HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0005.000 2008-2010
Harry Kim Christopher J. Yuen
Mayor : • Director
Brad Kurokawa, ASLA
,L of LEED® AP
Tountg of palu2YIL Deputy Director
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
November 18, 2008 101 Paualu street, suite 3 • Hilo, Hawaii 967204224
(808) 961-8288 • FAX (808) 961-8742
Mr. Micah A. Kane, Chairman
Hawaiian Homes Commission o o
STATE OF HAWAII c ~Q?
DEPARTMENT OF HAWAIIAN HOME LANDS
P.O. Box 1879 r
Honolulu, HI 96805 _'7V
Mark Bennett, Esq.
Attorney General _
STATE OF HAWAII
DEPARTMENT OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
Hale Auhau
425 Queen Street
Honolulu, HI 96805
Dear Messrs. Kane and Bennett:
SUBJECT: REQUEST ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OPINION RELATING
TO PROPERTY UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE
DEPARTMENT OF HAWAIIAN HOME LANDS (DHHL)
I am writing to inquire about the status of the August 8, 2008 request for a formal
Attorney General opinion on several land use issues involving the Department of
Hawaiian Home Lands. A copy of that letter is attached.
Sincerely,
it
CHRISTOPHER J. YUEN
Planning Director
CJY:pak
Wpwin60/Chris 08 - Micah Kane, DHHL - Mark Bennett - AG - Opinion - Status
Attachment
Comm. No.
Ref. To:
Ref. Date NOV 2 0 2001 [a!
Hawaii County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer.
Mr. Micah A. Kane, Chairman
Hawaiian Homes Commission
STATE OF HAWAII
DEPARTMENT OF HAWAIIAN HOME LANDS
Mark Bennett, Esq.
Attorney General
STATE OF HAWAII
DEPARTMENT OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
Page 2
November 18, 2008
cc: Mayor Harry Kim
Honorable Pete Hoffmann and Members of the County Council
Lincoln Ashida, Esq. - Corporation Counsel
Mr. Henry Eng, Department of Planning and Permitting
Mr. Ian Costa, Department of Planning (Kauai)
Mr. Jeffrey S. Hunt, Department of Planning (Maui)
Mr. Orlando Davidson, Land Use Commission
Mr. Abbey Seth Mayer, Office of Planning
ee ~•I•d ®P pro
1A,,r
AdnRrcy Kam »o CBah a ¢~P& er yuem
Director
"Wg°di•a>'a' - Emd KurOlmwP ASLA
LEED@ AP
Tlaunty of PRfunii DePaty Director
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
101 Pauahi Street, suite 3 • Hilo, Havraii 96720-4224
(808) 961-8288 - FAX (808) 961-8742
August 8, 2008
Mr. Micah A. Kane, Chairman
Hawaiian Homes Commission
STATE OF HAWAII
DEPARTMENT OF HAWAIIAN HOME LANDS
P.O. Box 1879
Honolulu, HI 96805
Mark Bennett, Esq.
Attorney General
STATE OF HAWAII
DEPARTMENT OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
Hale Auhau
425 Queen Street
Honolulu, HI 96805
Dear Messrs. Kane and Bennett:
SUBJECT: REQUEST ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OPINION RELATING
TO PROPERTY UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE
DEPARTMENT OF HAWAIIAN HOME LANDS DHHL
The purpose of this letter is to formally request that the Attorney General issue a formal
opinion for the guidance of the counties on whether the state land use law, Chap. 205,
Hawai'i Revised Statutes, applies to property under the jurisdiction of the Department of
Hawaiian Home Lands. We also request a formal opinion on the applicability of Chap.
205A, Hawai'i Revised Statutes, the SMA law, with respect to DHHL property. This is
especially important to the county planning departments because we must enforce Chaps.
205 and 205A. See H.R.S. sec. 205-12, and H.R.S. sec. 205A-22 (definition of
"authority."). DHHL has asked us to approve land uses in the state land use agricultural
district which would not normally be allowed under Chap. 205 and the corresponding
Land Use Commission rules, unless the landowner obtained a special permit, or obtained
UG 8 zQ~
Ha ai `i County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer.
Mr. Micah A. Kane, Chairman
Hawaiian Homes Commission
STATE OF HAWAII
DEPARTMENT OF HAWAIIAN HOME LANDS
Mark Bennett, Esq.
Attorney General
STATE OF HAWAII
DEPARTMENT OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
Page 2
August 8, 2008
a boundary amendment to designate the property into the urban district. We have also
been asked to approve development on DHHL property in the SMA without SMA
permits.
Attorney General Opinion 72-21 (attached) deals with the question of county zoning
authority over DHHL property, under Chap. 46, H.R.S. There is also a memorandum
from the Attorney General to the (then) Department of Business and Economic
Development, dated October 23, 1987, on the subject of Chap. 205A, the SMA law, and
DHHL. We also have several county corporation counsel opinions on the subject of )
county zoning and DHHL. We are not, however, aware of any formal Attorney General
opinion on the subject of Chap. 205, which is a separate and parallel land use control
along with county zoning. Hawai'i County has been following the October 23, 1987
memorandum and not requiring SMA permits for development on DHHL property, but
we believe that given the importance of these issues, a formal opinion would be
warranted.
Hawai'i County is currently operating under the provisions of a Memorandum of
Agreement with DHHL (attached). In that MOA, Hawai'i County acceded to DHHL's
position that county zoning did not apply to the basic decision of the use of DHHL
property, and agreed to a procedure where DHHL could designate the zoning for its
properties. This zoning would then be applied administratively by the county to
determine things like proper setbacks for buildings. The MOA did provide that DHHL
would obtain special permits in the state land use agricultural district, however. Par.
IILG provides that "for uses allowed in the various zoning districts that require special
permits or use permits, DHHL and its lessees will go through the applicable County
permit procedure." The MOA is silent on the question whether DHHL, in designating
zoning, must conform to the land use designations established pursuant to Chap. 205.
Normally, of course, it would be improper for the counties to zone land inconsistent with
the state land use designations established under Chap. 205.
I
Mr. Micah A. Kane, Chairman
Hawaiian Homes Commission
STATE OF HAWAII
DEPARTMENT OF HAWAIIAN HOME LANDS
Mark Bennett, Esq.
Attorney General
STATE OF HAWAII
DEPARTMENT OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
Page 3
August 8, 2008
We note that the use of state lands, generally, must conform to Chap. 205. Sec. 205-
4.5(a)(5), which applies to soils classified as A or B but is made applicable to other soil
types by its incorporation in LUC Rule 15-15-25(b), provides that permitted uses in the
agricultural district includes "public institutions and buildings which are necessary for
agricultural practices". This, coupled with the prohibition of other non-listed uses in
H.R.S. sec. 205-4.5(b) and LUC Rule 15-15-23, means that public institutions and uses
not necessary for agricultural practices are not permitted in the agricultural district
without special permits. It has been, therefore, the practice of the state to obtain either
special permits or a boundary amendment when it wants to establish non-agricultural uses
on state lands in the agricultural district, such as major housing projects (Kealakehe),
public schools (Konawaena Elementary), and libraries (the new Kohala Library). We
could furnish many other examples.
The Land Use Commission, after the enactment of Chap. 205 in 1961, did designate state
lands, including DHHL lands, within the various land use districts in its initial mapping.
State lands, generally, at least those not under DHHL jurisdiction, are subject to the SMA
law. The state has regularly applied for SMA permits for development of state parks,
commercial areas, and other projects, within the SMA
We also note that Ag. Op. 72-21 drew a distinction between DHHL property used for the
purposes of the Hawaiian Homes Act (at that time, residential, agricultural, and pastoral
lots leased to Native Hawaiians), which it determined were not subject to county zoning,
and those leased to the general public for industrial and commercial purposes, which, by
implication, had been determined by the Hawaiian Homes Commission not to be
necessary for the purposes of the Act. This distinction appears to have been recognized
by the court in Keno'o v. Watson, 87 Haw. 91, 101, 952 P.2d 379 (1998).
This is a very important issue. Major public and private investments are being made
directly by DHHL, and by their lessees, under the assumption that projects do not have to
conform to Chaps. 205 and 205A. A decision that ordinary land use requirements need
Mr. Micah A. Kane, Chairman
Hawaiian Homes Commission
STATE OF HAWAII
DEPARTMENT OF HAWAIIAN HOME LANDS
Mark Bennett, Esq.
Attorney General
STATE OF HAWAII
DEPARTMENT OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
Page 4
August 8, 2008
not be followed can be challenged in court by individuals or organizations with standing,
and could put investments worth tens of millions of dollars at risk. This suggests a very
thorough and cautious decision, which may also involve a review of Ag. Op. 72-21.
We hope that this letter provides enough information. We have earlier correspondence
with DHHL over the MOA where we discuss some of these issues. If you have any
questions, please contact Hawai'i County Planning Director Chris Yuen.
Sincere ^
CHRISTOPHER J.. YUE`
Planning Director
CJY:pak
Wpwin60/Chas 08 - Micah Kane, DHHL - Mark Bennett - AG - Opinion
Attachments
cc: Mayor Harry Kim
Honorable Pete Hoffmann and Members of the County Council
Lincoln Ashida, Esq. - Corporation Counsel
Mr. Henry Eng, Department of Planning and Permitting
Mr. Ian Costa, Department of Planning (Kauai)
Mr. Jeffrey S. Hunt, Department of Planning (Maui)
Mr. Orlando Davidson, Land Use Commission
Mr. Abbey Seth Mayer, Office of Planning
9
Cl[rr_ \y,
y . STATC Or HAWMI
(11, 1;(I, 72°21 nC"Aft I IACI<, OF' 111L AT 1011RCY Grnr It AL
n,ll r-LOOre
HONOLULU. HAWAII 90013
OCtobcr 2. 1972
Mr. i.lliam G. Among, Chairman
J)cp rt.mcnt of Hawaiian Home Lands
Stale of Hai:-aii
530 Ilalekaueila Street
Honolulu, Hawaii
Dear Mr. Among:
This is in response to youur question as to whether the
counties may "zone" Ilacaaiian hone lands.
Ile understand the question arose as a result of a
rezoning action by the County of Ilawaii of certain Ilar:aiian
home lands situated at Keaukaba, Milo, from resi.clential
to light industrial use. The rezoning action was requested by
the Commission because of the threat of tsunami and aircraft
accidents as well as noise and sewage pollution. Ale further
understand that the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands has in the
past requested the counties to change the land use designation
of other.Hawaiian home lands.
As a general rule, the counties must derive their po zr
to zone from some expressed or implied delegation of such po-,-:cr
from the State. Aside from the question of implied power, the
Legislature has granted the counties zoning poe•:ers by enacting
Act 234, Session Laws of Hawaii 1957, as codified in Section
Hawaii Revised Statutes. It is noted that county charters pro-
vide for the exercise of zoning porters also. Honolulu Charter,
Chapter. 5; Maui Charter, Chapter G; Kauai Charter, Article ):IV.
11awaii Charter, Chapter IV.
However, the zoning porters of the counties are subject
to Act 187, Sef ion Laws of Hawaii 19G1, ac codified in Chapter
205 of the Hawaii Rcvieed Statutes. Act 187 provided for ar,(j
crcotcd a st.at-c Land (1sc Cor.mic-ion which has been cmpC)w0).ed to
classify land in the State into four major land tu:c districts:
II
Op. Po, 77-21
YIi l1 i.~nn G, Tamonq
-t-.Lpr 'is::o
cr,-IvIwI• 2, 1.972
III-ban, rural, agricultural and conservation.
To the extent pro-
P ti ?-'e nr Ir. J rr~e 1a j?r tr -r..l t'4_~¢-~?{.
-t
%
{tr 1-jil, LC'] b}' t)a^ LCr~lia sslon, e}ecPt within c-onscrvatlon R1st71r,_c
!'.n DcP.-Ir tmcnt of Land and Natural Resources has the power under
;:cation IF.3-41, 11, r, S., to cnact xcgUlD,=;ons iilthln :ollservatlon
[I] strlcts.
With reference to Ilac:+aiian home lands, hoc:,ever, the
.;t-.atutes arc silent-1/ On the other hand, Section 204 of the
llac:'aiimi 110mcs Conmissio_n Act of 1920 provides:
. all available lands shall immediately assume the
status of Hawaiian ]ionic lands and be under the control of
the department to be u:;cd and disposed of in accordance
with the provisions of Lb-is title
added) - (Underscoring
Said section further provides:
"In the management of any retained available lands
not required for leasing under section 207(x), the depart-
ment may dispose of such lands by lease or, license to the
general public, including native Hawaiians, on the some
terms, conditions, restrictions and uses applicable to the
disposition of public lands as provided in chapter 171; pro_
vidcd, that the department may not sell such lands in fee
simple except as authorized under section 205 of this Act."
Section 207 of the Act authorizes the Department of
Hac,'aiian Home Lands to lease to native Iawaiians as defined herein
the right to the use and occupancy of llawaiian Home lands for "agri_
cultural", "pastoral" and "residential," purposes and also to grant
licenses to public utilities and others for various purposes.
/ Indeed no state statute nor county ordinance or county
charter provisions can affect- such lands unless in con-
formit}' With the 11acdaiinn Homes Cormission Act of 1920,
c:'hich was adopted as a compact wiLh the United Slates
as a provision of the Constitution of the State of Ilowaii
1
P,r, h;i?. Liam G. Among
J'.t~fn 1`vur
I ubcr 7, 1972
As I unCIm..stand these are public lands in a sense.
Now, is there provision in the bill }rich will
Fir, Dot-:ell, There is a public land c
in Hawaii u.-hose duty it is to ave chcrgc of LtthesAoner
public lands. Under. this bill certain specific lands
are c,•ithclrat:'n from his jurisdiction and. from the juris-
diction of every cornrtit:sion except the spec,i.al one to
have charge of these specific lands described in the
bill, and those lands are exclusively by
) g the terms of
the bill under the control of this co;:Lmission. (Emphasis
supplied,)
Pr. Walsh, if the gentleman will permit, if I under-
stand correctly, some of the lands are already under
the jurisdiction of the existing land commissioner?
Mr. Dowell, All of them are,
1-Jr. Walsh. Now some of these restrictions in his
jurisdiction,-and power over them is vested in the
new commission.
l:r. Dowell. That is correct.
A review of the pertj.ncnt provisions of the Hawaiian
Ilomes Commission Act indicates that the congressional intent was to
create a class of lands separate and distinct from other public
lands, to be utilized for the rehabilitation of the Dawaiians
and to vest control over the use of such lands in the Co:nmil:aion
and not in any other governmental agency. (See Sections 204,
205, 20G, 207, 208, 209 of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act-)
We further note, however., that in the management-of
'etained available lands not recuired for leasing under Sect:jon
07(a), the Department could dirpc,se of such lands by lease or
icensc as provided by Chapter 17---1, 11.R.S,; for the disposition of
ublic lands, and Chapter 171 reyulres in certai-n cases that county
:)ttipg regulations ire complied with. ccorc}ingl~ , where the
'i-'aii.an lJomcs Commission has clctcnnincd that contain Ilatraijan
'mc lands are not nccded or required for purposes of the Act,
ere appears to be no reason Why county zoning regulations should
L `ply to such lands.
' . ra
C?p. Nn. 72-71.
11i.)lialn C. Among ~
I•i vc•
We are advised that the vepar.trlent has from time to
t ij:;e: in the past appli.cd to the counti-cs for the rezoning4 of
T'- M1an e, rl?!l 'r 1:. 1"r'i )tIl{-. SUCK i,dn11n1.G
j ntCl: (=retcri with refcrcltCe to the poilcr of colintlc!, to "ZOlle"
home lands. Ilorever, 1ee do not believe that such
In}in.i tratile action is controlling in the interpretation of
Lhc Ilal:aiian Homes Commission Act,. As stated in Frank Nichols,
1.3 r.tited v. Vannatt_a, 33 Haw. G02, GOG (1935) :
11
. neither official construction nor usage no
matter how long indulged in, can be successfully
invoked to defeat the purpose and effect of a stat-
ute which is free from ambiguity, nor 1-.,ill the courts
be influenced by the construction placed upon a stat-
ute by the officials i..-hose duty it is to execute it
where such construction is manifestly incorrect."
We believe that the wording of the Hawaiian Homes ~
Commission Act indicates that control of Hawaiian home lands
is vested in the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands and that
subjecting Hawaiian home lands needed for purposes of the Act
to county land use regulations would be contrary to the purpose
of the Ha1-;aiian Homes Commission Act. Although the weight that
may be given by the court to the long-standing practice in this
case cannot be predicted with precision, on balance, it is our
opinion that the past practice of the Department in seeking
county rezoning action is not controlling in interpreting the
Act, based upon Fr-an); Nichols, Limited v. Vannatt-a, supra.
Since past administrative practice in seeking county
rezoning actions may not be invoked to defeat the purpose and
effect of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, we believe that
Section 209 of the Act is controlling mrith reference to the use
of Hawaiian home lands. Thereunder, it is the Department that
has the right to say how Hawaiian home lands nceued or required
for purposes of the Act are to be used and disposed of within the
scope of the Act, and any zoning ordinance purporting to change
the land use dcsignation or to impose restrictions on the use
-_f such IIa1:'aiinn home lands 1)OUld be outside the scope of any
DDWCr (gra!ILCO to counties.
As earlier noted,.hoi.,cvcr, a different conclusion
ppJics w)icre the Commission has determined that certain lands
Op, 170. 72-21
Mr. William G. Tunonq
1'ac7C 51>:
OcLoJcr 2, 1272
arc not required for purpose of the Act. In this latter situa-
hl Rr ('r) '!.G ^G1Tn
t" zoninU rC'711iatj Ul]17.
In the in°tt)n'_- case, lie b,211ICVe that the commis-i':'n'
action of requesting and initiating the rezoning ryas tantamount
to a.findinq that the JiZ,l:ziian hone lands in nucstjon were no
longer needed or required for purposes of the Act. Because Of
the Commission's finding, it is our opinion that the County of
Hawaii was authorized to rezone the lands from residential to
light industrial use and may also continue to exercise zoning
pwaors over such lands; however, should the Cotrmi';sion subse-
quently determine that those lends are again needed or required
for. purposes of the Act, the authority of the County of iJa1•)aii
to zone those lands will terminate.
Very truly yours,
NELSONT s. rr. C1JA14C4
Deputy Attorney Generwi
APPROVED:
f~rar} ,
I_
~ :.mot
Gi )RGr 4~71I
Attlarney General
e) ~
Ott, i,o. 72-21
-
~7nECT El VED
~/~°,e OR,S n- f p
\ / Y)t tb `J~nGiREM PRICE.
~fij?J
STATE OF HAWAII DfV ,i; C°w'n E s. a. mot,
DEPARTTZMT OF T ~lG fvT "IC sr Dawn er)o..~,
HE kTTORtEY GENERAL
STATE CAPITOL
KDr~LUtll. Y4K'n 11 ~E8 ~f ~T
1~AI Snai)~ '
Onto? er 23, 1937
LEGAL MEMORANDUM
TO: The Honorable Roger A. Ulveling, Director
Department of Business and Economic Development
FROM. John W. Anderson
Deputy Attorney General
SUBJECT: Applicability of County Special Management Area (SMA)
permit requirements to Hawaiian Home Lands.
opinion=whetherothe views expressed inrAttorney 7General's opinion
72-21 are applicable to county special management area permits )
prescribed by Part II of Chapter 205A, Hawaii Revised Statutes-
lie answer the question in the affirmative.
In Attorney General's Opinion 72-21 we held that lands
needed or required by the Hawaii Homes Commission for purposes of
the Hawaii Homes Commission Act, 1920 (the Act) are not subject
to county zoning powers. We held that Section 204 of the Act is
controlling with reference to the use of Hawaiian home lands
and that section 2O4 vests control of these lands in the Depart-
ment of Hawaiian Home Lands.
In our prior opinion we also noted that the Hawaiian Homes
Commission Act is made part of the Constitution of the State of .
Hawaii by section 3, Article XII thereof as a compact with the
United States,l/ and that no state statute or county ordinance or
county charter provisions can affect such lands unless in
conformity with the Act. we said that subjecting. Hawaiian home
1/ The compact to adopt the Act as part of the Constitu-
tion of Hawaii is contained in the Admissions Act of March 1E,
1959, Pub L. 86-3, 73 Stat 4° The compact also provides in
section 4 that the Act will be subject to repeal or amendment
only with the consent of the United States, and in no other
Wanner. This latter provision is repeated in section, 3 A
III ;-,f the State (70nst.ituFior: r rticle
i~l
Hon. P.oger A. Ulvelinc
October 23, 1967
Page - 2 -
lands needed for purposes of the Act to county land L2 se
regulations would be contrary to the purpose of the Act. 2/
The Hawaii Supreme Court recently has recognized the unique
status or Hawaiian home lands under the state constitution
T'f){, 9}a }rte " h 7 }.a 71.~n r _+n a- - b .
7~ 71 -1
Hawaiian home 'lcnIIS by section -004 of }h rv"-~`
Department of Eawaiian Home Lands, 69 Haw. 327, rhuna )
(5rphasis added,)3/ 338 (i
There is no apparent reason to alter our prior opinion. We
find that county special management area (SMA) permits prescribed
in Part II of chapter 205A, Hawaii Revised Statutes, by sections
205A-28 and 205A-29 do not differ in any essential respect from
other county land use regulations'. The regulations were origi-
nally adopted to provide "special interim controls on develop -
nents within an area along the shoreline," (Section 1 of Act 176,
1975 Sess, Laws of Hawaii 385) and remain a tool for regulating
land use in the State's coastal zone.
3 Part II of Chapter 205A, Hawaii Revised Statutes is part of
the state's coastal zone management program which has been
approved by the United States government pursuant to the Coastal
Zone Management Act of 1972, Public Law 92-583. Howeve r,
there is nothing in Public Law 92-583 which would purport to
preempt control of Hawaiian home lands in the coastal zone. The
law purports only to persuade the states to prepare and implement
"management programs to preserve, protect, develop and whenever
possible restore the resources of the coastal zone of the United
21 We found, however, that a request of the Hawaiian Homes
Commission to rezone a portion of lands held by it from
residential to light industrial use was "tantamount to a finding
that the Hawaiian home lands in question were no longer needed or
required for purposes of the Act," and that such action
authorized the county of Hawaii "to exercise zoning powers over
such lands..,." We noted, however, that "should the Commission
subsequently determine that those lands are again needed or
required for purposes of the Act, the authority of the County of
Hawaii to zone those lands will terminate."
3/ It necessarily follows that the state as well as the
counties may not impose land use controls on Hawaiian Home Lands
in a manner inconsistent with the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act.
i
I
Hon. Roger A. Ulveiinc
October 23, 1987
Page - 3 -
States" by providing "financial incentives to undertake the
responsibility for setting up management programs in the coast=al
zone>" The legislative history further states that:
There is no attempt to diminish state authority:
this let7i.aiatlon is to enhance state authority
by encouraging and assisting the states to
assume planning and regulatory powers over
their coastal zones.
S. Rep. No. 753, 1972 U.S. Code Cong. and Admin. News. 92d
Congress, Second Session 4776.
Although the Hawaiian Homes Commission may take steps to
subject their lands within the coastal zone to county special
management area permits and other county land use controls,
attempts by the counties or other "authorities" as delineated in
section 205A-22 4/ to impose their controls on Hawaiian home
lands would be incompatible with the Act.S/
John W. Anderson
Deputy Attorney General
JWA:bnf
APPROVED:
Warren Price, III
Attorney General
41 "Authority" in section 205A-22 is defined as the county
planning commission or the county council, as appropriate.
5/ This opinion in no manner attempts to limit the
counties' permit authority in waters adjacent to the Yanaiia n
home lands,
Memorandum of Agreement Between the Country of Ifawail
and the Department ofHawailan Horne Lands
Y. Purpose
The purpose of this Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) is to clarify the respective roles,
responsibilities, and obligations of the County of Hawaii (County) and the Department of
Hawaiian Home Lands (DHHL) relating to land use planning, infrastructure maintenance,
enforcement of laws, and collection of taxes and other fees on Hawaiian home lands.
II. Guidine Principles
The following general principles have guided the development of this MOA:
A. The Hawaiian Homes Commission is responsible for determining land use on
Hawaiian home lands. The County may not use its land use and zoning powers to
prevent the Hawaiian Homes Commission from controlling the use of Hawaiian
home lands.
B. The County and DHHL share common goals in planning for the use of Hawaiian
home lands: both support the orderly development of those lands for the benefit of
} native Hawaiians and both are committed to the integration of planning by DHHL
and Hawaii County.
C. The County should manage and maintain all infrastructure built to County
standards
D. The County is authorized to enforce criminal laws and applicable County
ordinances and regulations on Hawaiian home lands.
E. Hawaiian homestead lessees are residents of the County of Hawaii and should be
treated in a manner consistent with all other residents of the County.
F. Hawaiian homestead lessees should pay all taxes and fees required by law.
G. The County and DHHL acknowledge that there are areas where agreement will
not be reached, and agree to continue to work together toward a mutually
acceptable resolution of such issues.
III: Relatine to Planning and Land Use
A. DHHL will implement its Planning System which includes plans with DHHL land
use designations such as the Hawaii Island Plan, various Development and
Subdivision Plans, and Homestead Community Plans. In the formulation,
updating, and amendment of these plans, DHHL will consult with the relevant
County departments, and shall give due consideration and weight to their
al d
n
COH/DHHT Memorandum of Agreement
Page 2
1
comments, and to the Hawaii County General Plan, and other officially adopted
plans such as Community Development Plans. All land uses on DHHL property
will be placed according to the applicable DHHL plans.
B. The County will consult with DHHL over the appropriate designations of DHHL
property in the Hawaii County General Plan LUPAG maps, and shall give 'due
weight and consideration to the comments of DHHL, and to officially adopted
DHHL plans.
C. Based on its plans and DHHL land use designations, DHHL will determine the
appropriate County zoning districts that shall apply to the property in question.
DHHL will communicate these zoning districts to the County.
D. All normal land use controls will be applied by Hawaii County to DHHL property
according to the zoning district selected by DHHL. Except as specifically
provided in the Agreement, DHHL will follow all normal land use procedures,
regulations, and standards applicable to the zoning district.
E. All land use permit applications on Hawaiian home lands must be accompanied
by written consent from DHHL before the County can begin processing those
applications.
F. The standards of the various zoning districts selected will apply to DHHL
property. DHHL and its lessees will go through normal County administrative
variance procedures if they seek exemptions from standards.
G. For uses allowed in the various zoning districts that require special permits or use.
permits, DHHL and its lessees will go through the applicable County permit
procedures. At some time in the future, DHHL may implement its own use
permit procedure for Hawaiian home lands. If DHHL grants use permits, it will
be responsible for enforcing violations of those permits. The County will be
notified when DHHL has formulated its use permit system.
H. The County will advise DHHL of all violations by its lessees. The County will
enforce land use codes and regulations on Hawaiian home lands in the same
manner as with other landowners. DHHL will cooperate with the County in
enforcing the terns of its leases requiring conformity to applicable laws and
regulations, if requested by the County. Ongoing violations and failure to comply
will be referred to DHHL after the County has exhausted all remedies short of
pursuing legal action to address the violation. DHHL may institute lease
enforcement proceedings in advance of, or in lieu of, County enforcement actions.
I
C®H/DHHL Memorandum of Agreement
Page 3
IV. Relating to Public Facilities and Infrastructure Serving Hawaiian Biome Lands
A. In the development of future projects, DHHL will construct public facilities in
accordance with County standards. Where departures from County standards are
desired, DHHL will pursue exemptions and other administrative variances from
the appropriate County department, in accordance with procedures established for
all property owners. Should DHHL choose not to construct infrastructure in
accordance with County standards, the County may view such improvements as
private facilities for repair and maintenance purposes.
B. The County will accept operation, repair, and maintenance of all future DHHL
infrastructure constructed according to County standards.
C. Existing infrastructure shall be subject to County inspection prior to being
accepted by the County for operation, repair, and maintenance. The County may
require DHHL to repair any damage such as leaks, holes, sags, or deterioration
affecting the operation of the existing infrastructure, identified as a result of the
inspection.
D. In the case of existing infrastructure that is not constructed to County standards,
the County and DHHL will work to establish minimum standards for residential,
agricultural, and pastoral subdivisions. Existing projects will be evaluated based
on these new standards. The County may require DHHL to upgrade the
infrastructure to the minimum standard prior to being accepted by the County for
operations, repair, and maintenance.
E. The County will maintain infrastructure according to its own standards, resources
and schedules. Any decisions as to upgrades or rehabilitation will be at the
County's discretion.
F. Should DHHL elect to convert its land to a more intensive land use, DHHL will
be responsible for upgrading the onsite infrastructure to accommodate the new
use, and will consult with the County regarding the need to upgrade offsite
infrastructure. DHHL and the County shall negotiate the extent to which DHHL
will be responsible for any such offsite improvements requested by the County.
DHHL shall be responsible for project-related offsite improvements to the extent
that these would be required of other developers with similar projects. If offsite
improvements benefit other property, DHHL and the County shall cooperate so
that DHHL bears only its fair share of these improvement costs.
G. The County will treat DHHL lessees in the same manner as other property owners
with respect to conformity with laws, ordinances, and regulations. The County
will advise DHHL of violations, and will refer cases of ongoing violation to
DHHL after the County has exhausted all remedies short of pursuing legal action
sl ~
I
C®H/DHHL Memorandum of Agreement
Page 4
1
to address the violation. DHHL reserves the right to institute lease enforcement
proceedings in advance of, or in lieu of, County enforcement actions.
V. Relating to the Enforcement of Criminal Violations on Hawaiian Home Lands
A. The County is authorized to and will enforce violations of criminal law on
Hawaiian home lands.
B. County law enforcement agencies and DHHL will work to establish procedures
regarding sharing information and providing testimony relating to arrests made on
Hawaiian home lands needed for contested case hearings and other administrative
and/or judicial proceedings.
VI. Relating to Real Propertv Taxes
A. Homestead lessees on Hawaiian home lands are responsible for the payment of
real property taxes in accordance with the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act,
1920, as amended, and applicable County ordinances.
B. The County agrees to waive the penalty and interest on all delinquent real
property taxes owed by Hawaiian homestead lessees as of December 31, 2001.
Such waiver will apply to payments made by February 20, 2002, or to payments
advanced by DHHL pursuant to paragraph C.
C. For those homestead lessees with real property tax balances, excluding penalty
and interest, of more than $500, if payment is, not made by February 20, 2002,
DHHL will advance full payment of all real property taxes, excluding penalty and
interest, to bring those bills current, within 60 days of receipt of an updated real
property tax listing. This date may be extended by mutual agreement of the
parties.
D. It is understood that the County's waiver of interest and penalty charges on
delinquent real property taxes owed by homestead lessees as of December 31,
2001, and DHHL's advance of full payment of real property taxes, excluding
interest and penalty, in accordance with paragraph C, is a one-time only offer.
E. In order to alleviate or reduce further delinquencies, the County will notify DHHL
on an annual basis of any delinquent property owners.
F. The parties will continue to meet on an annual basis to evaluate the extent of
delinquencies by Hawaiian homestead lessees on the Island of Hawaii and take
action, if necessary, to keep delinquencies from recurring.
I
COH/DHHJ Memorandum of Agreement
Page 5
G. The County and DHHL shall work to establish a customer trust fund by July 1,
2004 to collect real property tax payments as part of the mortgage/loan payments
in order to make smaller, regular payments.
VII. Areas for Further Collaboration
The parties agree to work further on the following issues:
A. The creation of new County zoning districts for farming and pastoral activities.
B. The development of infrastructure standards for rural land uses such as
agricultural and pastoral activities.
C. The establishment of procedures for sharing evidence, information, and testimony
involving criminal violations on Hawaiian home lands.
D. The implementation of actions to prevent and/or address future real property tax
delinquencies by Hawaiian homestead lessees.
VIII. Termination
To achieve the objectives of this MOA, either party may, by mutual agreement in writing,
further clarify or waive any term or condition of this agreement, provided such action
does not violate any statutes, ordinances, or binding rules or regulations. DHHL and the
County reserve the right to terminate this MOA upon one hundred eighty (180) days
notice in writing to the other party.
In agreement thereof, the parties have entered into this Memorandum of Agreement on this
day of , 2002.
COUNTY OF HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF HAWAIIAN HOME
LANDS
B<~y By
Harry K Iayor R ardr oon, Chairman
H waiia mes Commission
APPROVED AS TO FORM: _
Corporation Counsel / Q puty Attorney General
j 41
i