If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
If Kawamoto goes thru with his plan he'll have beaucoup applicants of all ethnicities. He can select from those applicants via screening but not discrimination. If he happens to select tenants who he feels have an ability to pay and he's happy with their previous rental history and they just happen to be kanaka maoli...then so be it! Nuthin' wrong with that...except he's already made his wishes known. Must admit I was surprised that his ethnic choice went public because the law states he cannot discriminate based on ethnicity.
Auntielynn - I try to be buddies w/ everybody.... most of the time
Jeeeeez...this exchange is like watching a ping pong match! You're both selectively editing what I wrote and arguing points based on what was deleted! Manoa, I'm still not sure whether or not you get the difference between screening and discrimination. I hope you understand that a landlord can screen tenants but NOT screen them based on any criteria the government states in their fair housing law.
I hope you understand that a landlord can screen tenants but NOT screen them based on any criteria the government states in their fair housing law.
Understood before you even posted that....
But the second someone starts "Screening" they are automatically selecting based upon their own personal criteria of what they would consider a good tenant would be and wouldn't. They don't necessarily have to let the prospective tenants know what they are screening for at all.
Understood before you even posted that....
But the second someone starts "Screening" they are automatically selecting based upon their own personal criteria of what they would consider a good tenant would be and wouldn't. They don't necessarily have to let the prospective tenants know what they are screening for at all.
It's been said over and over... no point to say it again....
If someone does what you suggested above, it will be noticed soon enough by many people and before you know it... they will have Dateline/60 minutes or anyone of those shows doing an undercover story to show how they are to put in your words "screening" out tenants based on ethnicity.
The fact that he is also crazy enough to make it public that he is going to rent only to native hawaiian just defeats the point. All the lawyers out there are now lining up to sue him with a class action lawsuit as soon as he puts this great plan of his into action because he is "screening" tenants based on ethnicity alone..... you simply can't do that... no matter how you want to put it... Manoa...
Tayo
FINALLY HOME IN HAWAI'I!
"Twenty years from now you will be more disappointed by the things you didn't do than by the ones you did do. So throw off the bowlines. Sail away from the safe harbor. Catch the trade winds in your sails. Explore. Dream. Discover."
Mark Twain
I am going to start a White School. Then I am going to set aside some land for White Folk to live on. Afterall the heritage of the White People is clearly more important than any other heritage. In fact, since White People have been villified, and put down, for the last 40 years, it seems only fair that we should have our own land, values, systems, and laws, separate from anybody else. And we must preserve White Culture, which is dying right before our eyes. And we want all this land and benefits for FREE, cuz we don't want to work and earn our way through this life. That's just too much to ask. After all, we are White People, and that is why we are special.
So what's stopping you? Are you waiting for the Violin playing to end?
If someone does what you suggested above, it will be noticed soon enough by many people and before you know it... they will have Dateline/60 minutes or anyone of those shows doing an undercover story to show how they are to put in your words "screening" out tenants based on ethnicity.
...the second someone starts "Screening" they are automatically selecting based upon their own personal criteria of what they would consider a good tenant would be and wouldn't. They don't necessarily have to let the prospective tenants know what they are screening for at all.
But since Kawamoto has already said he’s specifically trying to put native Hawaiians in those homes, all the “other folks” who get turned down will have a good case for discrimination, and will likely sue.
I wasn’t saying you weren’t making a legitimate argument in general, mānoa. My point was that in this case, Kawamoto has backed himself into a corner by making public statements. Like I said earlier, his only option now (if he was ever serious) is to sell the properties to DHHL.
We can’t be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans. — U.S. President Bill Clinton USA TODAY, page 2A 11 March 1993
Let them sue... I doubt a million here or a million there in lawsuits is gonna hurt a billionaire that is choosing to play "Monopoly" with his properties.
He could also go and state in the papers toomorow... that, heck... I've changed my mind... I want it to be the Haole Homesteads!... He could change his mind the next day and say he wants to create another chinatown.....
The dudes got money... and doesn't care about lawsuits... I think the guy might even enjoy a challenge every now and then....
See some previous stuff about the guy...
Carol Asai-Sato, then an attorney with Alston Hunt Floyd & Ing, stood by his side as a representative through the Japanese boom in the 1980s, and then during the mass eviction of tenants from Hawaii and California homes. But in November 2002, the two had a falling out.
Her law license today is listed as inactive.
Kawamoto then went to Carlsmith Ball, which is the firm representing him on the two pending lawsuits today.
Today, the King of Kahala remains elusive and unpredictable.
The enigmatic real estate investor said in a letter faxed through an intermediary that he made the abrupt changes after seeing his Hawai'i rental properties last year for the first time in 10 years.
"I was shocked and upset to see the disastrous conditions of these rental houses," he wrote. "I will never allow these kinds of incidents to occur again."
Kawamoto did not elaborate on home conditions, though one person familiar with the properties said some are vacant and uninhabitable, while others have extensive damage and have been the subject of citations and complaints.
The guesthouse was the last of three pieces to be sold since Japanese billionaire Gensiro Kawamoto turned it over to landowner Kamehameha Schools in 1994 in a protest against its attempt to charge him a lease rental of $1 million a year for the land.
After a sealed-bid auction in 1997 failed, the seven-acre property was split into three parts, which were offered for sale as fee simple.
The first parcel to sell, the four-story boathouse and dock, changed hands for $5 million later that year. The main house was sold in February this year for $9.6 million.
While the identity of the buyers has not been disclosed, real estate sources say the three pieces went to two buyers.
The latest sale brings the total since Kamehameha Schools put it on the market to $19.7 million. Kawamoto had paid about $42 million for the whole property in 1988.
Japanese billionaire Gensiro Kawamoto is pushing ahead with plans to rent Kahala homes to native Hawaiian families, and says he already has selected his first tenants. Kawamoto said in an interview yesterday he has set aside four of his Kahala Avenue homes for rentals at $150 per month. All are on the mauka side of the street, at 4337, 4398, 4578 and 4744 Kahala Ave. [...] "I expect these families will invite guests over, between 30 to 40 people," he told the Star-Bulletin. "I'm going to choose families with lots of friends. They're going to be like my family." Kawamoto says the families must be hardworking, nice people that have fallen on hard times. He said he's not checking genealogy or requiring a percentage quantum of native Hawaiian blood.
I'm wondering if this is how he is skirting around his real priority of getting Hawaiians in?
I'm sure the results will speak for themselves. If 10 out of 10 are Hawaiian, what are the odds of that? On the other hand if the number of Hawaiian families are the within reasonable sampling error of the percentage found in the lower income bracket, then he's fine.
(OK, I'm lazy, Did he really mean "Hawaiian" or did he/his translator use the term the way the mainlanders use it? As in "resident of" I doubt if this would have risen to this level if it was such an error.)
Perry of KSSK's Perry and Price raised a question. How will the IRS view this? If these folks are able to rent a $5000/month place for $150/month, will the IRS view that as benefits and the families have to pay the taxes on the difference?
Race based decision making is okay in Hawaii. Ask Kamehameha Schools. Ask OHA. Ask DHHL.
If you are the proper color, or have the proper lineage, in Hawaii, then you can ask for, and get, preferential treatment based on race.
I am going to start a White School. Then I am going to set aside some land for White Folk to live on. Afterall the heritage of the White People is clearly more important than any other heritage. In fact, since White People have been villified, and put down, for the last 40 years, it seems only fair that we should have our own land, values, systems, and laws, separate from anybody else. And we must preserve White Culture, which is dying right before our eyes. And we want all this land and benefits for FREE, cuz we don't want to work and earn our way through this life. That's just too much to ask. After all, we are White People, and that is why we are special.
Tim I agree with you on principle. Race based discrimination is not right.
Yet in this case how can we take away the only real thing that native Hawaiians have left? Have left all to themselves that is. Take away a true source of pride in the Hawaiian community?
Folks who argue against a Hawaiians' only policy are fighting for the letter of the consititution not the spirit of the constitution.
I totally see where you are coming from though. I used to think like you five years ago.
Perry of KSSK's Perry and Price raised a question. How will the IRS view this? If these folks are able to rent a $5000/month place for $150/month, will the IRS view that as benefits and the families have to pay the taxes on the difference?
I don't think they would care. They are not in the appraisal business or the assessment of fair market value for rentals. This is also not related to any form of compensation or a potential tightening of tax deductions for businesses.
If you owned a company and paid yourself a small salary but received free company paid housing, the IRS would veiw this as a way to skirt income taxes because the business shelters revenue - the rent of the house is a deduction. The individual (you) gets a benefit but no tax ramification. By having the individual realize this as a taxable benefit, the IRS gets theirs. It was probably abuses from folks that used this type of setup that caused the IRS to view the rent as a form of compensation.
In this scenario, Kawamoto is not "sheltering" or trying to reduce his taxable income because these folks are his tenants. No benefit to Kawamoto.
That's why everyone is scratching their heads. This makes no sense. No business sense, no social benefit sense given the capital invested for minimal benefit. No sense at all. He's eccentric because he's a supa rich guy who don't think like the normal person.
Comment