The Public Land Development Corp. (PLDC), with all its exemptions, bypasses county land use policies, plans and ordinances and ignores cultural and environmental assessments and labor laws. By allowing unilateral decisions by only an unaccountable few, it has already adversely impacted civic society in Hawaii; fortunately, many groups protested its enactment.

But recent PLDC metamorphoses — such as the the Public-Private Partnership Authority — are not any better and remain flawed for one major reason: Partnerships that shut out the community are inadequate for good planning.

What is needed are procedures that implement three-party contractual agree- ments involving true public-private-community partnerships. The Legislature should enable a process to achieve genuine "community benefit agreements" (CBAs) as the output of any public corporation.

CBAs are enforceable contracts signed by community groups, developers and the pertinent government agencies. They spell out the allocation of responsibilities, benefits, costs, amenities and mitigation measures needed for the feasibility, viability, acceptability and durability of needed programs and projects. They leverage government resources and the permitting power to ensure, jobs, wages, housing, services, facilities and environmental amenities for the communities affected.

CBA agreements are binding and ensure enforceability by the three parties of the terms of the contract, which is ratified before a project is approved and permitted to proceed. Citizens hold government accountable on how public resources are used, and benefits are provided in accordance with negotiated outcomes. Clarity and predictability decrease developer risk, ensuring that no opposition to the negotiated project follows.

Up-front collaboration between public, private and community sectors for a project is key. The neighborhood boards or community councils, local non-governmental organizations and business associations in a given area enter into a coalition that has standing in project negotiation and in the contractual agreement as a legitimate party.

This takes organization and time, needs planning and legal support, and precedes an individual project’s startup. Communities have their own planning vision in place before development projects come on the horizon. Grassroots organizing and coalition building are a prerequisite for substantive deliberation. Who can speak and represent the community is settled beforehand. The benefits are enduring, bringing more trust, equity and justice into a collaborative land development process, sustaining community and economy needs. It’s a win-win situation.

This is a positive evolution from the current confusing situation in Hawaii: "unilateral agreements" signed only by a developer, "development agreements" signed only by government and developer, and "unilateral agreements" signed only between the developer and one community group. A CBA is a partnership among public, private and community sectors; it is an inclusive "three-party agreement" for more appropriate and sustained island economic development.

Developers, instead of having their projects approved by only one level of government — later to be contested by community groups and held up for years by demonstrations and court proceedings at additional expense — have their projects efficiently vetted early on and supported by the community. This provides broad and long-term support for the project.

It is more productive for a developer to codesign the project and include a CBA in its development agreement with government and contribute to the prosperity and well-being of people in Hawaii with projects that are transparent, understood, accepted and meaningful.