Laserfiche WebLink
• Include incentives to arovide affordable housing. Consistent with <br /> recent federal cases and the practices in many other jurisdictions, <br /> affordable housing exaction requirements should also be accompanied by <br /> incentives for land owners and developers. <br /> <br /> V. CONCLUSION <br /> LURF is opposed to a Council reconsideration and override of the <br /> Mayor Kim's veto of Bill 156, for the following reasons: <br /> 1) The Council and County have failed to first prepare the <br /> constitutionally required unbiased and detailed studies to justify <br /> imposing affordable housing exactions or linkage fees; <br /> 2) It is unconstitutional for the Commission to impose requirements on <br /> industrial developments to build or fund affordable housing, unless <br /> the Council and County first satisfies both the Essential Nexus Test <br /> and the Rough Proportional Nexus test to justify imposing <br /> workforce or affordable housing exactions or linkage fees; and <br /> 3) The intent of Bill 156, to impose workforce or affordable housing <br /> conditions on light industrial lands, is counter intuitive and would <br /> only discourage investments in industrial park developments, and is <br /> likely to result in very little job creation and minimal affordable <br /> housing. <br /> We appreciate the opportunity to express our position on this matter. <br /> Cc: Corporation Counsel, County of Hawaii <br /> j:\counties\county of Hawaii\070820 Hawaii Bill No. 156 affordable housing for industrial veto override.doc <br /> <br />