Ka Wai Ola - Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Volume 14, Number 3, 1 March 1997 — OHA Trustees reject H.B. 2207 as "unfixable" [ARTICLE]

OHA Trustees reject H.B. 2207 as "unfixable"

Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA) Trustees officially responded to House Bill 2207, whieh passed from the House Hawaiian Affairs Committee and is now headed to the Finance Committee for consideration and puhlie hearings. They condemned the bill, calling it punitive, mean-spirited, dishonest, and unconstitutional. Trustees state that, in its entirety, H.B. 2207 reverses an entire body of law, beginning with the Admission Act, the State

Constitution, and state statutes. Trustees believe that the bill will add significantly to the divisive and litigious atmosphere the measure claims it will help resolve. "The House proposal is so grossly unfair and provocative that it ean have only one real political purpose: as a bargaining ploy to threaten harsh and punitive measures in an effort to intimidate Hawaiians," says Trustee Frenchy DeSoto, head of OHA's legislative delegation. "The backers of this bill must know their

legal and moral position is so weak that they have to resort to strong-arm eeonomie threats." H.B. 2207 alleges to resolve a legal ruling by Circuit Court Judge Daniel Heely that would increase Hawaiian's share of ceded land revenues. It also claims to "clarify" Act 304 whieh was signed into law in 1990, reduce "controversy" and to begin dealing with ceded land issues in a comprehensive way. But in fact, it does the opposite of all these things: slashing Hawaiian's share of ceded land revenues; invalidating the letter and intent of Act 304; and creating a host of vague new definitions and divi-

sions that could only be resolved in future lawsuits. OHA's specific objections include: Inventory of public lands. A comprehensive inventory is necessary, but the highly specific language of the bill hints at an equally spe- i cific outcome that the authors wish of the inventory. Some required elements hint at preemption of future challenges, such as whether lands were "set aside by the governor for certain purposes." It would appear the

Legislature is attempting to register their intent to exempt lands that are so set aside. Changes in the definition of public land trust. H.B. 2207 creates gaps ' between the statutory defini- ! tion, the Admission Act definition, and the Constitutional definition. It redefines the public land trust as merely the lands that are in the DLNR inventory. What if j certain ceded lands are left out? Or excluded for reasons i of "policy"? Exclusion of specific ceded land ineome. The

ineome categories that H.B. ; 2207 attempts to exclude go far beyond the dis- ; puted issues in the Judge Heely decision. The Legislature cannot hide behind the excuse that they are merely reacting to the lawsuit. Incidental rental of public facilities (what does "incidental" mean?), non-patient hospital rev- ; enue, recreational uses (including professional j sports events?), and all airport and harbor receipts are all major exclusions that set new s policy, and violate existing agreements. "HB 2207 opposed by OHA, " continued on poge 6

*The House proposal is so grossly unfair and provocative that it ean have only one real political purpose: as a bargaining ploy to threaten harsh and punitive measures in an effort to intimidate Hawaiians." — Trustee A. Frenchy DeSoto

continued from page 1 Retroactivity. Making retroactive exclusions of ceded lands revenue is a highly irregular procedure, similar in spirit and outcome to a retroactive tax increase. Do the bill's authors expect OHA to "unspend" its programs for the better part of the last decade? Are beneficiaries of OHA grants, housing loans, scholarships, business start-ups, and community infrastructure expected to return their diplomas, sell their homes and close their businesses? "H.B. 2207 is not fixable, it's not amendable," says DeSoto. "Ifs an insult to Hawaiians, and a slap in the face to the spirit of cooperation and fairness OHA brought to the Legislature. We have presented eonstructive proposals to the House to

stabilize the current situation. We're ready to sit down anytime and talk. H.B. 2207 ignores all these efforts. We've proven we ean win this in the courts. But as a state we shouldn't have to rely on the courts to force us to do the right thing." OHA's legislative team, however, believes the bill will not be supported by most house members. "Onee legislators actually read this flawed pieee of legislation, we think they will recognize it for what it is: an arrogant attempt to rewrite history, rewrite law, and rewrite the State Constitution," says Trustee Abe Aiona. "Hawai'i voters know that Hawaiians have been treated unfairly, that the state is not keeping its promises to Hawaiians, and they will not support this measure."

House Bill 2207 opposed by OHA