OPPOSE SB469 to protect the Land Use Commission & public interest...again

/

SB469 is the companion to HB673, both authorize counties to reclassify lands that are 15-100 acres in certain rural, urban, and agricultural districts in which at least 50% of the housing units on the land are set aside for affordable housing.

SB 469 is being heard in the Senate Water and Land Committee on Friday, February 10 at 2:05pm in room 229. Testimony is due by Thursday, February 9 at 2:05pm.

Why this is bad:

This bill would prevent the Land Use Commission (“LUC”) from applying its decades of institutional knowledge and practice, and its critically important “quasi-judicial” approach to decisionmaking, in vast land use district changes (i.e. from agricultural to urban).

While the intent of the bill is laudable, the LUC is not the purported barrier to affordable housing as certain developers have claimed; instead, its decades of experience have provided it with the ability to effectively and efficiently navigate and balance highly complex public interests (including environmental, cultural, agricultural, socioeconomic, climate, and even affordable housing concerns) that may be impacted by large-scale development proposals. No completed affordable housing application has been denied within the 45-day statutory deadlines imposed on the LUC, and tens of thousands of housing units have been approved by the LUC, but never built.  

The LUC also evaluates and approves land use changes using a “quasi-judicial” process, where expert and kamaʻāina testimony and other evidence is explicitly considered in findings of fact, conclusions of law, and conditions of approval - providing a transparent and objective basis for its decisionmaking.  The counties, on the other hand, utilize a “quasi-legislative” process, where public testimony is simply received and a decision rendered, without any requirement for testimony or other evidence be used as a basis for decisionmaking.

Sample testimony:

Dear Chair Inouye, Vice Chair Elefante, and members of the committee,

My name is ______ and I respectfully OPPOSE SB469. There are a range of public interests that may be impacted, potentially for generations, by large scale land use changes. These interests - environmental, cultural, agricultural, socioeconomic, and others – must be carefully and transparently balanced, to address concerns, minimize unnecessary impacts, and minimize conflict and controversy. The Land Use Commission has decades of experience in doing just this, and should not have its ability to oversee land use district reclassifications  limited or eliminated. 

Forcing county planning departments to take on the new burden of solely administering land use district reclassification and balancing the myriad public interests in land use could have significant, long-lasting, and avoidable impacts on those interests. This could even have the inadvertent effect of delaying affordable housing production, by reducing planning departments’ capacity to administer other permits and applications needed for housing development and redevelopment.

Rather than reduce the LUC’s authority, the committees may wish to consider providing it with enforcement tools that can better hold developers accountable when they fail to produce promised affordable and workforce housing units after their petitions for district boundary reclassifications are approved.  

Accordingly, I respectfully urge the committees to HOLD SB469. Mahalo nui for the opportunity to testify.

Sincerely,
[Your name]

Testimony instructions:

  1. Register for a capitol website account if you haven’t yet (youʻll need to confirm your registration by responding to an automated email)

  2. Sign in to capitol.hawaii.gov with your registration information and click the "Submit Testimony" button.

  3. Enter "SB469" where it says "Enter Bill or Measure."

  4. Input your information and your written testimony, select your testimony option(s)—in-person + written, remotely + written, written only. Please consider providing verbal testimony (in-person or remotely) if you are able! 

    1. Note: Virtual testimony option may be disabled 24 hours before the hearing.

  5. If you are testifying via Zoom, be sure to review these instructions (page 4)