State House Representatives faced a crowded Capitol room 329 on Valentine's Day, Sat., Feb. 14, for hearings on their version of the OHA past due revenue payments bill. The Senate heard testimony on its version the day before. – Photo: Blaine Fergerstrom

OHA past due revenue payments bills heard

By Lisa Asato / Ka Wai Ola Loa

A month into the legislative session, the landscape of the Senate bill that would resolve three decades of back payments due to OHA by the state through land transfers would expand to include culturally significant sites such as Mauna Kea, all the state-owned fishponds, Kahana Valley and other parcels, under a proposal by Sen. Clayton Hee.

Senate Bill 995 would also remove the Banyan Drive parcel in Hilo and a 2-acre parcel in Kaka'ako Makai from the proposed $200 million settlement agreement. As originally written, the agreement would have occurred over two phases, with $127.2 million in real estate transferred to OHA in the first phase – via the Banyan Drive parcel and Kaka'ako Makai on O'ahu – with the remaining balance transferred in 2010 through parcels that would be identified in the future.

OHA Vice-Chair Walter Meheula Heen testified in favor of the bill before House Representatives. – Photo: Blaine Fergerstrom

The House Hawaiian Affairs Committee also removed the Banyan Drive parcel from its version of the bill, HB 901, on Feb. 18, following a week of hearings on the bill statewide that were for the most part supportive of the bill, but in Hilo drew opposition to the parcel.

The proposed settlement agreement would resolve constitutionally mandated income and proceeds the state owes OHA for the 30-year period from Nov. 7, 1978, to July 1, 2008. The state Constitution names Native Hawaiians as a beneficiary of the Public Land Trust and mandates that OHA receive and manage a pro rata share of the income and proceeds from the trust on behalf of Native Hawaiians.

Sen. Clayton Hee, the chairman of the Water, Land, Agriculture and Hawaiian Affairs Committee, proposed the new parcels at a Feb. 13 hearing, saying he wanted to "broaden the discussion" and that the ideas for the properties came from beneficiaries. "It's clear to me based on the comments received that those who had concerns about the OHA (settlement agreement) were concerned about the revenue-generating complexion of the package and the lack of cultural and historical areas that are meaningful to Hawaiians," he said. "That's the basis, for example, of Mauna Kea."

OHA Land Hale Director Jonathan Scheuer and Administrator Clyde Namu'o answered questions posed by Reps. Mele Carroll, Maile Shimabukuro and Gene Ward. – Photo: Blaine Fergerstrom

The proposed additions are: 320,000 acres of the Mauna Kea Scientific Reserve, the adjacent Natural Area Reserve, including Lake Waiau and the adze quarry, Kahana Valley, Pier 60, Sand Island Marina, the accreted peninsula in Ke'ehi Lagoon bordered by Kalihi and Moanalua streams, and He'eia State Park.

Leimomi Khan, president of the Association of the Hawaiian Civic Clubs, said she liked the idea of a package that was balanced with cultural and revenue-generating properties. "Really, we need money to take care of these properties," she said, but she was concerned that the added properties were coming after a House committee held hearings statewide on the original bill – and after OHA had been criticized last year for not conducting public hearings before the proposal was made public. "I think there's going to be similar critics," she said.

OHA Trustee Walter Heen told the Senate committee he was concerned that additional funds would also be needed for development, restoration and liability issues for the added properties.

James Kon, testifying before legislators "for the first time in [his] life," said that 30 years was far too long to go without settling your past due obligations. – Photo: Blaine Fergerstrom

"You understand the bill doesn't require you to fix the fishponds," Sen. Hee asked the trustee. "Are you opposed to fishponds?"

"No, not opposed to fishponds," Heen replied. "What we're saying is, 'Give us the resources to take care of them.' "

Hawaiian Affairs Committee Chairwoman Mele Carroll said testifiers in Maui, Moloka'i, Kona and Kaua'i were supportive of the bill, but people in Hilo packed the hearing. And while many attendees addressed issues not relevant to the bill, "What I did hear were concerns over the Hilo property," she said, describing the concerns as OHA's vision to put senior housing in a tsunami zone, whether title to those lands could be transferred under the current dispute over ceded lands sales and transfers, and a lack of understanding of OHA's criteria for choosing that parcel.

"I felt compelled to take the Hilo property out of the bill with the notion that OHA … would do due diligence in addressing all the concerns that were raised regarding this property and looking at it in the best interest of the community and OHA's goals – is it truly the best choice? I wanted to give OHA that opportunity to work on it by 2010, in the second phase," said Carroll, who represents East Maui, Moloka'i, Lāna'i and Kaho'olawe. The committee also inserted language clarifying that any parcels transferred to OHA would later be transferred to a Hawaiian governing entity, as is stated under law for Kaho'olawe, Carroll said.

State House Reps. Mele Carroll, Maile Shimabukuro, Gene Ward and Karen Awana heard testimony mostly in support of passing the bill out of committee. – Photo: Blaine Fergerstrom

In a presentation before the committee on Saturday, OHA Land Management Director Jonathan Likeke Scheuer said OHA spends about $1.3 million annually to manage its current culturally valuable properties, Wao Kele o Puna on Hawai'i and Waimea Valley on O'ahu. He said the proposed Banyan Drive and Kaka'ako Makai parcels were chosen because they produced income – and together would immediately generate an additional $1.8 million to OHA through leases. "Clearly if OHA continues to take only cultural lands, which don't produce revenue, and it doesn't take potentially revenue-producing lands, it won't have the resources to protect the very cultural values that it purchased the lands for," he told the audience.

"However, because this is a two-phase process … Trustees will have the opportunity to get input from communities into what kinds of properties could be proposed for transfer to OHA in phase two of the bill in 2010," he said.

He also said the bill reflects input from the community last year, through forums including 45 community meetings held statewide. "In this year's settlement agreement … there is no waiver of future claims. Future revenue due to the Office of Hawaiian Affairs is not addressed," he said. And OHA has the right to do due diligence and reject the property, he said.

Bumpy Kanahele and Mililani Trask opposed the bill, questioning OHA's competency in management. "I like the sound of getting these lands back – Mauna Kea, all the issues been on the table for a long time," Kanahele told the Senate committee. "How can we trust its going to be taken care of or done right?"

Others, like James Kon and Bo Kahui said 30 years was too long to wait for a resolution. "Thirty years ago I was 51 years old," Kon said. "Today I'm 81 years old. I wish and I hope … that my grandchildren and all their grandchildren will be able to benefit from this bill."