COM 0927.020 2004-2006 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

As the County and State continue to look at planning and land use, this resolution rather than providing much needed clarity and consistency, appears to support erosion of property rights through poor definition thereby increasing the level of uncertainty for land development, and effectively transferring rights to use of property from the property owner through the political process, to the general public. The issue at hand is related specifically to resource distribution. An excerpt from an article titled "Growth Management in Florida, Lessons for the National Economy" written in 1990 which reviewed Florida's Growth Management Act, speaks directly to this and states, "When resources are allocated through the private sector of the economy, distributional issues are secondary because all parties have an incentive to structure trades so that everyone gains. Otherwise the trade would not take place. When resources are allocated through the public sector, distributional issues are important because, unless unanimous consent is required, there is always the possibility that some individuals will impose costs on other non- consenting individuals through the political process." In other words, by transferring property rights from property owners to the public domain, property owners are subjected to political decision making and "as a result, rights that were at one time more clearly defined become more poorly defined, and the problem of common ownership arises." This is important to the current discussion as one considers other desired outcomes of the CDP including and not limited to, affordable housing. An unintended consequence for consideration is whether this resolution may encourage existing property owners to keep develop-able land scarce thereby maintaining (and exacerbating) high property values that discourage development and have a negative impact on affordable housing (both rental and for purchase). One should also consider unintended consequences and negative impact that may result from deferring such decision- making exclusively to Kona. For example, would this moratorium on rezoning encourage developers to look at areas outside North and South Kona, thereby increasing problems and encouraging sprawl into other regions of the island where CDPs are not expected for several months and/or years after Kona's CDP Steering Committee has made its recommendations? In the past, you have heard me quote Thomas Jefferson who said that there are times when "Delay is preferable to error." I suggest that in this case, postponing Council action on rezoning applications would in fad be the "error." The delay which would be preferable to this error, is for Resolution 381-06 to be held in its present form and for a comprehensive review to be conducted of both the stimulus (i.e. growth management), and response (i.e. the tools available that have allowed other jurisdictions to successfully manage growth and its related issues). The Hawaii Leeward Planning Conference welcomes the opportunity to partner with the Council and others to identify tools for consideration such as, including and not limited to, planning techniques and financing mechanisms. Thank you for the opportunity to express our views on this matter. Respectfully submitted, ytA,t 2.4w 4A__ JaUcquii L. Hoover, President Hawaii Leeward Planning Conference Jacqui L. Hoover Page 2 6/19/2006 C:\DOCUME-1\KEOFF\LOCALS-1\Temp\060620 Testimony Rose 381-06 E-mail.doc