Hawaii County residents press council over secrecy and safety after county buys Makani Circle home for supportive housing

The Hawaii County Finance Committee heard more than two hours of public testimony on March 3 over Resolution 475-26, a proposal that would allow the director of finance to negotiate multi‑year leases of county‑acquired houses to nonprofit providers for long‑term affordable housing. Neighbors around 76 Makani Circle urged the committee to remove that property from the package, citing safety, transparency and traffic concerns, and asked for clearer information about who would live there.

Why it matters: The county bought multiple single‑family homes using federal ERA2 emergency housing funds and is proposing very low‑cost leases (about $10 a year) to nonprofits that operate supportive‑housing and reentry programs. That mix — purchasing neighborhood homes, placing covenants restricting long‑term affordability, and leasing them to organizations that select tenants — has generated persistent local anxiety, and the committee elected to pause action on one disputed house to allow more community meetings and staff follow‑up.

Residents’ concerns were consistent and specific. Dozens of neighbors from Makani Circle said they were not notified in advance of the county purchase and only learned when flyers appeared or neighbors left notices on doors. Speakers repeatedly asked how tenants would be selected and what kinds of criminal histories, if any, residents might have: “I don’t think this halfway house is a fit in our community,” said Luana Cavelu, who told the committee she has lived on Makani Circle since 1970 and that many neighbors are kupuna in their 70s to 90s. Several speakers cited traffic and parking limits on the narrow loop, the absence of sidewalks, and what they said were inadequate operational details about supervision, staffing ratios and emergency response protocols.

Administration explanation and federal rules: Office of Housing staff told the committee the properties were purchased with roughly $27 million in federal ERA2 funds that Treasury later authorized for acquisition and preservation of rental housing. The administrator said the county completed appraisals, third‑party inspections and environmental screening and ran a competitive request‑for‑proposals process to select nonprofit managers. Deputy corporation counsel Sylvia Wan told council members ERA2 purchases carry restricted covenants to ensure long‑term affordability, and that leases longer than a year require council approval under county code (chapter 2, article 19).

Council response and outcome: Many council members said the office should have done more community outreach sooner. In response to testimony and questions, a council member moved to amend Resolution 475-26 to remove the Makani Circle parcel from the set of properties being authorized for lease negotiation; the amendment passed on a voice vote recorded as 9 in favor. After further discussion about funding transparency and tenant selection criteria, the committee voted (9–0) to postpone the amended resolution to the March 17 committee hearing to allow staff to provide additional memos and hold community meetings.

What remains unresolved: Testimony repeatedly requested operational details — intake criteria, staffing and supervision models, security protocols and verified program outcome data (for example, verified recidivism or program completion rates) — and requested copies of related FOIA records about purchase negotiations and repair costs. The committee directed staff to return with additional information and more direct community engagement before moving forward on the removed parcel. For the other properties acquired under the same ERA2 program, negotiations with nonprofit lessees may proceed unless council takes further action.

Quotes illustrating the split: “We were not consulted prior to the purchase of 76 Makani Circle,” said Joan Toledo. “Immediate placing them in a small neighborhood community is not the first step.” Office of Housing staff responded that they had followed federal rules and procurement steps and that some neighbors had been engaged; the housing administrator said staff would consider removing the property from the resolution to allow more engagement and repairs prior to leasing.

Next steps: The committee’s motion to amend and the subsequent postponement were recorded in committee action; staff were directed to prepare additional documentation for the March 17 meeting and to pursue further community meetings with the Makani Circle neighbors and the nonprofit providers. The matter will return to the committee on March 17 unless the administration withdraws or revises the proposal earlier.