Chapter 171, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by adding a new section to part I to be appropriately designated and to read as follows:
“§171- Exemption from special management area permit and shoreline setback variance requirements; authorized. (a) For the purpose of this section, “state project” means a development as defined in section 205A-22 for which:
(1) The contracting agency is the department of land and natural resources; and
(2) The funding includes state or federal funds.
(b) The board, with the approval of the governor, may exempt any state project from the requirements of part II and part III of chapter 205A; provided that any project exempted under this section shall be subject to:
(1) The requirements of chapter 343, unless exempt from the need for an environmental assessment under that chapter; and
(2) Consultation with the office of conservation and coastal lands and office of planning.
(c) The board may delegate the authority granted under this section to the chairperson.”
SECTION 6. Chapter 264, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by adding a new section to part I to be appropriately designated and to read as follows:
“§264- Exemption from special management area permit and shoreline setback variance requirements; authorized. (a) For the purpose of this section, “state project” means a development as defined in section 205A-22 for which:
(1) The contracting agency is the department of transportation; and
(2) The funding includes state or federal funds.
(b) The director of transportation, with the approval of the governor, may exempt any state project from the requirements of part II and part III of chapter 205A; provided that any project exempted under this section shall be subject to:
(1) The requirements of chapter 343, unless exempt from the need for an environmental assessment under that chapter; and
(2) Consultation with the office of conservation and coastal lands and office of planning.”
PART IV
SECTION 7. The purpose of this part is to exempt all work involving submerged lands used for state commercial harbor purposes from any permit and site plan review requirements for lands in the conservation district.
SECTION 8. Chapter 266, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by adding a new section to part I to be appropriately designated and to read as follows:
“§266- Exemption from conservation district permitting and site plan approval requirements. Notwithstanding any law to the contrary, all work involving submerged lands used for state commercial harbor purposes shall be exempt from any permitting and site plan approval requirements established under chapter 183C for lands in a conservation district.”
PART V
SECTION 9. The purpose of this part is to temporarily authorize a more streamlined process for exempting state projects from the environmental review process of chapter 343, Hawaii Revised Statutes. The legislature emphasizes that this part does not statutorily expand the types of state projects that are exempt under the existing provisions of chapter 343 or pertinent implementing rules.
SECTION 10. Chapter 343, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by adding a new section to be appropriately designated and to read as follows:
Ҥ343- Exemption list for state; authorization for establishment by governor. Until June 30, 2015, the governor may establish a list of specific types of state projects that are actions exempt from the need for preparation of an environmental assessment because they will probably have minimal or no significant effects on the environment. When establishing the list of exempted projects, the governor may consult with public officers and employees deemed appropriate by the governor. The governor may include in the list types of state projects already exempt by state agencies and other types of state projects deemed by the governor to qualify for exemption under this section.
The governor may establish the list without necessity of:
(1) Approval by the environmental council;
(2) Compliance with procedures established by the environmental council pursuant to section 343-6(a)(2) or rules of the office of environmental quality control; or
(3) Adoption of rules under chapter 91.
The office, upon request of the governor, shall provide public notice of the list of exemptions and any amendments through the periodic bulletin prescribed in section 343-3.
A list established by the governor and any amendment to it shall take effect on the date specified by the governor, but not earlier that the issuance date of the bulletin by which the office informs the public of the list and amendment.”
SECTION 11. Section 343-2, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by adding two new definitions of “construction” and “state project” to be appropriately inserted and to read as follows:
“”Construction” includes grading, grubbing, stockpiling, excavation, foundation laying, pile driving, demolition, building, reconstruction, rehabilitation, renovation, repairing, maintaining, paving, landscaping, and any other improvement of real property.
“State project” means a construction project for which:
(1) The contracting agency is a state agency; and
(2) The funding includes state or federal funds.”
SECTION 12. A list of exempted state projects established by the governor pursuant to this part shall be repealed on June 30, 2015; provided that the governor may extend the exemption for any projects identified on the list for which construction has commenced but not concluded by June 30, 2015, after the repeal of this part.
PART VI
SECTION 13. The legislature intends that the exemptions authorized under this Act be additional to the current exemptions under chapters 205A and 343, Hawaii Revised Statutes, or pertinent rule.
SECTION 14. It is the intent of this Act not to jeopardize the receipt of any federal aid. If any provision of this Act is found to be in conflict with federal requirements that are a prescribed condition for the allocation of federal funds to the State, those provisions shall be void.
SECTION 15. If any provision of this Act, or the application thereof to any person or circumstance, is held invalid, the invalidity does not affect other provisions or applications of the Act that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Act are severable.
SECTION 16. This Act does not affect rights and duties that matured, penalties that were incurred, and proceedings that were begun before its effective date.
SECTION 17. The repeal of part II, III, or V of this Act shall not affect rights and duties that matured, penalties that were incurred, and proceedings that were begun before the repeal date, including:
(1) The validity of any state project exempted under part II from the special management area permit and shoreline setback variance requirements before the repeal date of that part; and
(2) The validity of any state project exempted under part III from the environmental assessment requirement before the repeal date of that part.
SECTION 18. Statutory material to be repealed is bracketed and stricken. New statutory material is underscored.
SECTION 19. This Act shall take effect on July 1, 2012; provided that:
(1) Parts II, III, and V shall be repealed on June 30, 2015; and
(2) On July 1, 2015, the following sections 261-4 and 343-2, Hawaii Revised Statutes, shall be reenacted in the form in which they existed on the day before the effective date of this Act.
December 30th, 2012 at 11:03 pm
Kanoho Helm
WHAT’S THE PLDC?
December 31st, 2012 at 11:18 am
Thanks Robert.
And to make matters even worse, if you want to file a freedom of information act request (FOIA) so that you can locate documents that might show malfeasance (for example), you have to know exactly which document to request – but there is no list of documents available that the public can browse. So, in effect, the public has no access to the PLDC files. No sunshine in their closet!
December 31st, 2012 at 11:14 pm
Report: State Office of Planning to Become Super-PLDC
By AWalden :: 208 Views :: Land Use, Rail
by Walden
With protesters unleashing their fury on Abercrombie’s Public Lands Development Corporation, political insiders have been scheming. And on December 28, they quietly announced their plan.
Their report, “Leveraging transit-oriented development for economic growth, better living in Hawaii”, proposes to make the State Office of Planning “lead agency (which) should take charge of implementing Transit Oriented Development (TOD) and coordinating with agencies responsible for functions critical to implementation, such as the Hawaii Community Development Authority, (and) Public Land Development Corporation….”
According to the news release from Smart Growth America, “The report’s recommendations come after a series of meetings between state government officials, private sector leaders and non-profit representatives….convened by Governor Abercrombie.”
No community organizations were included. The list of 40-odd participants reads like a who’s-who of State, land owner, and developer interests such as:
Office of Hawaii State Governor Neil Abercrombie
Office of Hawaii House of Representatives Speaker Calvin K.Y. Say
Office of Hawaii State Senate President Shan S. Tsutsui
Office of Hawaii State Senator Donovan Dela Cruz
Office of Councilmember Breene Harimoto, City and County of Honolulu
Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation, City and County of Honolulu
Building Industry Association of Hawaii
Hawaii Business Roundtable
Hawaiian Electric Industries
Kamehameha Schools
Land Use Research Foundation of Hawaii
The Pacific Resource Partnership
Hawaii Institute for Public Affairs
The only environmental organizations included were governmental: EPA Region 9 and the Land Division of the State DLNR.
According to the American Planning Association, Smart Growth “can be a powerful tool for farmland, open space and habitat preservation.” But Abercrombie’s TOD scheme targets Kapolei and the sister islands for “…development throughout the islands, including but not limited to The Bus and rail transit on Oahu, but also the Hele-On Bus on the Big Island and the Maui Bus and Kauai Bus.”
TOD would be authorized anywhere within a half-mile of a bus or rail stop. This includes much of Honolulu’s urban core—but it also hijacks the Smart Growth label to cover Kapolei where Honolulu Rail starts with three stations located in empty farm fields. According to the report: “The University of Hawaii has opened a new West Oahu campus in Kapolei … is envisioned as a university village with a mix of uses….” UHWO is currently surrounded by open space and farmland. Leeward Community College and Honolulu Community College are also targeted for development. Taking aim at K-12 schools statewide, the report takes aim at “Inadequate financing mechanisms to fund new educational facilities or expand the capacity of existing schools in infill locations.” (pg 10)
The plan is to balance TOD on the back of the people. Land cost is the largest factor in the high cost of housing, but instead of contributing land to make affordable housing possible, the report proposes four tax increases which will drive the cost of housing and the costs borne by small businesses even higher:
Community Facilities District (CFD): “Special property tax levied within properties in a specific area for infrastructure improvement and capital facilities construction bonds, and/or ongoing funding for construction and maintenance. Property owners vote for formation. Use of funds must have reasonable direct/indirect relationship to assessed properties. (The) Counties (are) authorized to create CFDs. First CFD in state was formed in 2005 for Waiawa project infrastructure.”
Special Improvement District (SID): “Special bill levied on property owners in a specific area for public improvements and maintenance, including bond issuance/repayment for improvements. Affected property owners vote for formation. Assessment rates can be customized as appropriate. Use of funds must be specific and have a direct benefit to paying property owners. (The) Counties (are) authorized to enact legislation creating SIDs. Examples include Waikiki Business Improvement District Association and the Fort Street Mall Business Improvement District Association.”
Tax Increment Financing District: “Captures property tax increases above the existing baseline in a district at the time of creation; some portion of captured value is returned to ordinary taxing agency. Remainder can be used as payment of bond debt financing for capital improvements, services costs, and development assistance. Formation of ‘Tax Increment Districts’ is permitted under existing legislation, but none have been created due partly to unclear constitutional authority to issue bonds solely funded by tax increment.”
Developer Fees: “Fees collected by local government upon approval of final site plan or issuance of building permits to property developers. Must have a direct nexus between cost of fee and the impact of the development on local or regional needs. Used to construct/maintain relevant public infrastructure and facilities. A variety of impact fee districts have been established in Hawaii, primarily in areas experiencing high levels of new development.”
The Hawaii Admission Act (Sec 5f) mandates use of State lands “for the development of farm and home ownership on as widespread a basis as possible.” Local residents clamor for affordable housing. But the foremost TOD project, the $500M 690 Pohukaina tower planned for Kakaako, was rushed through during the holidays over the objections of legislators and councilmembers. Winning bidder Forest City plans an all-rental development with an underlying land-lease from the State, meaning that residents will live in debt peonage to the State and landlord. The Star-Advertiser December 16, 2012 explains how the State and the developer get theirs:
Under the proposal, Forest City would pay $14 million to the state for leasing the land for 65 years but is asking for exemption from the state’s general excise tax — from construction spending — estimated at $10.6 million.
In the cost-versus-benefit analysis, the state also stands to incur pre-development and permit costs estimated up to $10.2 million; a $6.3 million cost to buy civic space in the tower; and essentially, affordable housing credits valued at $40.4 million that Forest City gains for producing affordable units beyond HCDA requirements.
And after the State and developer get paid, what will the so-called “affordable” rents look like?
“$1,736 for a studio to $2,580 for a three-bedroom unit for those with incomes up to $69,470 for a single person and $99,240 for a family of four.”
—30—
January 3rd, 2013 at 9:29 pm
“So what is your idea to raise money?” I would have told Neil the following:
1. Between 1959 and 1995, how many people were prosecuted for state tax crimes? Answer: None Because we had zero tax crime investigators. What do you think the parking situation would look like in downtown Honolulu if everyone knew no one was enforcing the parking laws? Between 1996 and 2004, I prosecuted lawyers, doctors, teachers
, brokers, longshoremen, Truckers, bus drivers, and many corporations and their executives for state tax crimes using just one criminal tax investigator. Revenues went up because people realized the game had changed. Since August of 2012, we now have zero criminal tax crime investigators. Good luck with that. Sounds like PLDC is the plan.
2. In 2008 There were 20 welfare fraud investigators statewide with three on the Big Island. With caseloads exploding since our Great Recession
the. number of welfare fraud investigators has been reduced to 11 statewide with 1 on the Big Island (but he is very good at his job).But do not worry PLDC will make money. Sounds like a plan.
January 5th, 2013 at 1:36 pm
Sounds like legislators got the message and are falling over each other to write repeal PLDC bills. While no big fan of HFP I wonder if this takes the worst parts of the PLDC out of the hands of legislators and moves it into the administration. Some heavy hitters here..
Report: State Office of Planning to Become Super-PLDC
http://www.hawaiifreepress.com/ArticlesMain/tabid/56/articleType/ArticleView/articleId/8543/Report-State-Office-of-Planning-to-Become-SuperPLDC.aspx