HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017-03-20 Letter to Ryan I. Yamane re SB 1292 SD 2 HD 1 relating to the Hilo Community Economic District
Wil Okabe
Managing Director
Harry Kim
Mayor
Barbara J. Kossow
Deputy Managing Director
County of Hawai‘i
Office of the Mayor
25 Aupuni Street, Suite 2603 Hilo, Hawai‘i 96720 (808) 961-8211 Fax (808) 961-6553
KONA: 74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Hwy., Bldg. C Kailua-Kona, Hawai‘i 96740
(808) 323-4444 Fax (808) 323-4440
March 20, 2017
Rep. Ryan I. Yamane, Chair
Committee on Water & Land
Hawaii State Capitol
Honolulu, HI 96813
Dear Chair Yamane and Members:
RE: SB 1292 SD 2 HD 1
Relating to the Hilo Community Economic District
On behalf of the Hilo community, I would like to thank the Legislature for its
attempts to resolve the dilemma of State leases on commercial properties that are
nearing the end of their lease term.
My Administration has been supporting the efforts of Big Island legislators to
make special provisions for the economic district in Hilo, as in earlier drafts of SB1292
as well as HB 575, HB 1310, and HB 1479. I have wanted to reflect the community
wishes, and have been very impressed with the way in which the community has
worked together and rallied behind these proposals. I think it is very important that the
collaborative efforts of state, county, and community leaders not be put at risk.
In order to give DNLR the most tools to make its leases work, maybe a hybrid
version of the various bills can be developed, and that is what SB 1292, HD1 is
attempting to do. The different concepts are not incompatible, and if such a bill were to
continue on to conference, it would give the stakeholder’s time to fully evaluate the
options and collaborate on a final approach. Lessees might appreciate having two or
three options, or reject one or more out of hand, but the hard work of building
consensus would be rewarded rather than lost.
Having said that, I must offer a cautionary comment.
County of Hawai‘i is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer.
Ryan Yamane
March 20, 2017
Page 2
The series of bills addressing economic development on State lands in Hilo (H.B.
No. 575; H.B. No. 1310, H.D. 1; H.B. No. 1469, H.D. 1; and now SB No. 1292, HD1)
may all have merit, and therefore we appreciate the decision of the prior committees to
keep the various solutions alive for further discussion. However, this issue is so
important that we cannot risk losing this bill because of a technicality. We therefore want
to point out that the title of SB 1292 is "A BILL FOR AN ACT RELATING TO THE HILO
COMMUNITY ECONOMIC DISTRICT," while some of the language of SB1292, HD1
seems to be of statewide impact. If your attorneys do not think the language is too
broad for the title, we certainly would defer to them, but we would ask that you take this
into account, because we do not want to jeopardize ultimate passage of this bill.
With respect to the specific provisions of the bill, I would defer to our community
partners, who are directly impacted, to express their preference. But if you decide to
restore the language of SB 1292, SD2, I would offer the following comments from my
prior testimony on SB1292, SD2, and I am also attaching the testimony of the Hawaii
County Planning Department from the earlier hearing on this bill for your consideration.
1. Should this bill (SB1292, SD2) be enacted into law, the Hilo Community
Economic District (HCED) will be the only redevelopment district outside of the
City and County of Honolulu. For this reason, we ask that consideration be given
to providing that the District have a voting majority of members from the Hilo
community. Any cultural specialist, in particular, should be a cultural practitioner
from the Hilo community.
2. Financial support from State general revenues should include
opportunities for staffing and facility support, through reimbursements, as may be
provided by the County of Hawaii and the Banyan Drive Hawaii Redevelopment
Agency (BDHRA) in support of the Banyan Drive redevelopment project.
3. We cannot afford to jeopardize or divert the real property tax revenue that
comes from the affected parcels and currently goes into the County general fund
(we estimate that for the properties in SB 1292, tax revenue exceeds $3M).
SB 1292, SD2 says that
§206E-D Hilo community economic revolving fund. (a) There is
established in the state treasury the Hilo community economic revolving
fund, into which shall be deposited:
(1) Notwithstanding any law to the contrary, including section 206E-
16, all revenue, income, and receipts of the authority for the district;
County of Hawai'i is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer.
Ryan Yamane
March 20, 2017
Page 3
It also seems, theoretically at least, that the Authority could issue leases that
provide for the lessee to be exempt from property taxes for the term of the lease.
We do not think that SB 1292, SD2 is intended to affect real property taxes, so
ask for language that makes it crystal clear that real property taxes are not part of
"revenues, income, and receipts...", that leases cannot affect property tax obligations,
and that all property taxes will continue to flow to the County general fund.
4. The bill says its purpose is to deal with State-owned land, so perhaps
language should be inserted that says that it applies only to land within the
district boundaries that is State-owned. We have not determined how much non-
State owned land might be affected.
We appreciate the attention that the Legislature has placed on the disposition of
State lands within and proximate to the Banyan Drive peninsula and the Kanoelehua
Industrial Area, where opportunities exist to partner with private sector businesses to
carry out important economic revitalization efforts and to optimize the use of these lands
for the benefit of the entire community. Our ongoing efforts with the BDHRA reflect that
such benefits are not simply economic, but social and cultural as well. It is with this
comprehensive approach that we support the intent and purpose of SB1292 and other
bills introduced during this legislative session that seek to explore opportunities
regarding the use and management of State-owned lands within the core economic
section of Hilo.
Re/, .. .
pectfully submitted,
r --\
(
/t,--vv-•-
Harry Ki
Mayor
County of 1-lawaii is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer.
Harry KimMichael Yee
Director
Mayor
Daryn Arai
DeputyDirector
East Hawai‘i Office
West Hawai‘i Office
101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3
74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Hwy
Hilo, Hawai‘i 96720
Kailua-Kona,Hawai‘i96740 County of Hawai‘i
Phone (808) 961-8288
Phone (808) 323-4770
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Fax (808) 961-8742
Fax (808) 327-3563
Testimony of
MICHAEL YEE
Planning Director
Before the Senate Committee on Economic Development, Tourism and Technology
and the Committee on Water and Land
Monday, March 20, 2017
2:45PM
State Capitol, Conference Room 414
In consideration of
HB 1310HD1, RELATING TO THE WAIAKEA PENINSULA REDEVELOPMENT
DISTRICT
HB 1469 HD1, RELATING TO PUBLIC LANDS
HB 1479HD2, RELATING TO THE HILO COMMUNITY ECONMOIC DISTRICT
The Planning Department has been involved in the planning phases of proposed redevelopment
act
unintended consequence of the State’s leasing policies under HRS 171 has been the lack of
reinvestment by lessees into the infrastructure of leased properties and the infrastructures’
subsequent decline. Hilo is particularly affected by these leasing policies as there are substantial
tracts of State lands in our community. Planning and the BDHRA are supportive of proposed
legislation to stimulate reinvestment and economic growth through changes to the State’s leasing
policies. Planning and the BDHRA also agree that the properties identified in HB1310 HD1,
HB1479 HD2, and SB1292 SD2 could benefit from revisions to leasing policies and from
comprehensive planning efforts to identify a successful path forward that supports the lessees
and the broader interests and concerns of our community.
Planning and the BDHRA are aware that theLegislature must consider the two structurally
different approaches these bills are proposing; redevelopment under DLNR direction through
under HB1479 HD2 and SB1292 SD2. The strengths and benefits of both entities should be
considered as these bills move forward.
www.cohplanningdept.com Hawai`i County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer planning@hawaiicounty.gov
HB1469 HD1proposes changes to HRS 171, pertaining to management and disposition of
public lands. Planning is offering the following specific comments on HB1469 HD1.
The purpose of this bill, in part, is to: §171-A(b)(2) “establish a plan for the designated
area, including district-wide improvements, that is coordinated with State and county
land use and planning policies;”. The director of planning of the county in which the
designated district is located is identified as an “ex-officio, voting member of the
committee”, which is to contain 9 members. Language should be made clear to identify
both the director of planning and the chairperson of the board of land and natural
resources as members that count toward a voting quorum of the committee’s
membership.
Under §171-D(b)(2)(B), we recommend adding a new section: (vii) Land Use Planning
or similar field;
Under §171-D(b)(2), we recommend adding new section: §171-D(b)(2)(C) One member
shall be selected on the basis of their knowledge of history and cultural traditions or
practices within the redevelopment area.
Under §171-F(e), consider replacing the date 2020 with the Legislative session directly
following the two-year anniversary of the formation of the planning committee for the
redevelopment district.
Concerning Section 171-F(e). Planning questions whether 2-years is long enough to
develop a redevelopment plan with needed studies and public input. This section should
includea provision for a time extension of not more than 2 additional years in case more
time to develop a redevelopment plan is needed.
Concerning Section 171-
Chapter 53 relating to Urban Renewal Law
redevelopment plan developed pursuant to Chapter 171, HRS should work with or
incorporate the redevelopment actions or plan developed pursuant to Chapter 53, HRS.
Under §171-35(6), include the underscored in the bill’s language: “Where applicable,
adequate protection of forests, watershed areas, game management areas, wildlife
and public hunting areas, reservation of
sanctuaries, important cultural or historical sites,
rights-of-way and access to other public lands, public hunting areas, game management
areas, or public beaches, and prevention of nuisance and waste; and”
---
Planning recognizes that HB1310 HD1is dependent on the proposed structure provided by the
passing of HB1469_ HD1 or a version thereof. Specific comments are provided for
HB1469_HD1 above.
---
HB1479 HD2
Community Development Authority, to prompt needed changes in a number of State-owned
BDHRA through use of HRS 53 in order to plan for and redevelop lands along Banyan Drive in
Hilo. In review of HRS 206E and HRS 53, it would appear both sets of legislation employ
2
similar powers and duties to the respective authority or agency. If the Legislature considers the
adoption of HB1479 HD2 or SB1292 SD2 the County would request that the progress made to
date by BDHRA (such as the development of a conceptual master plan) be incorporated into the
Hilo Community Economic Development District effort.
The County would note that, in comparing HB1479 HD2 with its companion Senate bill, it
appears the House bill has included a number of requests made by HDCA that seem necessary in
order for that entity to successfully take on the planning and redevelopment of the district. As
such, the House version of the bill might be more complete than the Senate version at this time.
Planning is offering the following specific comments on HB1479 HD2.
Concerning Section206E-3. In the case of the Hilo Community Economic Development
District, the cultural specialist identified in subsection (b) should be from the district. This could
be done by making the existing position an “at-large” position and including a cultural specialist
from the district, or by adding language that identifies that each cultural specialist should be from
the individual economic development districts. The Planning Director should be included as an
ex-officio votingmember of the authority. Specifically relating to the Hilo Community
Economic Development District, Planning makes the following language suggestions identified
in subsection (4); deletions struck, additions underlined:
(4) For matters affecting the Hilo community economic development district, the following
members shall be considered in determining quorum and majority and shall be eligible to vote:
(A) The director of finance or the director’s designee;
(B) The director of transportation or the director’s designee;
(C) Thedirector of planning or the director’s designee;
(E)(D)The cultural specialist-at large;
(E)The cultural specialist from the district;
(D)(F)The three at-large members; and
(E)(G)The three representatives of the Hilo community economic development district;.
provided that the director of planning and permitting of the relevant county or the director’s
designee shall participate in these matters as an ex officio, nonvoting member and shall not be
considered in determining quorum and majority.
Mahalo foryour consideration of these important initiatives.
3