Tag Archives: Envision Laie

“Envision Laie” commentary misses the bigger picture

8 Replies

The “Island Voices” commentary by Pane Meatoga this week caught my attention (‘Envision Laie’ is of, by and for the people of the region).

He makes a few basic points. He loves living in Laie. There is a shortage of affordable housing. And he touted the “Envision Laie” planning process as representing the community. No, he went further, referring to “the region.”

Well, we also live in Koolauloa, the “region” for planning and many other purposes. Laie is only a small part of the region, and decisions about its future impact all of us along the long windward coastline.

The “Envision Laie” planning process? It wasn’t public planning. It was a process defined and controlled by BYUH and its real estate entities outside of the existing and legitimate planning process that was already underway to rewrite the “Sustainable Communities” plan for the district. Unable or unwilling to engage in that public process process, the Mormon establishment instead used its company-town power to mobilize its own constituency.

Longtime Punaluu resident Creighton Mattoon was involved in the Sustainable Communities Plan update and had this observation nearly two years ago:

Yesterday at the second planning meeting HRI made a request to even further delay the process because their leaders in Salt Lake City have directed them to conduct planning on a larger scale in order to resolve serious financial problems involving their holdings in La`ie, including PCC and BYUH.

Several points need to be made.

• BYUH has had approval for years to develop hundreds of acres behind the campus for student housing. In addition, the low density of the existing campus invites additional student housing. But they have failed to pursue these campus- and Laie-based solutions, instead now proposing a huge urban expansion beyond the boundaries of Laie. The failure to act has been the result of changing priorities within the Mormon hierarchy and business decisions made outside of Hawaii.

• Multigenerational households are common in the area but, as some have already observed, it is because families choose to rent rooms to students for income needed to make mortgage payments. One estimate is that half of Laie homeowners depend on student rentals to pay their bills.

From the Independent Kamaaina blog:

Your Envision Laie development will dry up the student rental income that so many Laie residents depend on for decades. If BYU move their students into the Malaekahana area, many Laie residents will have a hard time meeting mortgage payments.

If you take a walk around Laie, you’ll soon realize that Laie has ‘pent-up housing’ because a lot of families are renting to students to help pay mortgage.

Many residents live together to help make the mortgage payments. They cannot split up. If the families split up, there will be great financial hardship.

The consequence will be: A) Envision Laie will end up creating more upheaval and econmical difficulties in Laie. B) Outsiders will buy the majority of home buyers in Envision Laie homes because the typical Laie residents cannot afford it.

Koolauloa activist KC Connors commented: “ENVISION LAIE is Old Fashion Economic Development- 1960s style: Exploit land, overbuild & bring in more & more wealthy visitors (& thousands more visiting students-plus spouses & families) from the mainland & overseas, and create more low-skill, low-wage jobs for the local community!-! Then people can not afford housing! ”

Connors goes on to suggest:

“MODERN FOCUS: RAISE SALERIES & Incomes so Community members can afford the current Housing in Ko’olau Loa!!

some quick examples:

**UNIONIZE!! All other colleges in the mainland would have formed a UNION to get higher wages to afford housing in the area of the college. BYUH’s parent entity is wealthy!:-)
See income Stats for area! Laie is lower than Hau’ula or Kahuku!
Laie Employee need a cost-of-living adjustment!”

I’m sure that the “union” idea is not welcome at BYUH, but KC certainly has a point!

As a Koolauloa resident, I can assure you that the “Envision Laie” process did not represent the region. Far from it. And the needs of BYUH also should not be allowed to define the region.

There’s already at least one hidden time bomb. Before buying our house in Kaaawa twenty years ago, we looked at homes in Punaluu and beyond, including several along the highway. At some point, our realtor had to disclose some “fine print”–a “highway easement” that would allow the state to take something like 15 feet off the front yards of those roadside lots for future expansion of Kamehameha Highway. Would the increased traffic flow of the proposed Envision Laie project be enough to trigger use of this easement? I don’t know, but if I lived along the highway, I would certainly be worried.

Then there’s that “scientific survey” done as part of the Envision Laie process. Both Meda and I were surveyed independently at different times by phone, and both of us had the same reaction. The survey questions were horribly biased. Overall, the survey was like one of those campaign “push polls” designed to steer voters towards a particular candidate. Most of the questions were of the “forced choice” variety, but the choices were carefully selected to elicit support for the Mormon project.

The questions went along something like this: “Do you think (a) that Envision Laie should be supported, or (b) should all our children have to live on the mainland?”

Both of us, independently, told told the pollster that the many questions were too biased to answer properly. I doubt those comments were recorded.

In any case, that’s enough venting for this Christmas Eve morning.

Complaint challenges neighborhood board vote in favor of 1,200 home Laie development

4 Replies

The Koolauloa Neighborhood Board’s vote to support the “Envision Laie Development Plan” and a proposed 1,200 new homes is being challenged by two board members, who say violations of the sunshine law and glaring conflict of interests should nullify the vote.

Following sometimes heated public testimony at a special July 31 public hearing, members of Neighborhood Board 28 voted 7-4 in favor of the development.

But a complaint filed with the Neighborhood Commission argues the board violated the sunshine law by voting on the issue without hearing all public testimony or hearing responses to concerns raised, and without any opportunity for Neighborhood Board members to question the project’s sponsors.

The complaint also questions whether five board members employed by Mormon organizations behind the development should have recused themselves because of their conflicts.

Those filing the complaint were former board chair Dee Dee Letts and long-time Punaluu resident and community leader Creighton Mattoon.

Minutes of the special meeting confirm that public testimony was initially cut off after 50 minutes to keep to a previously announced schedule. But with 25 people who signed up to testify still waiting for the opportunity, the board extended the hearing for an additional ten minutes, for a total of 60 minutes of public testimony.

When the 10 minutes had expired, there were still 21 people signed up and still waiting to testify. They were told to submit their views in writing.

Then a motion was immediately made by board member Kela Miller to “accept and support” the Envision Laie Plan. It was later disclosed that Miller is employed by Hawaii Reserves, Inc., the real estate and development arm of the Mormon Church and sponsor of Envision Laie.

The motion was seconded by John Elkington, an employee of BYUH, another project sponsor.

Mattoon objected, according to the minutes, saying no action should be taken until all testimony had been heard. He also noted requirements for disclosure of conflicts of interest.

The board finally agreed to continue with testimony of all those who had put their names on a sign-up sheet.

When that testimony was completed, Miller and Elkington again offered their motion to support the plan.

Two other board members, Moana Kalua’u and Norman Kaluhiokalani, also disclosed that they are employed by BYUH. Kaluhiokalani, known as Coach K, is the cross country coach at the school. Another board member, Les Steward, is a recent past president of the BYU-Hawaii Alumni Association.

Of the five board members with direct ties to the project’s sponsors, only Kalua’a voted against the motion to support the project. The motion carried 7-4.

In their complaint, Mattoon and Letts assert that sunshine requirements were skirted when sufficient sign-up sheets were available, some who wanted to testify were unable to get onto the list, and then testimony was limited to those who had signed up. According to the complaint, the chair made no effort to solicit testimony from those who arrived late or could not sign up because “sign up sheets were not available.”

The Neighborhood Plan, which provides the rules of procedure to be followed by the neighborhood boards, requires disclosure of conflicts but does not prohibit voting on matters where a conflict may exist.

§2-11-310 Disclosure. (a) Any commissioner who knows he or she has a personal or private interest, direct or indirect, in any proposal before the commission shall disclose the interest either orally or in writing to the commission. The disclosure shall also be made a matter of public record before the commission takes any action on the proposal.
(b) A commissioner who makes any disclosure shall not be disqualified from participation in the discussion or vote on the matter. A commissioner may choose to be recused. A recused commissioner shall not participate in the discussion or vote. The recusal shall be recorded in the meeting minutes.

However, it also provides:

§2-13-105 Conflicts of interest. (a) No board member shall:

…(3)Engage in any business transaction or activity, or have a financial interest, direct or indirect, which is incompatible with the proper discharge of a member’s official duties or which may tend to impair the independence of judgment in the performance of the member’s official duties.

The complaint is pending before the Neighborhood Commission.