HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0632.038 2000-2002
JAMES Y. ARAKAKI ~°`Y o~
:o,, Phone: (808) 961-8272
Chairman & Presiding Officer ~`~d~, Fax: (808) 961-8780
;QI
.
r;
:•P~~
•'Tq•~•MP,dO
COUNTY COUNCIL
County of Hawai 'i
Hawaii County Building
25 Aupuni Street
Hilo, Hawaii 96720
September 9, 2002
TO: Council Members
FROM: James Y. Arakaki fR~...:,..
Chair
RE: Bill 220, Draft 3
Condominium Property Regimes
I am deeply concerned over placing a retroactive compliance date in Bill 220.
We, as responsible legislators, must be fair and prospective when enacting laws by providing due
process and adequate notice to all, and not to just the interested or concerned few.
We learned from the Planning Director that the date in question, June 19, 2001, was picked
because it was one year after the passage of Act 251, HRS, SLH 2000. We were also informed
that he has been implementing that compliance date by notification to potential condominium
applicants and also by withholding acknowledgement or certification of condominium
applications until this legislation is acted upon.
As a council member, I would like to know what due process was given when establishing this
administrative "policy." Were public notices posted or published, or was the public given an
opportunity to comment? Who knew or did not know that this administrative "policy" was in
effect? Was the Council, as the policy-making body of this County, ever formally noticed or
advised of the initiation of this administrative "policy"?
This, to me, is a disturbing example of administrative intervention into the duties and
responsibilities of this legislative body. Our County Charter is clear. The Council's primary
function shall be legislation and public policy formulation. The Council is the policy making
body of this County; the administration implements those policies. ~
~ ~
The record will show that during the Planning Commission's deliberations and our own ~
deliberations on Bi11220, there was a diverse range of opinion in both written and oral testimony
on the proposed exemption date. We heard testimony by some that one year was an adequate
amount of time in which to comply with the Act. You may also recall testimony that one year
~ ~
I~~ I1 ~ ? n, ~ ~ ~ Ca
was too long a timeframe and that six months should be more than adequate. Finally, we heard
testimony that the effective date of the ordinance, and perhaps even a period thereafter, should be
the compliance date.
It's ironic that the date of June 19, 2001, was imposed, yet the same enabling compliance
legislation had not been initiated until February 2002...almost eight months after expected
compliance by the public.
In light of what I believe is encroachment into the policy-making role of this body and consistent
with the legislative actions of the Council, the following amendments are recommended in the
attached Bill No. 220, Draft 4:
"Section 23A-20. Exemptions.
(a) Notwithstanding sec 23A-4, the director shall certify compliance with all county laws
if requested under H.R.S. sec 514A-40, to permit the developer to obtain an effective
date for a final report for a condominium property regime creating 2 units on a lot, if
the project complies with applicable county requirements, except for the minimum
building site area, minimum dimensions, and the provisions of this article, and, [on or
before June 19, 2001 ] np
~or to (the effective date of this ordinance):
(1) the declaration involving the condominium property regime had been filed
with the Bureau of Conveyances, pursuant to H.R.S. section 514A-20, or
(2) a notice of intent had been filed with the real estate commission, pursuant to
H.R.S. section 514A-31, or
(3) fees had been committed for attorneys or surveys directly related to creating a
condominium property regime on the lot.
Documentary evidence to qualify under paragraph (3) shall be submitted to the
director within six months of the approval of this ordinance.
Under this section, the developer may also amend a declaration or notice of intent
filed [on or before June 19, 2001] n~Or t0 (the effective date of this
ordinance ,creating more than two units, to allow the creation of only two units.
(b) Notwithstanding sec 23A-4, the director shall certify compliance with all applicable
county laws under H.R.S. sec 514A-40(b), to permit the issuance of an effective date
for a final public report creating two condominium units on a lot, if the lot contained,
on [June 19, 2001 ] (the effective date of this ordinance), two or
more legal dwellings, either completed or with valid building permits, and the project
complies with applicable county requirements, except for the minimum building site
area, minimum dimensions, and the provisions of this article. The declaration
establishing the condominium property regime shall be filed with the Bureau of
Conveyances no later than one year after the [effective date of this ordinance.] date of
the director's certification of compliance."
I look forward to our thoughtful deliberations.
2