…it’s the grass that suffers.
That seems to be the takeaway message of the story on a Ko Olina condominium dispute in today’s Star-Advertiser.
The story, by Rob Perez, tries to untangle an extremely complicated contractual dispute between Ko Olina Development, the land owner and master developer, and Centex Homes, developer of the Beach Villas at Koolina.
It’s the kind of story I usually love. Complicated with lots of available documents. At issue, according to the story, is ownership of and access to certain of the amenities, including the lobby, fitness center, and beach bar.
Unfortunately, although making reference to court documents and other records, the story doesn’t really make use of them to help tell the story and make sense of the competing claims. Instead, we’re offered “he said…she said” versions, an approach which is ultimately unsatisfying.
Many residents who bought into the condo project, touted as a world-class luxury development when it opened in 2008, said they believed the swimming pools, fitness center, lounge, lobby, gardens and other common facilities would be owned by the homeowners association, much as they are in most other condo complexes.
Ko Olina developer Jeff Stone responded.
But Stone said the sales documents the buyers received from Centex clearly stated that the so-called limited common areas could be turned over to a commercial operator, and that the plan all along was for his company to get ownership.
It might have been useful for the article to include quotes from relevant documents rather than rely on presenting the conflicting accounts.
I immediately thought of the developer’s Final Condominium Public Report filed with the Real Estate Commission.
I didn’t have time this morning to go over this carefully, but there are clear warning signs for condo buyers. In Exhibit D, several “commercial apartments” are described, with the percentage of common interest associated with each. These “commercial apartments” include the front desk, member’s club & toilets, beach bar, and other facilities, which appear to be distinct from the condominium’s “common elements” shared by all owners.
Then there’s the federal lawsuit between Stone’s Ko Olina Development and Centex Homes, the developer.
Here’s how the story reports on the case:
But late last year, after a judge ruled on a federal lawsuit filed by Stone’s Ko Olina Resort Development LLC against Centex, the builder sold the lobby, lounge, fitness center and beach bar to Stone’s company for $1.
Stone is appealing to gain even more assets.
But clearly there’s a lot more going on.
I just downloaded the original complaint, and the eventual findings of fact and conclusions of law.
If that’s not enough, browse the docket and you’ll get some inkling of the additional complexity in the case.
And what’s most interesting is the behind-the-scenes look at the development process that this case provides, where layers of obscure agreements and commitments between development interests are being continually amended and renegotiated as new deals are contemplated, negotiated, or abandoned, all behind the scenes and out of view of the people who are buying the condominium apartments.
I wrote about another one of these cases several years ago (“The war at home“), where condo owners again found themselves at the end of the line in dealing with problems created by the developers.
In any case, I’m glad Perez took a stab at the story. And I came away thinking that there’s an even better story still untold.
Discover more from i L i n d
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
At least Perez gave it a pretty thorough exploration and laid it out. On the other hand, the totally unbalanced and uncritical story
http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/20110227_Kobayashi_asks_why_city_needs_a_rail_system.html
about Councilwoman Ann Kobayashi’s very well-known opposition to the rail project (whenever there’s an audience), and predictable rambling monologue at a small community meeting, with no surprises and no specific action taken or even proposed (and, apparently, no questions asked of Kobayashi), was about the most pointless and laziest thing I’ve seen in print for quite some time.
I can’t believe they actually pay people to assign, write, edit and publish such laughably immature “reporting.” They barely even cover real decision-making by the council any more, and certainly don’t scrutinize any of Kobayashi’s legendary fibbing or obvious conflicting actions, such as her recent vote in favor of a major rail-related permit while taking a short break from her usual spouting off against it: http://www4.honolulu.gov/docushare/dsweb/Get/Document-107689/RES11-007.htm
Tell us what they do, not what they say.
That stupid Kobayashi story also referenced the “Federal Transit Authority.” Ain’t no such animal. Can’t they even get the basics right?
Correction:
» City officials have never said they would use general fund revenues to pay for Honolulu’s rail transit project since doing so would violate a city ordinance. President Barack Obama’s $250 million fiscal 2012 budget request for the project is only one of several federal appropriations the city is seeking. A Page B1 article Sunday incorrectly reported that the city would use general fund revenues, and it implied that only $250 million of the $1.55 billion total federal funds sought will be budgeted for the project. Also, City Councilwoman Ann Kobayashi said the city has “already spent $120 million” in the transit fund, not $120,000 as she was misquoted as saying. And the Federal Transit Administration must approve the city’s financial plan. The story gave an incorrect name for the agency.
Ouch!
a few random musings to keep on the list regarding stories coming from the area
1) The area just north of the resort (kahe point/electric beach) has been noticeably cleared of homeless yet remains in very undeveloped form — is the plan is to just leave it as a buffer zone and just keep it clear and undeveloped?
2) the public boat ramp which was ordered by DLNR is still pending (Stone and company closed the original ramp down in the middle of the night) … local fishermen organized along with activist Caroll Cox to force recognition of the original West Beach Estates plan
3) Hanabusa has been residing in the resort in what has been alleged to be a sweetheart deal townhouse provided to her significant other
4) the landfill story
5) the gated community story — gated communities don’t normally cover a large beach front area (the original West Beach Estates plan contemplated public uses) — also more and more commercial establishments exist inside the gate
6) “aquarium” tax credits that were used for probowl football fields
correction: the order on the boat ramp comes from the Land Use Commission, not DLNR
http://www.staradvertiser.com/news/20100803_Ko_Olina_has_until_2013_to_build_public_boat_ramp.html
. . . and it was Hanabusa that fought for and secured the Ko Olina tax credits . . .
Whaaaat ? Hanabada’s best bud Jeffy Stone involved in a situation like this? With threats and closed bathrooms? Say it ain’t so!
I recall that the $1 agreement was an amendment after purchase by most owners (not Polito), although original language was vague enough to allotment units to be transferred.
What is difficult to convey is the timeline.
I suspect Mr Stone wanted to build a second phase and turn this into anothe hotel. Unfortunately legal actions have derailed (temporarily?) his plans.
Good way to diversify away from land into services.
Actually the aquarium tax credits were never used. Jeff Stone never built the aquarium, and eventually returned all the credits, according to a 2007 Star Bulletin story.
Kahe Point is an industrial area reserved for future expansion of the HECO power plant if and when needed.
here is the story on the tax credits that were used including $200,000 on a football field — http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2009/Apr/04/bz/hawaii904040306.html
the area just north of the resort has a park facility that is frequented by both the Hawaiian Railroad Society train and tourist dive groups … the park area is in complete disrepair