Ka Wai Ola - Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Volume 26, Number 3, 1 March 2009 — Land management [ARTICLE+ILLUSTRATION]

Land management

In the current legislative session, OHA is again asking the Legislature to aeknowledge that the State owes OHA $200 million in "back rent" for the use of ceded lands going back to 1978. Also, in partial payment of that delinquency, OHA is again asking the Legislature to transfer ownership of State lands at Kaka'ako Makai on O'ahu and Banyan Drive in Hilo. Although OHA sought those parcels in 2008, some people still question how OHA decided on those two properties and why we eonhnue to seek them. Those properties were not selected "willynilly." They were selected by the Board from a rather long list of State-owned properties. The selection was consistent with OHA's "Real Estate Vision, Mission, and Strategy" adopted by the Board in 2007. The policy may be viewed on OHA's web site. The thrust of the Policy is that OHA's real estate acquisition and management activities shall be govemed by principles and actions that will protect Hawai'i's cultural lands and provide a land base to support the future nahon. The OHA Board is keenly aware of its kuleana to protect our cultural lands. At the same time, however, we also know that to provide that protection we, and the future nahon, will need income-producing lands. That need fonns the basis for selecting the Hilo and O'ahu lands. Many of you might recall that in 2006 the community strongly opposed a developer's plan to erect expensive high-rise apartment buildings at Kaka'ako Makai. That caused the developer to abandon that proposal. So, the logical question is, "Why does OHA want that property?" OHA is not proposing to go high-rise or residential. We have preliminarily discussed developing open-air

pavilions or gathering places, with walkways along the water, and an area for truly Native Hawaiian products to be displayed and sold to both residents and visitors. The property lends itself to true cultural preservation while providing ineome for protecting other cultural properties. The Hilo property ean also be transformed into a combination of cultural preservation and income-producing lands. The Board has discussed eventually removing the hotels on the makai side of Banyan Drive. That would open the waterfront from the area of Lili'uokalani Gardens to "Reed's Bay" for access by everyone for fishing and other cultural activities. Across Banyan Drive, the golf course ean be replaced by hotel and conunercial activities that produce ineome to maintain the cultural uses. The hotel and conunercial activities would also benefit the general Hilo conununity. OHA's proposals have been presented to the coimnunities on all islands. Except for the Hilo community, the proposals have been rather well-received. Keaukaha residents, particularly, oppose the transfer of the Banyan Drive property to OHA. They are particularly concerned because the property is in a tsunami inundation zone, and there could be considerable damage, personal injury or even loss of life in the event of a tidal wave in the future. OHA' s bills are being considered by eommittees in both the House and the Senate. At conunittee hearings there appears to be some acceptance of the fact that $200 million is owed to OHA. That will not be certain, of course, until the session is over. However, there is resistance to transferring the Hilo property to OHA so that it may be removed from further consideration. Additionally, there is strong indication that the Legislature will add properties to the mix. Some of those will be properties that are indeed culturally important. We also expect that some properties with ineome potential will be part of the "package." In any event, OHA will consider those additions in light of its Real Estate Vision and Mission. S

Walter M. Heen TrustEE, 0'shu