Laserfiche WebLink
Ms. Self commented that if you're an easement holder, the landowner still owns the land. The problem <br />is as an easement holder you only have one small interest whereas the property owner has all these <br />rights. <br />Mr. Sensenig replied that Mr. Ha can sell as many property rights as he wants but you can ruin the value <br />of the property significantly. You don't want to make an easement so restrictive, it becomes impossible <br />going forward. The County is acquiring development and water re- charge rights so the necessity to <br />grow food there and keep the property in agriculture is very likely. <br />Ms. Springer asked if the required management plan would travel with the land. Mr. Sensenig replied <br />yes, it does. Mr. Whitt added that this plan ensures that whatever is being produced on the land is done <br />in a sustainable manner and should a new owner come in the plan may need to be changed. <br />Ms. Springer asked Ms. Self if her problem with this is that the County would be one of several partners <br />rather than the sole. Ms. Self replied yes, and noted that by reading the County Code, Section 2- 215(d), <br />"the funds shall be used for acquiring lands or property entitlements in the County for the following <br />purposes" it means that the County is acquiring a property or entitlement and therefore should hold <br />interest. <br />Mr. Sensenig commented that they want to see the land protected and it's not important how title is held. <br />If the COH wants to hold title 100% and contract with the land trust to do the monitoring and <br />stewardship subject to County review, it could be done at a minimal cost. <br />Ms. Springer asked with that regards would it affect the DLNR LLCP or NRCS FR-PP. Mr. Sensenig <br />replied that in terms of DLNR, they want language inserted into the document stating that they have an <br />interest and that the easement is required to run with the land. <br />Ms. Self added that this is the way that it would have to be done if the County does this as we have a <br />public trust obligation to get something for our money. <br />Mr. Hirakami asked if they can give one specific example of a similar situation to this in Hawaii. Mr. <br />Whitt replied that there are three taking place specifically for agriculture. There was one in Oahu that <br />closed and the State, Federal, County and land trust are all listed on the conservation easement. <br />Ms. Springer asked Ms. Self if she feels comfortable with the Commission continuing this discussion or <br />is it outside of their purview. Ms. Self replied that it would depend on how it's crafted if this property is <br />put on the prioritized list. Mr. Van Bergen added that it will be very challenging to get a resolution for <br />this should it make it on the list. <br />Ms. Moon thanked Mr. Sensenig and Mr. Whitt for their time and information. Mr. Sensenig concluded <br />by saying that there's millions of federal dollars waiting to come into Hawaii. <br />Mr. Van Bergen told them to contact R &D since they may not have as much restrictions as we do and <br />they also work with various grant sources. <br />-3- <br />