Less than 24 hours after a stunning defeat for the state Office of Hawaiian Affairs before the Legislature, supporters of the proposed $200 million ceded lands settlement, including OHA officials themselves, held out hope that the agreement could be salvaged during the remaining month-and-a-half of the legislative session.
Meanwhile, opponents of the proposal said yesterday that OHA officials need to spend more time talking to the agency's beneficiaries after the legislative session to get the agency's priorities right.
After five hours of testimony, three major committees of the state Senate voted Monday night to shelve the plan, which would have had the state transfer three parcels valued at $187 million, $13 million in cash and at least $15 million annually, to OHA as its share of revenues derived from ceded lands.
In exchange, OHA and other Hawaiians would no longer be able to make further claims to those revenues.
Those opposed to House Bill 266 said Monday that the measure was giving up too much for too little and that it would have additional ramifications.
Two of three committee chairmen, Jill Tokuda, D-24th (Kailua, Kane'ohe), and Clayton Hee, D-23rd (Kane'ohe, Kahuku), said they wanted to OHA to go back to the drawing board after session.
But OHA Administrator Clyde Namu'o said agency officials want to talk to Senate President Colleen Hanabusa and House Speaker Calvin Say to see if there's still any chance of the settlement passing this session.
"When and if that is exhausted and there is no relief, the trustees will determine, based on counsel's recommendation, what the next course of action might be," Namu'o said. Asked if that might include a lawsuit, Namu'o replied: "Whether or not there is a cause of action that OHA might assert, that is what the attorneys need to determine and recommend accordingly."
He added: "Honestly, we would prefer not to go there. We really would prefer a legislative solution, and we don't think it's too late."
House Majority Leader Kirk Caldwell, D-24th (Manoa), said House Democratic leaders have also not given up on an amended bill that they helped craft.
"There are 26 days left in the legislative session, that's a little less than half," Caldwell said. "Many things can happen." House leaders have yet to discuss whether to hold hearings on Senate Bill 2733, the Senate's version of the agreement which crossed over from that chamber earlier this month, he said.
Procedurally, the House could change the language of the Senate bill to reflect House Bill 266. If that happens, House and Senate members could try to hammer out an agreement in conference committee at the end of session. But that could only be done if the Senate leadership assigned conferees to discuss the matter, and it would not be required to do so.
Almost as stunning as the committees' abrupt decision Monday was the tone of the meeting. At a House hearing on the same bill also held in the Capitol auditorium on Feb. 23, hardly anyone spoke in opposition. Before the Senate on Monday, a majority of the speakers testified against it.
Kamaki Kanahele, chairman of the Sovereign Councils of the Hawaiian Homesteaders Assembly, said what drew scores of homesteaders to the hearing was OHA's refusal to acknowledge that they, as beneficiaries of the ceded lands, should have been consulted more thoroughly and early on.
"They refused to recognize us, associate with us, to work with us," Kanahele said.
Namu'o said that in response to a request from lawmakers, OHA is holding more than 50 meetings statewide to discuss the issue with beneficiaries and the public.
"I would say that anecdotally, many of the people who attended the meetings did not have any solutions to improve the legislation," Namu'o said.
Tamar deFries, vice president of the Merchant Street Hawaiian Civic Club who helped rally opponents by passing out copies of the bills in Native Hawaiian communities in recent weeks, said beneficiary consultation "involves a two-way flow of information and opinion exchange that can lead to several levels of participation, including the involvement of drafting policy and legislation."
That has not been done, deFries said.
The interim will allow stakeholders to "begin a process of truth that includes: a full and complete inventory of the ceded lands, an audit of all gross revenues generated by the ceded lands, and beneficiary consultation with stakeholders," she said.
Reach Gordon Y.K. Pang at gpang@honoluluadvertiser.com.
Comments
> MARCH 20, 2008
>
> RELEASE NO. 032008-02
>
> OHA VOWS TO CONTINUE TO SEEK PASSAGE
>
> The Office of Hawaiians Affairs today vowed to continue its efforts to seek passage of the proposed settlement on Public Land Trust funds owed to OHA for the betterment of conditions of Hawaiians. A bill to approve the proposed settlement negotiated between OHA and the State Administration was rejected by three Senate committees on Monday, March 17.
>
> OHA Chairperson Haunani Apoliona said OHA is both responding to constructive suggestions that have come out of meetings across the state and other outreach, as well as preparing additional information to counter false statements raised in testimony to the Legislature. She said, "The future of Hawaiÿi depends on everyone speaking truthfully and reaching agreement on facts."
>
> An inaccurate but widely repeated claim is that one of these areas, Kalaeloa Makai, is "a toxic waste dump." That is simply not true. The Kalaeloa Makai land is zoned industrial, and because of its previous use as a feedlot, there may be some contaminants that may need to be mitigated. OHA has reviewed a Phase I environmental assessment conducted by DLNR, a Phase II assessment is underway. OHA will, per the terms of the settlement agreement, continue due diligence on all parcels if the settlement is passed.
>
> Trustee Walter Heen said that "In line with OHA's policy on real estate, our objective in this settlement was to obtain land that can generate significant revenues in the future. Pristine land, which should be preserved, is another priority of OHA. But the proposed settlement identified only lands that can generate funds to help steward pristine lands and for programs and services that benefit Hawaiians.
>
> Another claim of bill opponents is that no settlement should be reached until a complete inventory of ceded lands and their revenues is conducted. While OHA strongly supports an inventory of ceded lands, and believes the State should pay for it since the State controls these lands, having an inventory is not required to settle past due disputed amounts. OHA does not own and is not entitled to the ceded lands themselves - OHA's only rights are to a pro rata portion of income and proceeds from those lands. And while a ceded lands inventory has not been done, the state does produce a report under the terms of Act 178 of the 2006 legislature, which accounts for income and proceeds from those ceded lands which produce income and proceeds.
>
> Trustee Stender said OHA was disappointed that the Senate responded only to the concerns of a vocal minority. He added, "They do not represent the vast majority of Hawaiians who want a reasonable and fair settlement that preserves our sovereign claims to the ceded lands."
>
> He noted that OHA was still conducting the last of the scheduled 50 community meetings and had not submitted a report on public feedback due on March 26, as required by a legislative resolution.
>
> Stender pointed to a statewide survey conducted by Ward Research that showed a majority of respondents and 72% of Hawaiians supported legislative approval of the proposed settlement.
>
> Boyd Mossman, the OHA trustee from Maui and a member of the negotiating team, said opponents are using the proposed settlement as criticism of OHA. Mossman said the proposed agreement is necessary to better serve the Hawaiian people. "This is a legal obligation of the State of Hawaiÿi, and OHA was established by the State Constitution to use money from the public land trust for the benefit of all Hawaiians."
>