Rep. Jon Riki Karamatsu
Floor Speech
House Bill 1368 HD1
Relating to Land Use
February 17, 2006
Mr. Speaker. In Support. Mr. Speaker, let's go to the law. The reason why these developments have happened is because the law allowed it to happen. The law allowed one-acre lots to be develped. If you look at the statutes we defined what A and B lands are. C, D, E and U lands, what they are as well. Under A and B, you see a laundry list of restrictions. And under C, D, E and U, we gave authority to the counties. We also gave the authority to the counties to define accessory agricultural uses.
“The Land Use Commision created some rules which conflict with what the restrictions are for A and B. they tried to apply some of the A and B restrictions to C, D, E and U which is not stated in the law. And law supersedes ruling. So I think there might be a conflict in rulemaking versus what the law is stating.
“I think for this issue, there's language that allows this. If you look at 205-2, it's not linited to farm dwellings. You can also build buildings and not grow agriculture on that same lot. You can grow agriculture on other lots. So the law doesn't restrict C, D, E and U the way some attorneys are trying to make it restricted. So who's right or wrong depends on who interprets the law. And in this case the counties were given authority so they did what they did in permitting these developments. They didn't have to go to LUC. So maybe we need to clarify even better because the law doesn't state that the A and B restricitions should be applied to C, D, E and U. People are saying it should, but the law doesn't say that. So I'll just stand by the law. Thank you.”
JON RIKI KARAMATSU 