honoluluadvertiser.com

Sponsored by:

Comment, blog & share photos

Log in | Become a member
The Honolulu Advertiser

Posted on: Monday, December 30, 2002

ISLAND VOICES
Public purpose absent in Act 38

By Jeremy Lam
Honolulu resident

The City Council's recent decision to vote on moving forward with condominium condemnation instead of waiting to discuss the complex issue further was the wrong thing to do.

There are many reasons for my position, but chief among them is the sacred right to own private property in the United States and to continue to hold your property rights unless the government has an overriding public purpose to condemn that land. Taking a small parcel of private land for private gain is wrong under any circumstance.

Act 38 has been affirmed by the court system, as many issues have, but there is a difference between being legal and being right. Times have changed. There is no oligopoly manipulating land values. There is no shortage of inventory. There is no public purpose. If the government is worried about the large landowners, why should they penalize the small landowners?

The leasehold system should not breed terrorism in people who were intelligent enough to read their lease agreements. When I signed my office lease for 20 years, I knew it would end. I have made costly improvements. I know I will give them up at the end of the lease. A normal lease agreed upon and signed off by both parties does not breed terrorism or fear of loss.

The present forced lease-to-fee law that was supported by John Felix, Duke Bainum, Gary Okino, Steve Holmes and John Yoshimura makes certain that our legacy for our children (which is our private property) and their future condominium homes will be taken away.

Not only will our family never find a comparable property in the future, but small landowners will not share in the profits when the condominium sells the unit for a large profit (now that the ownership of the land will increase the value of the unit).

The land condemnation will also disallow small landowners a condominium for their retirement in their senior years.

The landowners are not receiving fair market value and in many instances they are losing money on the transaction because of the low lease rents for the first 30 years of the lease.

The new City Council needs to reopen this chapter of forced land control and repeal Act 38. That would be a positive step into the 21st century.