Comments on the Akaka Bill?

[Miulang]

Court says OHA can't spend tax money only on kanaka maoli programs

In a truly bizarre reversal of an earlier decision, the infamous 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that OHA cannot use tax money on Hawaiian only programs.

"However, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld dismissal of the group's challenge to the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands.

The appeals court's ruling Wednesday overturns a lower court's dismissal of the case on political grounds while affirming a multiethnic group of taxpayers' standing to challenge the Hawaiians-only programs...."

So if OHA can't use state funds for Hawaiian only programs, does that mean that they will lose their reason for existing? Does this mean now that the Arakaki suit now can be continued?

Miulang

[alohabear]

Re: Court says OHA can't spend tax money only on kanaka maoli programs

In a truly bizarre reversal of an earlier decision, the infamous 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that OHA cannot use tax money on Hawaiian only programs.

"However, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld dismissal of the group's challenge to the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands.

The appeals court's ruling Wednesday overturns a lower court's dismissal of the case on political grounds while affirming a multiethnic group of taxpayers' standing to challenge the Hawaiians-only programs...."

So if OHA can't use state funds for Hawaiian only programs, does that mean that they will lose their reason for existing? Does this mean now that the Arakaki suit now can be continued?

Miulang

Well according to this editorial It looks like another battle is on the way for the kanaka maoli to fight.

[Miulang]

Re: Comments on the Akaka Bill?

I just got through reading a more thorough explanation of the ruling yesterday and it appears that Arakaki v. Lingle is going to get watered down, so it's kind of a partial win for the kanaka maoli, except it's not.

The ruling yesterday said that individuals can't sue DHHL over the homestead leases of $1/year because that law was established in 1920. So that's a good thing for the kanaka maoli and keeps non-Hawaiians from moving onto homestead lands. The kinda not so good part is that OHA can still be sued over its use of tax money collected from ceded lands for Hawaiian-only programs. It's a fairly small amount every year (about $2.8 million) but it does represent a substantial amount to each of the 3 Hawaiian-based programs that OHA supports. The court also said any taxpayer suits would be limited to contesting that $2.8 milliion and not other income OHA receives.

It's going to be a long struggle for the kanaka maoli, but I pray that Akua will be merciful and show them the way to justice.

'Onipa'a.

Miulang

[Glen Miyashiro]

Re: Comments on the Akaka Bill?

Vote on Akaka bill postponed indefinitely

A vote scheduled for today on whether the Akaka bill will get a full airing on the Senate floor has been postponed indefinitely as Congress focuses on the needs of Gulf Coast residents in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.

(Honolulu Advertiser)

Why am I not surprised?

[Miulang]

Re: Comments on the Akaka Bill?

Why am I not surprised?

Well, ya know, they say "things happen when they're supposed to." And I guess the time of reckoning for the Akaka Bill isn't supposed to be right now. Too many of Akaka's buddies in the South are tied directly to the aftermath of the hurricane, so it's prudent that they don't call for the vote right now.

Miulang

[Pua'i Mana'o]

Re: Comments on the Akaka Bill?

The ruling yesterday said that individuals can't sue DHHL over the homestead leases of $1/year because that law was established in 1920. So that's a good thing for the kanaka maoli and keeps non-Hawaiians from moving onto homestead lands. Miulang

I need to comment here.

Homesteads are very unique communities. Whereas every other community is bound by socio-economic commonalities and share a solidarity towards issues (lower-income areas might have crime to deal with, high-end have gated community issues, condos have association issues, etc), homesteads are not; Mr. Solid Middle Class lives next door to Mr. No-Mo-Nothing. The only thing that they each have in common is that they are Hawaiian.

And there has been some changes in DHHL lease awards/transfers that have been happening quietly over the last 15 or so years which hasn't garnered much media attention: that $1/yr means nothing. House lot awards are happening in only two ways:

1)DHHL has built communities (the majority of which are poorly-built track homes who have each faced numerous complaints) which award homes to whichever Hawaiian can financially qualify to "purchase the house on top of the leased land" at near-full-market-rate (and the land beneath is the DHHL "award"), and

2)New leasees are purchasing the house from current leasee homeowners, at whatever the market is bearing (agreed upon price), with the current leasee then transferring the lease to the new homeowner, making him/her also the new leasee.

And then a couple of other things:
-there is no equity built upon a DHHL lease (my home is currently worth $xxx,xxx, but I couldn't borrow $5 against it)
-Leasees such as I am cannot get competitive financing, because the B.S. dealing with DHHL is so great that it prohibits enough of a variety of mortgage companies needed to create competition. No free market. Homesteaders pay usually .5% and up more in interest, face restrictions up the ass, and get nickel/dimed along the way.

My family falls into the second catagory. Why? Because the house/lot belonged to my parents, and while it would make more fiscal sense to go outside the Homestead to build my castle, there is a piko that ties me here.

[Miulang]

Re: Comments on the Akaka Bill?

I need to comment here.

Homesteads are very unique communities. Whereas every other community is bound by socio-economic commonalities and share a solidarity towards issues (lower-income areas might have crime to deal with, high-end have gated community issues, condos have association issues, etc), homesteads are not; Mr. Solid Middle Class lives next door to Mr. No-Mo-Nothing. The only thing that they each have in common is that they are Hawaiian.

And there has been some changes in DHHL lease awards/transfers that have been happening quietly over the last 15 or so years which hasn't garnered much media attention: that $1/yr means nothing. House lot awards are happening in only two ways:

1)DHHL has built communities (the majority of which are poorly-built track homes who have each faced numerous complaints) which award homes to whichever Hawaiian can financially qualify to "purchase the house on top of the leased land" at near-full-market-rate (and the land beneath is the DHHL "award"), and

2)New leasees are purchasing the house from current leasee homeowners, at whatever the market is bearing (agreed upon price), with the current leasee then transferring the lease to the new homeowner, making him/her also the new leasee.

And then a couple of other things:
-there is no equity built upon a DHHL lease (my home is currently worth $xxx,xxx, but I couldn't borrow $5 against it)
-Leasees such as I am cannot get competitive financing, because the B.S. dealing with DHHL is so great that it prohibits enough of a variety of mortgage companies needed to create competition. No free market. Homesteaders pay usually .5% and up more in interest, face restrictions up the ass, and get nickel/dimed along the way.

My family falls into the second catagory. Why? Because the house/lot belonged to my parents, and while it would make more fiscal sense to go outside the Homestead to build my castle, there is a piko that ties me here.

Aloha e, Pua'i Mana'o:
An interesting thing happened to someone I met recently who has a house on homestead land in Nanakuli. He said one day he got a tax bill from the State. When he went to the State tax assessors' office, the staff pleaded ignorance. He then went to DHHL and asked why he got an estimated tax bill. The staff there (he said he didn't see any people who looked kanaka maoli..but then maybe there were some hapa people in there) told him they sent out the estimated tax bills in case the Arakaki lawsuit was ruled in favor of the plaintiff and leasehold land became fee simple property which was taxable.

Is the lease only on the land, or does it include the structures on the leasehold land? If the lease is limited to the homestand land only, why can't you get a loan based on what your house is worth? Would passage of the Akaka Bill do anything to help restore the covenants as originally set up in the DHHL in 1960?

I just briefly read through the 2004 Report from the DHHL. On paper, it looks pretty impressive. But Pua'i Mana'o, I believe your description more than I believe this report. One set of stats I find especially interesting is on pg. 24 of the report. It states that of 6,308 homeowner occupied homes, almost 50% are in need of some kind of rehabilitation. How could the state and DHHL allow this to happen? Something is definitely slipping past the oversight of the State and DHHL. I guess the only way the rest of us are going to know about these inequities is if people like you and my friend Williama speak up and tell us about it. Once the knowledge is gained, what do we do with it? Your property is in Kula, yes? Down by Keokea?

There are some sad parallels to what happened to black American slaves immediately after Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation. The kanaka maoli get to live on "plantations" where their welfare is at the mercy of the State.

Miulang

[Pua'i Mana'o]

Re: Comments on the Akaka Bill?

Think of your tax bill, which is a simple grid of two values:

-Improvement. We pay this and I believe that its fair to do so; I enjoy having paved roads and utilities. This category covers the house itself. That is what we pay mortgages upon. If we chose to buy another lot, we can pay to have the house hauled off the homestead, as it is what we actually own.

-Land. We are exempt from paying this tax, because we don't own the land, as it is leased.

[Miulang]

Re: Comments on the Akaka Bill?

Think of your tax bill, which is a simple grid of two values:

-Improvement. We pay this and I believe that its fair to do so; I enjoy having paved roads and utilities. This category covers the house itself. That is what we pay mortgages upon. If we chose to buy another lot, we can pay to have the house hauled off the homestead, as it is what we actually own.

-Land. We are exempt from paying this tax, because we don't own the land, as it is leased.

But I guess I don't understand why the lenders and DHHL don't recognize the equity that's inherent in the structures on that leased land. As you said, if you wanted to, you could pay to have that house moved to another property, so that building should have some tangible value.

Here's some interesting information from a Honolulu realtor who says it is possible to get financing on a leasehold property (although it is tougher than with a fee simple property). Is it the DHHL procedures that are precluding people on homestead land from even pursuing the limited options that are available to other leasehold owners?

Miulang

[Pua'i Mana'o]

Re: Comments on the Akaka Bill?

But I guess I don't understand why the lenders and DHHL don't recognize the equity that's inherent in the structures on that leased land. As you said, if you wanted to, you could pay to have that house moved to another property, so that building should have some tangible value.

Here's some interesting information from a Honolulu realtor who says it is possible to get financing on a leasehold property (although it is tougher than with a fee simple property). Is it the DHHL procedures that are precluding people on homestead land from even pursuing the limited options that are available to other leasehold owners?

Miulang

Well think about it: a normal home equity loan (which I understand only in theory, as I have never employed one) is based on the home and lot. So if Joe Blow defaults on it, they take away his house and that land underneath it (I've never heard of any bank hauling away *just* the house, kwim?).

But THEN AGAIN...let's go back to that 2nd method of Lease acquistion that I had mentioned earlier. There is a lot of "phantom equity" going on; people are selling their leases--to those Hawaiians who can financially qualify, and are willing to jump through those hoops as set by those mortgage lenders (for simplicity's sake, let us call them the "cartel"). In fact, because my personal story falls under this category, I can tell you that my dad and I negotiated a fair price, taking into consideration 1)reasonable value of the home 2)existing mortgage he had on the house and 3)what would be fair to him in order that he could buy another property elsewhere.

Now, many would be understanding towards our situation, because the big picture is transferring our family home between the generations. But it was still a transaction just the same. And get some Hawaiians out there who are commanding big bucks to sell off the lease (remember the technical terms: sell off the development atop those leases and transferring the lease itself)...and get Hawaiians willing to buy.

[Miulang]

Re: Comments on the Akaka Bill?

Well think about it: a normal home equity loan (which I understand only in theory, as I have never employed one) is based on the home and lot. So if Joe Blow defaults on it, they take away his house and that land underneath it (I've never heard of any bank hauling away *just* the house, kwim?).

But THEN AGAIN...let's go back to that 2nd method of Lease acquistion that I had mentioned earlier. There is a lot of "phantom equity" going on; people are selling their leases--to those Hawaiians who can financially qualify, and are willing to jump through those hoops as set by those mortgage lenders (for simplicity's sake, let us call them the "cartel"). In fact, because my personal story falls under this category, I can tell you that my dad and I negotiated a fair price, taking into consideration 1)reasonable value of the home 2)existing mortgage he had on the house and 3)what would be fair to him in order that he could buy another property elsewhere.

Now, many would be understanding towards our situation, because the big picture is transferring our family home between the generations. But it was still a transaction just the same. And get some Hawaiians out there who are commanding big bucks to sell off the lease (remember the technical terms: sell off the development atop those leases and transferring the lease itself)...and get Hawaiians willing to buy.

OK, it's a little clearer now. Funny, but I own a condo up here and technically some portion of the land it's built on (there are 44 units in my building). But I can still get financing on my condo, even though the only part I can sell is my unit; I mean, I can't saw it off from the other 43 units and go put it on some other piece of land. Hmmm...real estate laws are kinda strange, aren't they?

Miulang

[Pua'i Mana'o]

Re: Comments on the Akaka Bill?

You make sense with that condo analogy (although, if you default on your condo mortgage, you lose your condo, since you bought it with the understanding that it remains attached to the rest of the bldg....oh boy, this discussion can get us stuck in the minutiae, eh?)

[Miulang]

Re: Comments on the Akaka Bill?

You make sense with that condo analogy (although, if you default on your condo mortgage, you lose your condo, since you bought it with the understanding that it remains attached to the rest of the bldg....oh boy, this discussion can get us stuck in the minutiae, eh?)

And that's why we should all be highly paid lawyers who can get rich deciphering this mumbo jumbo!

Miulang

[Miulang]

Re: Comments on the Akaka Bill?

I was Googling "Hawaiian sovereignty movement" and came up with interviews with Bumpy Kanahele et al., but I also found this "Hawai'i Constitution" dated January 16, 1995. The Akaka Bill is nothing like this vision the kanaka maoli had for their restored Kingdom.

Miulang

[Miulang]

Re: Comments on the Akaka Bill?

Even after capitulating to the requests of the DoJ to disallow casino gambling and barring kanaka maoli from suing the federal government for land claims, the DoJ is now saying it's still not happy with the Akaka Bill.

"...Over the past month, Hawai'i lawmakers, the Lingle administration and the Justice Department have agreed to amendments that would bar Hawaiians from bringing land claims against the United States in court and explicitly prohibit a Native Hawaiian government from authorizing gambling.

But in a statement yesterday in response to media inquiries, the Justice Department repeated its constitutional concerns about the bill, indicating the department shares many of the same objections as Republican opponents who have blocked it in the U.S. Senate for five years.

"The administration appreciates the work of the Hawai'i delegation to address some of the concerns raised by the Justice Department but there are substantial, unresolved constitutional concerns regarding whether Congress may treat Native Hawaiians as it does the Indian tribes, and whether Congress may establish and recognize a Native Hawaiian governing entity," said John Nowacki, a Justice Department spokesman. "As the Supreme Court has stated, whether Native Hawaiians are eligible for tribal status is 'a matter of some dispute' and 'of considerable moment and difficulty.' "...

This kinda tells me that the feds and Congress never really had any intention of allowing the Akaka Bill to succeed. I think for all intents and purposes, the latest words from the DoJ pretty much have nailed the coffin in this bill because there doesn't seem to be anything else the Hawai'i delegation can do to make the DoJ or the Republicans in Congress happy.

Miulang