A flood of complaints has begun to flow from Oahu farmland owners who don’t want their property preserved for agricultural use, possibly in perpetuity.
The state Land Use Commission got hit Wednesday by a leading edge of an expected wave of such objections during a hearing that continues today and then in late May to consider city recommendations for protecting privately owned prime agricultural land on the island.
This effort stems from a state law enacted in 2005 in response to a long-ignored Hawaii Constitution amendment ratified by voters in 1978 mandating that prime ag lands be identified and protected.
The Important Agricultural Lands, or IAL, law directed county government officials to identify land appropriate for preservation under eight criteria that include soil quality, water supply and use.
Each county was directed to make recommendations, and the City and County of Honolulu finished first in 2019 by identifying 1,781 parcels covering 41,407 acres — about 11% of Oahu — as suitable for protection.
The city’s work spanned seven years and included assessments of land quality ratings, community and focus group meetings, notification to the roughly 1,800 landowners, a formal comment period, an opportunity to object, City Council hearings and Council approval.
Now, as directed by the 16-year-old law, the LUC is charged with determining whether the recommended lands should be locked in their existing state agricultural land classification unless a landowner can meet a higher standard for convincing the LUC that such protection is no longer warranted.
Wednesday’s hearing was focused only on considering whether the city properly followed the process laid out in the law. But the entire hearing, which lasted over four hours via Zoom, was consumed by landowners objecting to their property being on the city’s list along with a flurry of complaints about the city’s work and the IAL law.
“I don’t think that it’s right for a bureaucrat sitting in some office who has never done any farming (to) make decisions about how our land should be used,” John Foti, who operates a taro farm in Kahuku, told commissioners.
Michael Lenz, who bought a home on a 38,768-square-foot parcel of country-zoned ag land in Waianae in 2018 for $522,500, said his property isn’t suitable for farming.
“The lot is too small feasibly to farm and make a living off of, and we even tried a little bit of gardening and it’s just too rocky,” Lenz said.
So many people trying to participate in the hearing delayed the event at the outset because the virtual meeting room hit a maximum capacity of 100 participants, which led the commission to pause the meeting and upgrade capacity before continuing.
The LUC also received about 120 phone calls in roughly two weeks leading up the meeting, and received about 50 pieces of written testimony.
The commission sent letters about the hearing to landowners on the city’s list, though many alarmed participants said they were also sent a letter about the issue from a law firm, which prompted commission Chairman Jonathan Likeke Scheuer to describe some of the response as a whipped- up frenzy.
One landowner on the list mentioned that their letter was from Honolulu business law firm Durrett Lang Morse LLP.
Many people who testified were unsure or misinformed about what the IAL designation would do to their property.
Some wondered if they would be forced to farm or barred from living on the property.
“It feels like a land grab,” said Diana Young, who operates a plant nursery on agricultural land in Waimanalo that has been in her late husband’s family for four generations.
“If I’m already doing ag, why am I getting this letter?”
Sharlette Poe, chairwoman of the Waianae Coast Neighborhood Board, told LUC members that community members with land on the city’s list are upset, scared and confused.
Alicia and Zac Alethea suggested in written testimony that they would not be able to survive by only farming and not being able to have income from another job.
“I am extremely concerned with the potential designation of our property to IAL and the devastating economic implications that it may have on our livelihood,” the couple said.
Samuel Campbell, a retired teacher who bought a home on agricultural land in Waianae with the aim to do some farming, told the commission that he fears losing his home.
The IAL designation wouldn’t prohibit existing allowed uses on ag land, which can include having a home or two. It would, however, make it very difficult to remove the land from the state’s agricultural district, which is a prerequisite to county up-zoning.
Some landowners, including ones who recently bought their property and others who have owned their property for over a decade, claimed that the city never notified them that their property was being considered for protection. Others said they weren’t able to attend city meetings, or that the city didn’t clearly explain what was being considered.
“The owners need to be notified,” said Linda Baptiste, who has owned nine acres of ag land in Waimanalo for 53 years and believes IAL should be optional. “Honestly, under due process my rights have been diminished.”
Today’s continued hearing will be to receive input from the city and other government agencies as to whether the city’s process was proper.
If the commission rules affirmatively on this issue, it would later accept more public testimony from affected landowners and others before judging the merits of whether property on the city’s list should be protected.
Correction: An earlier version of this story misstated what is required to remove important agricultural lands from the state agricultural land district.
