Bill Text: HI HB921 | 2010 | Regular Session | Amended
Bill Title: 999-year Homestead Lease; Assignment
Spectrum: Partisan Bill (Democrat 1-0)
Status: (Vetoed) 2010-07-06 - (S) Vetoed on 07-06-10 - Returned from the Governor without approval (Gov. Msg. No. 654). [HB921 Detail]
Download: Hawaii-2010-HB921-Amended.html
STAND. COM. REP. NO. 1080
Honolulu, Hawaii
RE: H.B. No. 921
H.D. 1
S.D. 1
Honorable Colleen Hanabusa
President of the Senate
Twenty-Fifth State Legislature
Regular Session of 2009
State of Hawaii
Madam:
Your Committee on Water, Land, Agriculture, and Hawaiian Affairs, to which was referred H.B. No. 921, H.D. 1, entitled:
"A BILL FOR AN ACT RELATING TO PUBLIC LANDS,"
begs leave to report as follows:
The purpose of this measure is to expand the potential assignees of a homestead lease to include trustees of land trusts created for the purposes of managing and holding a homestead for the benefit of the lessee and the lessee's family member.
Testimony in support of this measure was submitted by two organizations. Testimony in opposition was submitted by one state agency and one public citizen. Written testimony presented to your Committee may be reviewed on the Legislature's website.
Although your Committee recognizes the problems addressed by this measure, serious concerns have been raised regarding the legal issues involved with assigning the homestead lease to land trusts.
Your Committee finds that asserting the Legislature's management authority over ceded lands is an immediate concern that needs to be addressed in light of the recent United States Supreme Court oral arguments for Office of Hawaiian Affairs v. Housing and Community Development Corporation of Hawaii, 117 Hawaii 174 (2008).
Your Committee has amended this measure by:
(1) Replacing its contents with the contents of S.B. No. 1085, S.D. 1, which was earlier passed by the Senate, with amendments and which prohibits the sale or transfer of ceded lands, with certain specified exceptions, until the claims of the native Hawaiian people have been resolved or until the Legislature finds by concurrent resolution that the State no longer supports reconciliation between the State and the native Hawaiian people; and
(2) Inserting language to permit the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands to negotiate lease terms beyond sixty-five years, and provide a right of first refusal to previous lessees.
Your Committee notes that the recent United States Supreme Court oral argument referenced the ongoing legislative session. Justice Alito asked the Attorney General, "would there be anything to prevent the Hawaiian legislature from passing a law that says . . . we are going to impose a five-year moratorium on any transfer of these lands because we want to promote a reconciliation process?" Transcript of Oral Argument at 11, Office of Hawaiian Affairs v. Housing and Community Development Corporation of Hawaii, 117 Hawaii 174 (2008) (No. 07-1372). This line of inquiry was later iterated by Justice Breyer, indicating that the Justices are clearly contemplating action by this Legislature. Transcript of Oral Argument at 16, supra. Justice Souter summed up the discussion by saying, "the Supreme Court of Hawaii, in effect, has said the land is tied up until these people who are currently negotiating, the State, the Native Hawaiians . . . all come to a . . . resolution and a reconciliation. . . They are just saying, no more land transfers until these people sit down and make up their differences." Transcript of Oral Argument at 24-25. Thus, your Committee believes in light of the Hawaii State Supreme Court decision and the pending United States Supreme Court decision, action by this Legislature is the most efficient and widely accepted method of addressing the immediate problem of disposing of ceded lands. The United States Supreme Court clearly recognizes the political nature of the ceded lands claims, and the Hawaii State Supreme Court stated as much in their opinion.
In sum, all of the aforementioned pronouncements indicate that the issue of native Hawaiian title to the ceded lands will be addressed through the political process. In this case, Congress, the Hawaii state legislature, the parties, and the trial court all recognize (1) the cultural importance of the land to native Hawaiians, (2) that the ceded lands were illegally taken from the native Hawaiian monarchy, (3) that future reconciliation between the state and the native Hawaiian people is contemplated, and, (4) once any ceded lands are alienated from the public lands trust, they will be gone forever. For present purposes, this court need not speculate as to what a future settlement might entail- i.e., whether such settlement would involve monetary payment, transfer of lands, ceded or otherwise, a combination of money and land, or the creation of a sovereign Hawaiian nation; it is enough that Congress, the legislature, and the governor have all expressed their desire to reach such a settlement. In other words, . . . the State has a fiduciary duty as trustee to protect the ceded lands pending a resolution of native Hawaiian claims. 117 Hawaii at 213 (2008).
As affirmed by the record of votes of the members of your Committee on Water, Land, Agriculture, and Hawaiian Affairs that is attached to this report, your Committee is in accord with the intent and purpose of H.B. No. 921, H.D. 1, as amended herein, and recommends that it pass Second Reading in the form attached hereto as H.B. No. 921, H.D. 1, S.D. 1, and be referred to the Committee on Ways and Means.
Respectfully submitted on behalf of the members of the Committee on Water, Land, Agriculture, and Hawaiian Affairs,
|
|
|
____________________________ CLAYTON HEE, Chair |
|
|
|
|
