Lawmakers are considering a bill to allow the Office of Hawaiian Affairs to build housing units in Kakaʻako, makai of Ala Moana Boulevard. However, a 17-year-old ban on residential development in the area is still in place.
Craig Nakamoto of the Hawaiʻi Community Development Authority, which oversees development in Kakaʻako, said plans for the area have gone back and forth on residential development at least four times since 1985.
"The current law is the law regarding residential development, and HCDA intends to follow that law," Nakamoto said.
Senate Bill 736 would allow the HCDA to approve residential development on land parcels owned by OHA.
"If the residential development restriction is lifted on these nine parcels, if it is, the applicant would still have to come to the Hawaiʻi Community Development Authority to review any development permit," he said. "It would still be subject to the makai rules. It would still have to follow the current contested case hearing requirements."
SB736 received slightly more testimony against the measure than for it at a hearing Wednesday before the Senate Committees on Water and Land and Hawaiian Affairs. Over 200 pages of written testimony were also submitted prior to the hearing.
Many who oppose the bill say residential development could threaten the last open public shoreline in urban Honolulu.
"This bill is premature. Because Hakuone is owned by OHA, a state agency, any development proposed by a new master plan to increase density triggers a new environmental assessment. I urge you defer on SB 736 until OHA completes the required environmental review," said Lee Sichter, an urban planner, at the hearing.
OHA accepted this Kakaʻako land from the state in 2012 as a settlement for ceded lands revenue the state withheld from OHA for nearly 50 years. Casey Brown, Chief Operating Officer at OHA, said trustees at the time knew the residential restrictions were in place.
"Of course they were aware. And of course they wanted to have the lands with the entitlements, but again what played into the dealmaking was it was take-it-or-leave-it," Brown said.
He added that the agency accepted the deal with the expectation that lawmakers would be open to discussions on entitlements further down the road. That was 10 years ago.
If the ban on residential development is not lifted, is it time for the state to revisit this settlement and consider transferring other lands to OHA? Or perhaps money instead?
"OHA wants to be as open as possible to any offers that are made by the state," he continued. "But you know hard to tell Hawaiians to give up land. We have land in our hands that we believe are valuable … So any offer that would come to OHA that would ask OHA to deal away these lands would have to be a very significant offer."
Decision-making on SB736 is set for Feb. 16 at 1 p.m.
