Recently I’ve been getting messages from friends and allies concerned about the State Constitutional Amendment #2: Directing the Hawaii State Legislature to Establish Procedures for Counties to Issue RISE Bonds, Exempt from County Debt Limits.
I’ve publicly stated I will be “voting yes” and continue to believe this new authority/power will provide a powerful new tool for County governments to use.
However, because of recent notes and concerns from others, AND because I’ve been getting calls from people saying that PRP and/or similar entity is using my name in a “push poll” on this issue…I’ve decided to dig in a little deeper. My position hasn’t changed, but I’m reaching out to the broader community to see if perhaps there’s something I’ve missed or gotten wrong.
Your feedback is welcome!
Almost all of the supporting testimony comes from the real estate, development, construction labor, and Pacific Resource Partnership (PRP) segments of the community.
As someone with a “subject matter” focus that is grounded in environmental protection, this naturally raises red flags.
So…in response to friends who have expressed concerns I recently read through SB3219, in its entirety. This is the measure upon which the Constitutional amendment is based.
In addition, I skimmed through all the testimony from every single committee hearing in both the House and Senate.
I could find zero opposing testimony of substance. Two individuals were opposed, but no substance was provided as to rationale or reasoning.
Below are a few sections of SB3219 that is the foundational measure creating Constitutional Amendment #2, I found particularly informative.
NOTE: I am not an attorney…and invite all you attorneys out there to clarify or correct any misunderstandings or misstatements should you see any (and I will correct, note on this blog piece, and update my position as may be appropriate).
My summary and understanding.
This Constitutional amendment if passed, directs the legislature via “General Law” to grant to the Counties the power and authority to utilize “resilient infrastructure for shelter and equity bonds” that is commonly implemented through “tax increment financing” by the County.
It is my understanding from reading SB3219 that the bonds must be used for “actions necessary for housing and community development”.
Note it says “housing and community development” and not “or”.
Community Development is defined in SB3219 as “advances a community’s values, culture, and vision”.
It’s my further understanding that if the Con amendment is passed, the legislature will draft and pass a bill into law that will further define the powers being granted but must do so within the confines of the language contained in SB3219 which is the language of the Constitutional amendment.
It is also my understanding that the law passed could be “more restrictive but not less restrictive” but generally must follow the intent and spirit of SB3219.
AND that the Counties could also pass a County ordinance that is “more restrictive but not less restrictive”. (If for example they wanted to ensure only certain types of affordable housing could be financed using this method)
The below info is taken directly from SB3219 (but out of context/sequence). Please read SB3219 yourself and let me know if I’ve got this right (as to my understanding of what’s happening).
“The legislature also finds that resilient infrastructure for shelter and equity bonds are a proven value capture tool used in many other jurisdictions to help fund housing-enabling infrastructure. Through this form of financing, commonly implemented through tax increment financing, a county may establish a district and use a portion of the future growth in real property tax revenues–generated by new development and appreciation of existing properties within that district–to pay for present-day infrastructure.”
“The legislature by general law shall authorize political subdivisions to issue general obligation bonds, bonds issued under special improvement statutes [and], revenue bonds and resilient infrastructure for shelter and equity bonds and shall prescribe the manner and procedure for [such] the issuance.”
MY NOTES: IT SEEMS THE ACTUAL LANGUAGE EMPOWERING THE COUNTIES TO UTILIZE THIS POWER, WILL BE CONTAINED WITH A “GENERAL LAW” YET TO BE PASSED? NOT ENTIRELY SURE ON THIS.
“2. The term “community development” means the planning, acquisition, ownership, construction, reconstruction, rehabilitation or improvement of capital projects or improvements, including real or personal property, or any interest therein, that advances a community’s values, culture, and vision. “Community development” shall be limited to capital assets and shall not include operating expenses.”
“5. The term “resilient infrastructure for shelter and equity bonds” means all bonds, the principal of and interest on which are payable from and secured solely by all real property taxes levied by a political subdivision, such as a county, on the assessed valuation of the real property in a designated district established by the political subdivision that is in excess of the assessed valuation of the real property for the fiscal year before the effective date specified by resolution of the political subdivision of the specified public works, public improvements or other actions necessary for housing and community development by the political subdivision within the designated district.”
MY NOTES: IT SAYS “HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND NOT “HOUSING OR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Gary
