Laserfiche WebLink
minutes 04-12-00Page 2 of 26 <br />REED: Yes. David Reed, Chairman of the HRA. I would agree with the two previous speakers. We have, through Mr. <br />Takase’s help, determined that the agency’s sunset is sunsetting in October of this year, so it is probably not going to exist by <br />the time the election comes around. And I think that the agency members would agree that its life is coming to an end. We do <br />have meetings once every three months, and have had a couple of special meetings, and we do see things passed on to us by <br />Planning and Public Works as far as their considering to be our jurisdiction, as far as approval or disapproval, but certainly, <br />yes, it could be deemed as a duplication. Any questions? <br />RAY: Questions? <br />HERKES: I have a question, David. <br />RAY: Marni. <br />HERKES: As you know, we all worked with the HRA a long time ago. Maybe this is Virginia’s question, but if there were <br />not an HRA, to whom would the downtown questions be addressed? Would the Downtown Improvement Association take <br />those over, do you think? <br />REED: The Downtown Improvement District was added to the jurisdiction of the HRA. I’m not sure when that occurred. But <br />originally, when the Downtown Improvement Plan came out, the Downtown Improvement Association was supposed to have <br />some say as to design aspects and things like that. That never really came to fruition as far as them ever being asked. My <br />assumption is that Planning and Building, the individual departments, would take care of their own business. <br />HERKES: Okay. <br />RAY: Okay. Sue, you’ve got a question? <br />IRVINE: Yes. I actually just went and looked at our Charter concerning the Hawaii Redevelopment Agency, and the only <br />thing it says is ‘The status of the Hawaii redevelopment agency shall not be affected by this charter.’ That lends me to believe <br />that maybe we can’t do away with it by Charter. <br />REED: We understood that it can be, but we understood, also, that the life of the agency was for, according to Mr. Takase, 35 <br />years after the first building permit was issued after the ‘60 tidal wave. So, I guess it took four or five years to issue the first <br />building permit once this whole area was cleared out and things started to develop after that. There was probably a <br />moratorium on building for several years. <br />YUEN; Actually that provision has been in the Charter since 1968. There was a Hawaii Redevelopment Agency before we <br />had a Charter. It was established under State Law that all the counties could have redevelopment agencies. At that time, there <br />was federal money that came in and would be funneled into these redevelopment agencies. So there was this agency. They <br />did the Kaiko’o Redevelopment largely. The Charter had that in there, probably because nobody could figure out what to do <br />with in the Charter at the time, because it’s sort of a half-State, half-County type-agency. They had it going. They didn’t want <br />to mess it up by putting something different in the Charter so they just left it there. After the Kaiko’o Project was done and <br />built, there were a number of regulatory-type issues that remain. All the buildings have things that you might call like <br />restrictive covenants. They’re not exactly restrictive covenants, but they’re controls on buildings. And the redevelopment <br />agency retained the right to approve or deny changes like that, uses of the buildings, and so forth. And so it had that function <br />even when it stopped having money. In the mid-80's, <br />there was some hope that downtown Hilo could be redeveloped and the redevelopment agency, which had not had any <br />members for several years, was re-established, and came out with the Redevelopment Plan for the Downtown, which has <br />some design-type criteria which, I think, are being reviewed by the redevelopment agency currently. And those functions <br />could be transferred to the Planning Department to do as part of their permit reviews, and to the Department of Public Works <br />as part of their permit reviews. The hope, in the mid-80's was, that there would be some redevelopment money to come in to <br />actually do projects in the downtown but that never materialized. So, in brief, you folks will have to remind me, if we put this <br />in the Charter, to take that part out of Article XVI, that says it shall not be effected, and the Charter can be changed to <br />eliminate the redevelopment agency. <br />HERKES: So we can just take it out? Do we need to insert the other language, or can we just eliminate it? <br />YUEN: I’m not sure it would need to be printed in the Charter. It could be adopted as an amendment, the agency becomes <br />file://\\coh01\cohweb\council\charter_commission\minutes\minutes 04-12-00.htm7/1/2011 <br /> <br />