2019-03-21 Leeward Exh B (Discussion on condition deadlines)

Home

The other thing I’d like to take into, bring to your attention – I’m sure you are fully aware of it – is our schools are overcrowded. So by lengthening the time with which a development takes place, that’s separates the time from when they pay their school fees into the kitty to when the keiki start arriving. The downside to that, of course, is that they probably, we probably got enough new developments on the books right now for at least another thousand children. Where will we put them? I think that there needs to be a better tie-in between the fees that are charged upfront to developers and the eventual arrival of those children, because it’s going to be more expensive with each and every passing year. So please take into consideration the eventual cost to us, to we the people who live here, for when a development arrives. Thank you. DAVID BLANCETT-MADDOCK: Aloha, I’m David Blancett-Maddock. I live up in the Kona Vista up on Lako. I am a licensed attorney here and I was a planner in the City of Pittsburgh for many years but not in, I was more in the budget into the planning. Three minutes is too little time, and as my colleague has indicated, this is a discussion, I would ask for a little leeway because this subject is so broad and so much needs to be said at this time. I agree with my colleague about the problems that I’m seeing with delegation of authority all the way down to the Planning Division. No offe- I don’t mean to take exception to this body. But the laws in zoning are derived from State authority. They are derived from the State authority to the County and to the Land Use Commission, based on that authority of the State. And the delegation of power has to come to you in that form; it can’t be subrogated. Now, in the LUC in 1990 the Legislature instituted the very thing that’s causing a lot of these issues with the LUC reverting, like in Waikoloa Mauka, the recent case, where they reverted the subdivision to Agricultural, and it was very, very specific. I have in written testimony – I had no idea how broad this was actually going to go today – but it said the Senate Committee on Energy noted that “vacant land with the appropriate state and county land use designation is often subjected to undesirable private land speculation and uncertain development schedules, and such speculation and untimely development inflates the value of land … coordination of planning efforts, adequate funding, public services, and facilities.” They put this, they specifically put the authorization to give the LUC the ability to revert these in, because it requires successful, this, “which will require that successful applicants for land use boundary amendments either ‘use it, or lose it.’” That’s your State Senate telling you what the intent of the LUC getting enforcement powers is. Now, let me put that in perspective. You probably wonder why I’m talking about the LUC. The LUC had no enforcement powers. The enforcement power is right here at the County level. The delegation from the State was to the County for enforcement. And it had the LUC out there working on these large projects with no enforcement powers, and it didn’t go in and start to give you the broad powers you have to amend these to things that are more appropriate – Ma’am, I’m going to kind of ignore that \[countdown sign Ms. Hall was holding up\] for a minute because I have to try to get to these points. HALL: Go ahead, keep going. Just doing my job. DAVID BLANCETT-MADDOCK: They – I understand, ma’am – they gave broad authority to the County but they didn’t give it to the LUC, and they discovered the LUC was letting these project just sit out there and be speculative projects. Putting money in the, large amounts of money in the hands of the developers and giving nothing back to us the public and, you know, 12 EXHIBIT B