Mayor Harry Kim is hoping to have a conceptual plan for a Kaikoo-style redevelopment project to help those displaced by the Kilauea eruption drafted within a month.
Kim said a committee consisting of representatives from Hawaii County, the state, Federal Emergency Management Agency and consultants are working on the issue, and has met twice so far.
“Our plan must be comprehensive, and we absolutely must know what the needs are,” Kim said.
The Kaikoo project allowed Hilo residents displaced by the 1960 tsunami to use state land for housing or businesses. The state law that allowed that to happen is still on the books.
Kim said he was a college student at the time of the tsunami and was a “gofer” for government agencies during the response efforts.
“I learned a lot,” he said, from that experience. “And, by golly, they did it.”
“If I do my job — and I will do my job — I hope to get a conceptual plan finished within a month,” Kim later added.
He noted that before they can offer specifics, they will need to first assess the need.
“It takes a little time to do that,” Kim said. “Hopefully, we will do it as soon as possible.”
But he also suggested that residents shouldn’t move back into Lava Zone 1.
“I think (the county) should review the fact that it is not wise to allow people to build” there, Kim said.
State Sen. Russell Ruderman, a Democrat representing Puna and Ka‘u, thinks the state and county could move fairly quickly with establishing a new community for the hundreds of residents who have lost their homes.
He’s proposing use of undeveloped state land on both sides of Highway 130. The “makai parcel” is between Hawaiian Beaches and Hawaiian Paradise Park, while the “mauka parcel” is between Pahoa and Ainaloa.
He said the parcels are located in Lava Zone 3 and have access to power and county water.
Ruderman said the land could be licensed to a nonprofit, such as Habitat for Humanity, that could provide long-term leases to those who lost their homes or help them build new residences. He said agricultural lots also could be provided.
Those who accept a parcel would give their inundated lot to the state.
Ruderman said the goal is to “take care with aloha and make it better than it was” for those who lost everything.
He said he presented his proposal to Kim and Gov. David Ige.
The mayor said the proposal is being considered.
“I told him at the time our program we are looking into is very, very comprehensive which would include ideas of his,” Kim said.
Hershel Hood, who lost his home in Lanipuna Gardens, backs Ruderman’s idea.
Hood said he and his wife had enough time to grab two bags of clothes and one bag of documents. He said they’ve had trouble finding affordable housing and are living in an attic above a Pahoa restaurant.
“My goal is to not let it die,” Hood said about the proposal. “This is what we hope for.”
Between 450 and 500 people were in shelters in Pahoa and Keaau on Wednesday, according to county Civil Defense.
Churches and nonprofit groups are helping to build “micro-units” as transitional housing.
Twenty such units were constructed last Saturday at Sacred Heart Catholic Church in Pahoa.
Pastor Dion Maeda of Connect Point Church said his church is proposing to build another 10 of the 120-square-foot shelters in Hawaiian Paradise Park. He said the church is awaiting approval from the county.
To donate or volunteer, Maeda can be contacted at 937-6968.
Email Tom Callis at tcallis@hawaiitribune-herald.com.
This almost sounds reasonable. I think it fair that their mortgage balance follow them as well and the county is reimbursed something for the land via the families and mortgage companies. Its a start anyway. Until I read this…..”“I think (the county) should review the fact that it is not wise to allow people to build” there, Kim said.” Really you idiot is should never been allowed to happen!
Ok, so you want to build a planned development for the displaced? The question is who pays for the infrastructure of this new planned community? Who pays for the sewer system? Who pays for the roads? Who pays for the electric grid? Who pays for the water delivery system and individual hookups? The county council is ready to raise the GET. Property taxes were raised this year.
Will this new development prohibit short term rentals or will we now pay for a tourist Mecca of hundreds of new short term rentals? As usual the poor working stiffs will get the bill for all this and our socialist one party “Social Justice Warriors” will whoop and shout about ‘Aloha’ and how we the stupid taxpayers must foot the bill for the poor judgement of people who built homes, businesses, and lives in the most active lava zone in the world.
I know who is going to pay for this…we the over taxed and under represented idiots who can’t seem to change this bloated bureaucracy full of grifters and career politicians.
Developers pay for the roads and sewers, etc. …. not tax payers. The state leases the land which produces yearly lease rents and also Real Estate taxes for the state. The state benefits as well as the people …. Look at the BIG picture.
Wrong. The roads will be paid for and maintained by the county–as are most roads–and the lease rents will come nowhere near the fair market value the property. We’ll also have to have the county government determine need and administer the leases, which will come nowhere near a break-even point for the county. The taxes on leased land parcels with “affordable” housing will be minimal once you take the standard resident rates and deductions. DHHL has millions of dollars delinquent loans and lease rents for thousands of properties and they are a big states agency. The county would do much worse at a much higher cost to taxpayers. No, this would not be future revenue for the county; it would an expense (to be paid by taxpayers).
Kona Life: The people aren’t going to live in tents on the land. They will pay for houses built there by developers (not the State) and they will be charged Real Estate taxes the same as private land owners do. Subsidies will come from charitable organizations, private funds……not county tax payers
I don’t believe that the government should be in the business of trying to make right the result of choices people made to live in a lava zone 1 or 2. They knew it was a precarious location, and the cost of those lots/home reflected the risk; they got an inexpensive lots in a place that even the insurers (who know risk better than anyone) would not insure for lava.
As Raoul Duke notes (below) giving lots on county owned property in exchange for their lava inundated (worthless) property will only result in huge costs for the county taxpayers. There is no way this will not end up costing taxpayers tens of millions of dollars in infrastructure, lost land value, administrative and other costs.
Let private sector builders, landowners and financial institutions efficiently and at no cost to taxpayers work to provide land (our island has a lot of it), homes and financing to those who need it. The county could work with builders to agree to pre-approved designs for affordable housing to get the permitting done quickly.
For certain, the work of non-profits and faith-based organizations in those communities should play a role (as they already have).
This is not a government problem–other than the need for it to get out of the way. One could reasonable argue that the county created the problem by letting people build in lava zones 1 and 2 in the first place!
Well stated!
You are blaming lower income people for choosing the only land available to them? Do you understand how this happens: how government works with developers to enable tragically stupid housing situations? You do realize that most homeowners had insurance, right? Insurance subsidized by your taxes through a State fund, as private insurers wouldn’t carry them. This whole event is because the State and County made it possible for developers to profit from cheap land. Its not entirely the fault of people who assumed it was safe because “why else would the Planning Department allow an entire subdivision if it wasn’t safe?”
Government should absolutely make it right. And they should prevent it from happening again. The huge costs we will bear as taxpayers is because years of the County Planning Department allowing your oh-so-honorable “private sector builders” and developers to build in inappropriate places, and the State subsidizing the insurance on it.
If you think this stupidity does not happen on the Kona side, well let me just say that we continue to build golf courses and extensive high-end housing in areas with limited water. Slow moving train wreck. Lava comes a little faster, but same-same on the stupidity level. Developers wanna make money, so they develop inappropriate areas.
Wow! The homeowners who chose to buy in those areas, according to you, have been duped by builders and the county?
C’mon. They knew what they were buying, and they knew that the land was cheap because it was in lava zones 1 & 2. The idea that the government is responsible for fixing the problems caused by private choices is just bad policy. It’s bad for taxpayers, and it sends the signal that no matter where you build (lava zone, flood zone, tsunami zone) the government has to bail you out.
Doesn’t individual choice, responsibility and assumption of risk mean anything?
If they have insurance, as you claim they do, (contrary to what is widely reported in the media) they can be made right by their insurance policy/company.
I’m game. As long as we include in anyone who lost a house to a hurricane, tornado, mud slide, forrest fire, flood, hail, blizzard, trees falling on them or any other natural disaster that one could assume it possible to happen.
Yes! Imagine if Kukio or Hokulia are overrun with lava. If the precedent is to give county or state land to those displaced, we (taxpayers) would be on the hook for billions.
At some point we need to take responsibility for our choices where to live and buy insurance to mitigate the risk. If we won’t or can’t get insurance, it’s not our county, state or national government’s responsibility to cover the risk that we were not willing to cover ourselves.
As I said I’m game.
As long as we include every other place in America where any natural disaster can happen.
Fair is fair.
Exception to one but not the other is discrimination
Do you pay taxes? I, for one, am not willing to give a blank check to the government to cover the losses people incur due to natural disasters. That’s what private insurance if for. Let those who build mansions on mountain sides in Southern California (earthquakes, mudslides, wildfires, erosion, ect) pay for the risks they incur. Likewise, for coastal properties in Florida, Texas, and, yes, Hawaii. I have insurance on my home, cars, health, life, ect and those rates are determined by the risk factors for each. It’s not the government’s responsibility to cover me for risks for which I am unwilling to cover for myself.
Yes I pay taxes
Maybe you could find some bible versus to substantiate your claims?
Works for the current administration in immigration now I see!
Nope, just a belief in individual responsibility and limited government. I understand risk and that’s why I have insurance and don’t live in a lava zone 1 or 2. I fault no one who does live in these areas, but they need to understand that it’s not my responsibility as a taxpayer to subsidize their relocation if they are unable or unwilling to insure their property or maintain sufficient savings to rent or buy a new home. It’s not my responsibility to cover their losses (as much as it’s not theirs to cover mine).
Fine.
And yet look at what we did in Texas, Louisiana, California, Florida.
Oh yeh. Majority republicans.
What about the tsunami in 2011?
Feds covered millions in losses.
Especially in “Rich” Kona.
We do away with that too?
No they didn’t.
FEMA disbursed $6.2 million for small boat harbor repairs, not individual properties.
There were only 14 claims (9 for businesses and 5 for homes) that received low interest SBA loans. Read again, LOANS.
The other losses to property were all covered by individuals and companies through out of pocket payments or private insurance.
This proves that it’s NOT the government’s responsibility to cover losses for those who are unable or unwilling to mitigate their risk though insurance or private funds.
Yes they did.
Nope, you’re just wrong. FEMA paid 75% of repair costs to the harbors: $6.2 million, and the other amounts were loans, all 14 of them. The government did not cover losses to “rich” Kona. I have no problem with loans to credit-worthy individuals and businesses.
Nope you are wrong. Sorry but facts do matter. You are only posting a fraction of the total facts.
You are wrong they didn’t so why are you saying yes? Don’t compare low interest loans to free handouts the county is proposing.
No you are wrong. Sorry that facts matter.
Kona Life: I love learning how things get done and appreciate the education. Having lived in both Hawaii and Calif. I know that in CA the developer pays for the roads and sewers, etc. in the sub-division in order to get permits to build. He adds the cost in the price of the homes the buyers (or lessees) pay. I read that the State is considering contracting with a Developer, like Habitat for Humanity, etc. to take charge of the whole project. If the land is vacant, it is not bringing in any money to the State, so if they lease it (and still own it) they will make money on Real Estate taxes and sales taxes from all the people that will be living there. How is that on the backs of taxpayers? I don’t understand your thinking, but am willing to listen to how you come to your conclusion that this will result in huge costs for county taxpayers.
Sure. The state or country has some land, let’s say it would be worth $5 million (just for the sake of example). If the land was sold at market rates, either entity would receive $5 million today. Now, let’s say the land is set aside for lease. A fair market lease would make it no more compelling than what is available in the private sector, so it will have to be at or below market leases. Likewise if the land is sold to the displaced persons; it’d have to be at or below market rates. The only way the taxpayers get a fair deal is for the state or county to sell it outright at market rates, but that won’t happen.
Now let’s put house on a leased property. Say the home value is $175,000, about right for home values in that area, maybe high. Take out the following deductions: Resident Homeowner- $48,000, 60-69 years old – $96,000 ($120,000 for 70+) , income less than $40,000 – $55,000 and you might, on average, see a home value (for tax purposes) of $100,000, and at a $6.25/$1,000 rate at you end up with $625. Let’s value the land at $25,000, and the total tax contribution for 50 homes would be $39,062, about 1/4 of Mayor Kim’s yearly salary. That’s the potential revenue for 50 homes: $39,032 (which, by the way is equivalent is about 1/3 the taxes paid on one $10 million home in a resort area).
Now, we need to administer the program. We need to develop applications, distribute them and collect them. This is probably the full-time job (or overtime pay) or several county employees. Maybe we need to start a department with managers.
Then the county needs to decide who get what. Do you give property based on means–the poorest of the poor? (Note: these people don’t have money to build homes) Do you give it to your uncle’s cousin’s brother? Do you give them to those who have been displaced, but have resources to build? (If so, why?) This all will cost money, taxpayer money, to figure out. Fraud and lawsuits are sure to be part of this process.
Now, the county has to draw up contracts and execute them. That costs money.
Ok, now let’s build the roads, wastewater system, water distribution, a park, a community center, etc. The county will pay for those into perpetuity.
Now, we have some homes being built–probably take at least a year–and we need to collect lease rents. The Department of Hawaii Homelands, which is a major leaseholder in Hawaii has tens of millions of dollars of unpaid leases and thousands of properties with unpaid leases. Expect some level of this if the county or state become lessors. This will all take county/state workers to collect, record, maintain and deal with delinquent leases.
We have the value of the land, the costs of setting up, administering and maintaining the program, and the cost of infrastructure. That’s a lot of money for taxpayers to pay…into perpetuity.
If we helped facilitate private developments with loans through financial institutions (what you or I have to do) and private builders, we have a solution that is fair and transparent to everyone and at very little immediate and long-term costs to taxpayers. And, yes, let’s help non-profits and Habitat help those most in need.
I don’t think available land is the problem in that area; there is plenty of affordable land available from Hilo to Kau, so why would the county/state focus on giving land leases (which, by the way is a horrible way for these folks to build savings/assets compared to fee simple ownership)? A better way to help would be to work on ways to allow micro homes, alternative dwelling units for those most in need, and give rapid permitting for those who are ready to build.