U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

76–305 PDF 2012

S. HRG. 112–649

S. 65, THE HAWAIIAN HOMEOWNERSHIP ACT

OF 2011

FIELD HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS 

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

APRIL 13, 2012

Printed for the use of the Committee on Indian Affairs

(

(II)

COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS 

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii, Chairman 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming, Vice Chairman 

DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii 

KENT CONRAD, North Dakota 

TIM JOHNSON, South Dakota 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

JON TESTER, Montana 

TOM UDALL, New Mexico 

AL FRANKEN, Minnesota 

JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona 

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska 

JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota 

MIKE CRAPO, Idaho 

MIKE JOHANNS, Nebraska 

LORETTA A. TUELL, Majority Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

DAVID A. MULLON JR., Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held on April 13, 2012 .............................................................................. 1

Statement of Senator Akaka ................................................................................... 1 

Statement of Senator Inouye .................................................................................. 2

WITNESSES

Boyd, Rodger J., Deputy Assistant Secretary, Native American Programs, 

U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development ..................................... 7

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 8

Danner, Robin Puanani, President/CEO, Council for Native Hawaiian Advancement ............................................................................................................. 53

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 55

Filimoeatu, Kehaulani, Board President/Co-Founder, HawaiianCommunity 

Assets, Inc. ............................................................................................................ 60

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 63

Galuteria, Hon. Brickwood, Majority Leader, Hawaii State Senate ................... 38

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 41

Hanabusa, Hon. Colleen, U.S. Representative from Hawaii ................................ 19

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 21

Hirono, Hon. Mazie K., U.S. Representative From Hawaii ................................. 4

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 6

Kauhane, Michelle, Deputy Director, Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, 

State of Hawaii ..................................................................................................... 11

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 13

Mackenzie, Melody, Associate Professor of Law, Melody Kapilialoha Mackenzie; Director, Ka Huli Ao Center for Excellence in Native Hawaiian 

Law, William S. Richardson School of Law ....................................................... 22

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 24

Watson, Kali, Chairman, Housing & Economic Development Committee, Sovereign Councils of the Hawaiian Homelands Assembly .................................... 50

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 52

Wurdeman, Richard Naiwieha, President, Native Hawaiian Bar Association ... 43

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 44

APPENDIX

Brown, Samson L., President, Aupuni O Hawai’i, prepared statement .............. 93

Causley, Cheryl A., Chairwoman, National American Indian Housing Council, 

prepared statement .............................................................................................. 87

Kahui, Craig ‘‘Bo’’, Executive Director, La’i’opua 2020, prepared statement ..... 89

Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA), prepared statement ....................................... 90

Response to written questions submitted by Hon. Daniel K. Akaka to Rodger 

J. Boyd .................................................................................................................. 95

Richards, Paul P., Richards, President of the Waima ̃nalo Hawaiian Homes 

Association (WHHA), prepared statement ......................................................... 92

Ruis, Scottina Malia, Resource Management Specialist, Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, prepared statement ................................................................ 94

Young, Hon. Don, U.S. Representative from Alaska, prepared statement ......... 89

(1)

S. 65, THE HAWAIIAN HOMEOWNERSHIP ACT 

OF 2011 

FRIDAY, APRIL 13, 2012

U.S. SENATE, 

COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS, 

Honolulu, Oahu, HI. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:05 a.m. in the 

Oahu Veterans Center, Hon. Daniel K. Akaka, Chairman of the 

Committee, presiding. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL K. AKAKA,

U.S. SENATOR FROM HAWAII 

The CHAIRMAN. I call this hearing of the Committee of Indian Affairs to order. 

Aloha mai, aloha mai kakou and mahalo for being here with us 

today. 

AUDIENCE. Aloha. 

The CHAIRMAN. It is so wonderful to be home and to be holding 

this legislative hearing on the U.S. Senate Bill 65, the Hawaiian 

Homeownership Opportunity Act of 2011. I know this measure is 

so important to advancing Prince Kuhio’s vision of returning our 

people to the aina. And we must endeavor to meet the standard he 

set for us. 

As I mentioned earlier, this bill is crafted and sponsored by my 

good friend and partner, our great senior Senator Dan Inouye. Senator Inouye and I are pleased that you could join us today. 

Its companion bill in the house is sponsored by Congresswoman 

Mazie Hirono and co-sponsored by Congresswoman Colleen 

Hanabusa, and Congressman Don Young of Alaska. 

I’m happy to have invited the congresswomen to join the Committee on the dais for this hearing and to participate as their 

schedules permit. I know she’s busy and—well, all of our members 

are busy—and I want to say, Congresswoman Hirono, much aloha. 

We are expecting Congresswoman Hanabusa shortly. 

I want to extend a warm aloha to our guests from Washington, 

DC and welcome HUD’s Deputy Assistant Secretary for Native 

American programs, remember that name, Rodger Boyd, to Hawaii. 

Thank you for taking this time all of you for traveling here so 

far to talk with us and hear from the community about the importance of HUD housing programs for Native Hawaiians. I hope you 

were able to see some of the projects of HUD, Mr. Boyd, and what 

you’ve been supporting here in Hawaii. 

2

The United States has a trust relationship with Native Hawaiians as indigenous people of these islands of the State of Hawaii, 

and what is now the United States. Congress has understood this 

relationship for a long time, and began legislating to meet its trust 

responsibility—can you imagine—over 90 years ago. With passage 

of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act of 1920, Congress set 

aside 203,500 acres of land to ensure that the Native Hawaiian 

people had home lands where our ways and our communities could 

continue to thrive. 

Along the way, and in furtherance of the trust responsibility, 

Congress has enacted over 150 laws to protect Native Hawaiian 

rights, address Native Hawaiian concerns and provide resources to 

meet Hawaiian needs. 

In 1959 the Hawaii Admissions Act, the United States required 

the State of Hawaii to administer certain portions of federal trust 

responsibility, and the state incorporated that responsibility into 

its own constitution and body of law. 

As part of that federal trust responsibility, today’s hearing considers a bill to reauthorize HUD programs that provide housing assistance to Native Hawaiians, ensuring that Native Hawaiian people have access to housing programs on our trust lands consistent, 

consistent, with that and what the United States provides to other 

federally recognized Native peoples. 

The Hawaiian Homeownership Opportunity Act is an important 

part of meeting the housing needs of no income Native Hawaiians, 

and achieving the original goal of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act of 1920. 

Senator Inouye, now I would like to ask you to make any opening 

statement you may. 

STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL K. INOUYE,

U.S. SENATOR FROM HAWAII 

Senator INOUYE. Thank you. I thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing on Senate Bill 65. 

Over the past four years American families have struggled 

through what some have called the great recession, and for the 

first time in a long while, American’s middle class is experiencing 

housing problems. They have fallen behind in their loan payments. 

The value of their homes have dropped, and they can’t sell it to recoup their investment. And some are losing their homes on foreclosures. 

The impact on Native communities have been many, many times 

worse. There were serious housing challenges experienced when 

the economy was good. According to the 2003 report published by 

the United States Commission on Civil Rights, approximately 

98,000 Native families are homeless or under-housed. And I’m certain that this number has only increased in the last decade. 

Poverty has run rampant in Native communities. Affordable and 

safe housing is difficult to obtain. As a result, Native families regularly face overcrowded and substandard living conditions. 

And here in Hawaii, studies have documented the acute housing 

needs of Native Hawaiians, which include the highest rates of overcrowding and homelessness in the State of Hawaii. 

3

Those same studies indicate that Native Hawaiians have the 

highest inadequate housing rates in the nation. And this should 

not be surprising because when you consider the cost of housing 

and the lack of affordable housing in this state, well, Hawaii’s 

housing market has not yet fully recovered. The median sales price 

for single-family home on Oahu this past January—listen to this—

was $618,000. And how many young families can afford this, or for 

that matter, old families? 

And so I introduce S. 65, the Hawaiian Homeownership Act, because I believe this program is essential to provide affordable housing for the beneficiaries of the Hawaiian Home Lands trust. This 

bill amends the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act and the Housing Committee Development Act of 

1992 to extend housing assistance and loan guarantees for Native 

Hawaiian housing through fiscal year 2015. 

This bill also makes the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands 

eligible for loan guarantees. These changes will provide Native Hawaiians with program benefits similar to those available to American Indians and Alaska Natives. 

United States has consistently demonstrated, as the Chairman 

has indicated, that clear trust relationship and responsibility of 

Native Hawaiians through scores and scores of studies and statutes 

over these decades. It is through that trust relationship that our 

nation has provided housing services to Native Hawaiians. 

Despite the Congress’ clear historical recognition of this trust relationship, I must sadly tell you that there are some members who 

oppose Native Hawaiian programs and funding. It is my hope that 

through the testimony today, the hearing record will reinforce the 

historical and legal justification for Native Hawaiian programs, 

like housing, to benefit our state’s condition. 

And so I thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your leadership in holding these hearings today. Unfortunately, I have a flight to catch, 

Mr. Chairman, so I’ll be here to listen to the first panel, and if I 

may, sir, I would like to submit questions that can be submitted 

to the witnesses. Thank you very much, sir. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Senator Inouye. Your full 

statement will be placed in the record, and we are delighted to 

have had you here for the time you can spend with us. 

And, again, I just repeat, this is his bill, co-sponsored by our delegation, and we’ll continue to work on it. Thank you, again, Senator, for your opening statement. 

Congresswoman Hirono, we’ll hear you during the first panel, 

and from Congresswoman Hanabusa in the second panel. We will 

also hear from HUD and DHHL as the principal agencies tasked 

with carrying out this part of the trust responsibility to the Native 

Hawaiian people, from legal and state law experts who can help us 

review how the federal trust responsibility has been advanced by 

Congress, and the State of Hawaii, and from the community and 

the organizations partnering with them to deliver needed services 

and opportunities. 

As Chairman, it is my goal to ensure that we hear from all who 

want to contribute to the discussion. The hearing record will be 

open for two weeks from today, and I encourage everyone to submit 

your comments through written testimony. I know we are on HaVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:51 Dec 11, 2012 Jkt 076305 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\DOCS\76305.TXT JACK
4

waiian time, but I encourage the witnesses to limit your oral testimony to five minutes, if you can, and so we can engage in a discussion afterwards as well. 

Serving on our first panel is Honorable Mazie Hirono, Congresswoman from Hawaii’s Second District. And I would like to ask Mr. 

Rodger Boyd to please step forward also, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Native American programs at U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development in Washington, DC. 

Michelle Kauhane, Deputy Director, State of Hawaii, Hawaiian 

Home Lands in Kapolei, Hawaii. Welcome to our panel. 

Congresswoman Hirono, will you please begin. 

STATEMENT OF HON. MAZIE K. HIRONO,

U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM HAWAII 

Ms. HIRONO. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Good morning everyone. 

Senator Akaka, thank you so much for calling today’s hearing, 

and, of course, Senator Inouye. Both of you have been leaders and 

champions in advancing the interests of Native Hawaiians, and it’s 

certainly an honor to testify this morning. 

I am a strong supporter of S. 65, the Hawaiian Homeownership 

Act of 2011, which was introduced by our Senator Inouye, and I 

have introduced similar legislation in the House of Representatives, H.R. 2648, the Hawaiian Homeownership Opportunity Act, 

along with Congresswoman Hanabusa and Alaska Representative 

Don Young. 

My friend from Alaska, Don Young and I have partnered a number of times in the House to save and support Native Hawaiian and 

Alaska Native programs. 

Passage of S. 65 and H.R. 2648 would build up Congress’ long 

and bipartisan history of supporting Native Hawaiian housing 

issues. 

Both of you have eloquently explained how important this is and 

how great the need is. This history of support spans nearly a century, and began with the passage of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act which was passed in 1921 at the urging of Hawaii’s Delegate to Congress, Prince Jonah Kuhio Kalanaiana’ole. That legislation set aside some 204,000 acres of land to provide homesteads for 

Native Hawaiians. 

With the enactment of the Statehood Act of 1959, the control and 

administration of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act was transferred from the Federal Government to the late new State of Hawaii. And later in 1960 the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, 

DHHL, was created to administer the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act. 

Then in 2000 Congress passed the American Homeownership and 

Economic Opportunity Act. This legislature established two programs to help provide housing to Native Hawaiians. The Native 

Hawaiian Housing Block Grant Program and the Section 184A 

Loan Guarantee Program. 

To date, DHHL and community groups around the state have 

helped provide housing, counseling and financial literacy training 

to thousands of Native Hawaiians. 

5

Both of these programs have a real impact on the Native Hawaiian community. The Hawaiian Homes Commission and the dedicated staff at DHHL have both worked hard to make sure that the 

resources provided have been well used. And it is our solid charge 

as Hawaiian representatives to make sure that the U.S. Congress 

understands and fulfills its obligations to Native Hawaiians. And 

we always work together to fulfill this important responsibility and 

duty. 

As Senator Inouye mentioned, unfortunately there are those in 

Washington who view these programs as set-asides based on race 

or arbitrary expenditures to the federal budget. They reject the notion that we have a special responsibility to the indigenous people 

of our nation. And in recent years I have fought on the floor of the 

House of Representatives against these notions. Fortunately we 

have been successful. 

These programs aren’t handouts. And there’s certainly more than 

simply numbers in the federal budget. These programs are about 

giving families—families that have some of the greatest needs of all 

in Hawaii’s population—the opportunity for homeownership. Owning a home has long been a pillar of the American dream, and it 

is a dream that people do not forget and do not give up on, and 

that is why passage of S. 65 is so important. 

This bill would reauthorize the Native Hawaiians Housing Block 

Grant program, as well as the Section 184A program through fiscal 

year 2015. It would also set in statute the ability for DHHL to refinance mortgages under the 184A program, and this authority currently exists only as provided for in the annual appropriations law. 

So it’s very important that we put this authority in statute to ensure the necessary flexibility for the program as well as certainty 

for those considering refinancing as an option. 

Finally S. 65 would make DHHL eligible for Title VI loan guarantee program under the Native American Housing Assisting and 

Self-Determination Act. This program currently allows Indian 

Housing Block Grant recipients to pledge future grant funds as security in order to receive a private loan guaranteed by HUD to finance affordable housing projects. This could prove to be a useful 

tool for financing affordable housing projects in the future. 

And I do commend the DHHL for being very resourceful and just 

gathering the tools that we need to enable more Native Hawaiian 

families in pursuing and obtaining the American dream of homeownership. 

So I strongly support the passage of S. 65 and will continue 

working with the members of our delegation to see this measure 

advanced. At the same time we need to make sure that the programs currently authorized under these programs, under the existing laws, continue in the meantime. 

So, again, I appreciate this opportunity to put my strong support 

for S. 65 on the record, and I do apologize, senators and to the 

panel members, for my inability to stay for the remainder of the 

panels. But please know everyone that I completely am on the 

same page with all of you in supporting this bill. Mahalo nui loa. 

[The prepared statement Ms. Hirono follows:]

6

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. MAZIE K. HIRONO, U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM

HAWAII

Aloha kakahiaka ka ̈kou (Good morning everyone). Thank you, Chairman Akaka, 

for calling today’s hearing. You have been such a leader and champion in advancing 

the interests of the Native Hawaiian community. It is an honor to testify this morning. 

I am a strong supporter of S. 65, the Hawaiian Homeownership Act of 2011, 

which was introduced by Senator Inouye. I have introduced similar legislation in the 

House of Representatives—H.R. 2648 the Hawaiian Homeownership Opportunity 

Act—along with Congresswoman Hanabusa and Alaska Representative Don Young. 

Passage of S. 65 and H.R. 2648 would build on Congress’s long and bipartisan history of supporting Native Hawaiian housing issues. This history spans nearly a century and began with the passage of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act. Congress 

passed this Act in 1921 at the urging of Hawaii’s Delegate to Congress, Prince 

Jonah Kuhio Kalaniana‘ole. That legislation set aside some 204,000 acres of land 

to provide homesteads for Native Hawaiians. 

With the enactment of the Statehood Act of 1959, the control and administration 

of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act was transferred from the federal government to the new State of Hawaii. A year later in 1960, the Department of Hawaiian 

Home Lands (DHHL) was created to administer the Hawaiian Homes Commission 

Act. 

Then in 2000, Congress passed the American Homeownership and Economic Opportunity Act. This legislation established two programs to help provide housing to 

Native Hawaiians: The Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant Program and the 

Section 184A loan guarantee program. To date, DHHL and community groups 

around the state have helped provide housing, counseling, and financial literacy 

training to thousands of Native Hawaiians. 

Both of these programs have a real impact on the Native Hawaiian community. 

The Hawaiian Homes Commission and dedicated staff at DHHL have both worked 

hard to make sure that the resources provided have been well used. It is our solemn 

charge as Hawaii’s representatives to make sure that the U.S. Congress understands and fulfills its obligations to Native Hawaiians, and we work together to see 

to this important duty. 

Unfortunately there are those in Washington who view these programs as set 

asides based on race, or arbitrary expenditures on the federal budget. They reject 

the notion that we have a special responsibility to the indigenous people of our nation. In recent years I’ve fought on the floor of the House of Representatives against 

these notions—and fortunately we’ve been successful. These programs aren’t handouts and they are certainly more than simply numbers in the federal budget. These 

programs are about giving families—families that have some of the greatest needs 

in all of Hawaii’s population-the opportunity for homeownership. 

Owning a home has long been a pillar of the American dream. This is a dream 

that people do not forget, and do not give up on. There many stories of Native Hawaiians who have been on waiting lists for decades. Some have died waiting to see 

this dream fulfilled. So it is clear that we have much more work to do. And that 

is why passage of S. 65 is so important. 

S. 65 would reauthorize the Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant program as 

well as the Section 184A program through Fiscal Year 2015. It would also set in 

statute the ability for DHHL to refinance mortgages under the 184A program. This 

authority currently exists under authority provided in annual appropriations law. 

However, setting this ability in statute would ensure necessary flexibility for the 

program as well as certainty for those considering refinancing as an option. 

Finally, S. 65 would make DHHL eligible for Title VI loan guarantee program 

under the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act. This 

program currently allows Indian Housing Block Grant recipients to pledge future 

grant funds as security in order to receive a private loan guaranteed by HUD to 

finance affordable housing projects. This could prove to be a useful tool for financing 

affordable housing projects in the future. 

I strongly support the passage of S. 65 and will continue working with the members of the delegation to see this measure advanced. We will also continue to work 

together to see that the important programs that S. 65 would reauthorize receive 

the federal support they need in the meantime. 

Again, I appreciate the opportunity to testify in support of this important legislation. Mahalo nui loa (Thank you very much).

The CHAIRMAN. Mahalo and thank you, Congresswoman Hirono, 

for your testimony. 

7

And now we will receive the testimony from Mr. Boyd. Would 

you please proceed. 

STATEMENT OF RODGER J. BOYD, DEPUTY ASSISTANT

SECRETARY, NATIVE AMERICAN PROGRAMS, U.S.

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT 

Mr. BOYD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and good morning. 

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, it is a pleasure 

to appear before you this morning and of course to be back in Hawaii. My name is Rodger Boyd, and I am the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Office of Native American programs at HUD. 

On behalf of Secretary Shaun Donovan and Assistant Secretary 

Sandra Henriquez, I would like to express my deep appreciation for 

your ongoing commitment to improving housing conditions for Native Americans and Native Hawaiians. 

On a personal side, being a member of the Navajo Tribe, it’s a 

great pleasure to have received your assistance over the very 

many, many years since I’ve been working on behalf of my Tribe 

and for Native Americans throughout the country. 

I’d also like to thank you for allowing HUD to provide comments 

on this S. 65 Hawaiian Homeownership Act of 2011. We have submitted written testimony to the Committee that does have greater 

details to my comments this morning. 

Chairman Akaka and Senator Inouye, as you know, HUD’s Office 

of Native American programs is responsible for the management, 

operation and oversight of HUD’s Native American and Native 

housing programs. The Native Hawaiian Housing Program my office administers is through the Native Hawaiian Housing Block 

Grant and the Native Hawaiian Section 12 184A Loan Guarantee 

Program. 

These programs contribute significantly to the development of 

housing and homeownership on Hawaiian home lands. 

I’m here today to testify that the Office of Native American Programs, and HUD, fully support the Hawaiian Homeownership Act 

of 2011, S. 65, and its expansion and reauthorization of both these 

programs through fiscal year 2015. 

HUD has seen that the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, 

which is the sole grantee of the Native Hawaiian Housing Block 

Grant, works effectively with its community partners to not only 

increase housing opportunities throughout the state, but to build 

stronger, more economically vibrant and self-sufficient communities. DHHL’s leaders understand the value of thoughtful planning that is evidenced in their annual strategic housing plans, 

which include elements of regional planning, energy efficiency and 

resource leveraging. DHHL has indicated that a reliable, steady 

stream of federal grant funding is essential to project and plan for 

long-term growth and development. 

To address critical housing issues such as affordability, overcrowding, structural quality, and availability, DHHL has targeted 

a significant amount of block grant funds to support site improvements and infrastructure development; financial assistance for 

home buyers; rehabilitation of existing units; homeownership counseling; and technical assistance to prepare families for home purchase and ownership. 

8

The first Block Grant was awarded first in Hawaii 2002 for $9.6 

million. Over the last ten years the Block Grant investments has 

totaled $108 million, including Recovery Act funding. 

A key provision of S. 65 would create a Title VI program using 

Block Grant funds, which would greatly expand DHHL’s ability to 

leverage federal and private funds. Title VI could be a powerful addition to the development tool for DHHL. 

On the mainland, Title VI has financed dozens of successful 

projects in Indian Country, and has provided an incentive for lenders, which I think is extremely important to get involved in the development of Tribal housing. 

The Section 184A Loan Guarantee Program provides access to 

private-market mortgage financing for Native Hawaiian families 

who might not otherwise be able to get a mortgage loan because 

of the trust status on Hawaiian home lands. 

S. 65 would expand the 184A program to allow families for the 

first time to refinance their home mortgages at the current low 

market rates. This would help Native Hawaiian families save more 

money, giving greater stability to communities where housing costs 

are among the highest in the nation, which was well pointed out. 

Under the fiscal year 2012 the Appropriations Act authorized 

Section 184A refinancing, but only for fiscal year 2012. HUD 

strongly supports making refinancing provision permanent, as this 

bill will so allow. 

With the recent authority to refinance in fiscal year 2012, 

DHHL’s success in constructing new homes, we expect loan activity 

to significantly increase, and certainly a permanent provision 

would be value added. 

In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, HUD supports S. 65 and the reauthorization of both the Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant and 

the Section 184A Loan Guarantee Program. Through these programs, HUD can continue to partner with DHHL in providing Native Hawaiian families with fair and affordable housing opportunities. 

Thank you again for the opportunity to appear before you today. 

And I will be happy to answer any questions you may have, thank 

you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Boyd follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF RODGER J. BOYD, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY, NATIVE

AMERICAN PROGRAMS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, it is a pleasure to appear before 

you this morning. My name is Rodger Boyd, and I am the Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Office of Native American Programs (ONAP) at the Department of 

Housing and Urban Development. 

On behalf of Secretary Donovan and Assistant Secretary Henriquez, I would like 

to express my deep appreciation for your ongoing commitment to improving housing 

conditions for Native Hawaiian peoples. I also want to thank you for allowing HUD 

to provide comments on Senate Bill 65, the Hawaiian Homeownership Act of 2011. 

Chairman Akaka, as you know, HUD’s Office of Native American Programs is responsible for the management, operation and oversight of HUD’s Native American 

and Native Hawaiian programs. These programs are available to 566 federally-recognized Indian tribes, 5 state-recognized Indian tribes formerly eligible under the 

United States Housing Act of 1937, and the State of Hawaii’s Department of Hawaiian Home Lands. We serve these entities directly, or through their tribally designated housing entities, by providing grants and loan guarantees designed to support affordable housing and community development activities. 

9

Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant Program 

Title VIII of the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act 

of 1996, as amended, or NAHASDA, establishes a block grant program, the Native 

Hawaiian Housing Block Grant (NHHBG),to carry out affordable housing activities 

for Native Hawaiian families eligible to reside on Hawaiian home lands. The Department of Hawaiian Home Lands (DHHL) is the sole recipient of this grant and 

administers the NHHBG program. DHHL is the department of government for the 

State of Hawaii responsible for the administration of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act. 

To address critical housing issues such as affordability, overcrowding, structural 

quality, and availability, DHHL has targeted a significant amount of NHHBG funds 

to support:

• Site improvements and infrastructure for new construction of affordable housing;

• Financial assistance for homebuyers;

• Rehabilitation of existing affordable housing units;

• Homeownership counseling; and

• Technical assistance to prepare families for home purchase and ownership.

NHHBG Program Funding and Accomplishments 

The first NHHBG grant was awarded in FY 2002 for $9.6 million. Over the last ten years, NHHBG grants have ranged from $8.3 million in FYs 2006 and 2007 to 

a high of $12.7 million in FYs 2010 and 2012. 

In the last seven years, 461 affordable homes have been built, acquired, or 

rehabbed with NHHBG funds, and the program has provided the basic, critical infrastructure to support new construction throughout the Hawaiian home lands. In 

addition, the program has provided training and technical assistance to community 

housing providers, lenders, and low-income residents, including 233 Native Hawaiian families trained just last year in self-help home repair, financial literacy, and 

home buying. Over 840 families have participated in training over the life of the 

program. 

DHHL works with Native Hawaiian organizations, civic groups, and service agencies in the public, private, and government sectors. DHHL’s housing and community 

development partners include: Habitat for Humanity, the Council for Native Hawaiian Advancement, USDA Rural Development and the County of Hawaii. 

Most of DHHL’s affordable housing projects are developed over several years. Currently, there are six NHHBG-funded housing projects in progress, all of which are 

at various stages of development, from design, to infrastructure installation, to 

home construction. 

Here are a few examples: 

Kumuhau and Kakaina Subdivisions 

One hundred single-family homes are planned for construction on a 16-acre parcel 

in Waimanalo on the island of Oahu, of which, 28 lots are reserved for NHHBGeligible families.

• $1.4 million in FY 2006 and $50,000 in FY 2007 NHHBG funds was used for 

on- and off-site infrastructure construction for the Kumuhau subdivision. Approximately 18 of the 52 lots (45 turnkey and 7 self-help lots) are reserved for 

NHHBG-eligible families.

• As of September 30, 2011, site work for Kumuhau was complete. The construction of 45 turnkey homes was underway, 22 of which were complete. Of the 22 

completed homes, 3 were for NHHBG-eligible families.

• The Kakaina subdivision consists of 44 lots. This project is in the infrastructure 

phase. Approximately 10 of the 44 lots will be for NHHBG-eligible families.

East Kapolei I (Kanehili) 

This project consists of the development of 400 single-family homes on a 92-acre 

parcel in Kapolei on the island of Oahu; approximately 72 of the homes will be for 

NHHBG-eligible families.

• $447,300 in FY 2002 NHHBG funds was applied toward the total cost of $2.5 

million for project engineering and design, which was completed in March 2007.

• $1.7 million in FY 2006 NHHBG funds was used, in combination with DHHL 

trust funds, to pay for approximately 18 percent of the cost for mass grading 

and on- and off-site infrastructure construction in increment I of the subdivision.

10

• As of September 30, 2011, site work was complete for increment I phases 1 

through 4, which includes 286 lots. House construction in increment I was ongoing, with 250 homes completed and occupied and another 30 homes under construction.

Laiopua Villages 4 and 5

Approximately 360 single-family homes are planned for construction on 2 parcels 

totaling 86 acres at Kealakehe in North Kona on the island of Hawaii. The homes 

are allocated between Village 4 (243) and Village 5 (117) of Laiopua. Seventy-two 

lots are reserved for NHHBG-eligible families.

• $3.8 million in FY 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006 NHHBG funds was used for 

mass grading. Additional NHHBG funding will be used for infrastructure construction, house construction loans, or down payment assistance grants, and 

self-help technical assistance.

• $1.2 million in FY 2006 and 2007 and 2008 NHHBG funds is being used to install streets, sewer and utilities for Village 5.

• As of September 30, 2011, mass grading work was complete for Village 5 and 

Village 4. Installation of streets, sewer and utilities was 95 percent complete for 

Village 5. House construction for 45 homes in Village 5 was underway. Village 

4 was in the design phase.

East Kapolei II 

A total of 1,000 single-family residential lots are planned for construction on a 

374-acre parcel in Kapolei on the island of Oahu, of which, approximately 200 lots 

will be reserved for NHHBG-eligible families.

• $53.9 million in FY 2007 and other NHHBG funds are planned to be used in 

combination with DHHL trust funds for on- and off-site infrastructure construction, consultant services, including engineers and architects, house construction 

loans or down payment assistance grants, self-help technical assistance, and 

utility fees.

• $3 million was used in FY 2010 to complete off-site sewer and drainage work.

• $4 million in Recovery Act funds is being used to do mass grading for East 

Kapolei II, increments B and C. As of September 30, 2011, this mass grading 

work was 90 percent complete.

Partnerships with Habitat for Humanity and other service organizations are making it possible for low-income Native Hawaiian families to achieve homeownership 

through the self-help method of construction in various projects on the islands of 

Kauai, Oahu, Maui, Molokai, and Hawaii. Partnerships have also been secured to 

implement a home rehabilitation grant program, a self-help home repair training 

program, and to provide homeownership counseling and training. 

Native Hawaiian Housing Loan Guarantee (Section 184A) 

The Section 184A Loan Guarantee for Native Hawaiian Housing program, known 

as Section 184A, was established by Section 514 of the American Homeownership 

and Economic Opportunity Act of 2000 (P.L. 106–569, approved December 27, 2000), 

which amended the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 (12 U.S.C. 

1715z-13b). The purpose of Section 184A is to provide access to sources of private 

mortgage financing to Native Hawaiian families who could not otherwise acquire 

housing financing because of the unique legal status of the Hawaiian home lands. 

Eligible borrowers include Native Hawaiian families who are eligible to reside on 

Hawaiian home lands, the DHHL, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, or private nonprofit organizations experienced in the planning and development of affordable 

housing for on Hawaiian home lands. Loans are used to construct, acquire, or rehabilitate eligible housing located on the Hawaiian home lands. The FY 2012 Appropriations Act authorized funding to be used for Section 184A refinancing. 

Section 184A Program Funding and Accomplishments 

In August 2005, DHHL closed on the first loan guaranteed under the Section 

184A Loan Guarantee program. In May 2006, HUD executed a memorandum of 

agreement with DHHL that served as the foundation for subsequent loan activity. 

Prior to this agreement, DHHL was the only eligible participant in the program. 

Since 184A program activity began in FY 2005, 269 loans have been guaranteed. 

Given the recent authority to use the program for refinancing, and DHHL success 

in constructing new homes on Hawaiian home lands, HUD expects loan activity to 

significantly increase within the next year. 

11

The Hawaiian Homeownership Act of 2011, Senate Bill 65

HUD supports The Hawaiian Homeownership Act of 2011 (Senate Bill 65) and its 

reauthorization and expansion of both NHHBG and Section 184A through 2015. 

DHHL is working effectively with community partners to not only increase housing 

opportunity on the Islands, but to build stronger, more economically vibrant and 

self-sufficient communities. DHHL understands the value of thoughtful planning as 

evidenced in its strategic plan, which includes elements of regional planning, energy 

efficiency and leveraging resources. 

Expanding the 184A program to allow families to refinance will provide a perfect 

complement to the limited amount of financing options available for properties on 

Hawaiian home lands. The Section 184A program makes it possible for eligible Native Hawaiian families to refinance their homes at the current market rate of interest. The money saved on a monthly basis through refinancing is critical to families 

living in high-cost areas, and provides greater stability of Native Hawaiian communities. 

And giving DHHL the ability to participate in the Title VI program will expand 

the leveraging capacity of federal funds, and at the same time, will decrease dependency on government dollars. Currently, only tribes or their tribally designated housing entities can participate in the Title VI program. This program is a powerful 

leveraging and development tool that encourages long-term projects and the 

leveraging of a variety of funding sources. Under Title VI, HUD can guarantee 95 

percent of a loan for affordable housing activities covered under NAHASDA. Borrowers pledge a portion of their current and future housing block grant funds as 

security. This program has provided an incentive for lenders to get involved in the 

development of tribal housing. 

Conclusion 

In conclusion Chairman, through the reauthorization of both the Native Hawaiian 

Housing Block Grant and the Section 184A program we can work towards giving 

every Native Hawaiian family a fair shot at having a home. 

Thank you again for this opportunity to appear before you today. I would be 

happy to answer any questions you may have.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, very much, Mr. Boyd. Your full statement will be included in the record. I want to thank very much for 

your positive testimony. 

Ms. Kauhane, please proceed. 

STATEMENT OF MICHELLE KAUHANE, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, 

DEPARTMENT OF HAWAIIAN HOME LANDS, STATE OF HAWAII 

Ms. KAUHANE. Thank you, Senator. 

Aloha Chairman and Senator Inouye, and Distinguished Members of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs. 

My name is Michelle Kauhane, and I thank you for the invitation 

and opportunity to provide testimony on behalf of the State of Hawaii, Department of Hawaiian Home Lands. Our state agency is responsible for the administration of the federal land trust established by Congress through the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act 

of 1920. 

DHHL strongly supports Senate Bill 65, the Hawaiian Homeownership Opportunity Act of 2011, which reauthorizes federal 

housing assistance and loan guarantees for Native Hawaiians. 

Today I will provide highlights of my written testimony that give 

a short overview of DHHL’s role in administering the Hawaiian 

Homes Commission Act, describe the Native Hawaiian housing 

need that make NAHASADA vitally important to our progress, and 

share some of the ways NAHASDA has assisted in supporting Native Hawaiian homestead communities. 

DHHL has a unique role as a state agency to manage the federally created land trust to reconnect Native Hawaiians to their ancestral lands in Hawaii. For the beneficiaries of the HHCA, self-deVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:51 Dec 11, 2012 Jkt 076305 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\DOCS\76305.TXT JACK
12

termination and self-governance is expressed through the existence 

of organizations governed by beneficiaries or homesteaders themselves. 

These homestead associations have existed for decades, and have 

representative leadership through democratically elected processes 

for each homestead land area on different islands within the state. 

Just as Tribes are powerful partners with the Federal Government, homestead associations are vital to our state’s success in implementing the tenets of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act as 

Congress intended. 

After 92 years since the enactment of Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, just over 10,000 land leases have been issued to beneficiaries for homesteading purposes. An estimated 35,000 lessees 

and family members reside on our homestead lands throughout Hawaii. Approximately 48 percent located on Oahu, 23 percent on Hawaii island, 22 percent in Maui County and seven percent on 

Kauai. 

In addition to the beneficiaries residing on Hawaiian Home 

Lands, the waitlist of individual applicants to receive a land award 

under the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act exceeds 26,000 individuals, with waiting times ranging from five years to 50 years. 

According to an SMS 2008 survey, about 46 percent of the applicants on the DHHL waitlist have incomes below 80 percent of the 

HUD median. More than half of those low income applicants fall 

into the category between 30 and 50 percent of that same area median income. 

DHHL must provide housing solutions to meet the needs of the 

low and very low income on the waitlist. These families continue 

to get passed over as they have the most difficulty in qualifying for 

mortgage financing based on the current sales prices that are simply out of reach for these income categories. 

Since 2002, DHHL has received and utilized the NAHASDA 

funds primarily to support subdivision development. Approximately 

75 percent of the open lands of our trust remain undeveloped. One 

of the largest barriers to issuing lands to individuals on the 

waitlist is the investment required in infrastructure for roads, utilities, water, wastewater facilities, broadband and renewable energy 

sources. 

In addition to subdivision development, we have issued low cost 

loans, down payment assistance and subsidies, individual development accounts, and home repair/rehabilitation programs. Likewise, 

the funds have supported financial literacy and homebuyer education and counseling, as well as foreclosure prevention and lease 

cancellation services. 

DHHL also awards grant funds to qualified entities with a wide 

array of programs servicing our homestead association and beneficiaries. 

In addition to direct financial resources, Senate Bill 65 would 

also authorize credit subsidies that make mortgage capital available to Native Hawaiian beneficiaries under the HUD 184A loan 

program to purchase, construct and refinancing of homes. 

The HUD 184A program is one of the most successful trust land 

focused home loan products to be sponsored by the Federal GovernVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:51 Dec 11, 2012 Jkt 076305 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\DOCS\76305.TXT JACK
13

1 Ch. 42, 42 Stat. 108 (1921) 

ment. The program is one of only a very few sources of home loan 

capital available for financing homestead properties. 

In addition, the 184A program is a remarkably affordable mortgage product with no mortgage insurance requirement. 

The federal loan guarantee provided by the 184A program is 

powerfully important to bringing private capital to new home development in every county of the State of Hawaii where Hawaiian 

Home Lands are located. Since 2007 when the first loan closed, the 

184A portfolio has grown to over $50 million in just over four 

years. 

Finally, Senate Bill 65 authorized, or would authorize DHHL for 

loan guarantees under Title VI of NAHASDA. This eligibility would 

allow the Department to borrow against its annual awards to do 

larger scale housing development and long-term planning. 

Mr. Chairman, on behalf of DHHL and Department of Hawaiian 

Home Lands, we thank you for your unwavering support for our 

homestead beneficiaries. You have always been a champion for Hawaii’s people throughout your longstanding career in the United 

States Congress. We have been honored to share you with the rest 

of our nation and we welcome you back home with open arms at 

the end of 2012. 

Senate Bill 65, the Hawaiian Homeownership Opportunity Act of 

2011 is vitally important to fulfilling the mission of the Hawaiian 

Homes Commission Act in reconnecting Native Hawaiians with 

their lands. 

Thank you for this opportunity to share our mana’o with you and 

the Committee. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Kauhane follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MICHELLE KAUHANE, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF

HAWAIIAN HOME LANDS, STATE OF HAWAII

Aloha Chairman Akaka, Vice-Chairman Barasso and Members of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs. 

My name is Michelle Kauhane, and I thank you for the invitation and opportunity 

to provide testimony on behalf of the State of Hawaii, Department of Hawaiian 

Home Lands (DHHL). Our state agency is responsible for the administration of the 

federal land trust established by Congress through the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act of 1920 1 (HHCA). 

The Department of Hawaiian Home Lands strongly supports S. 65, the Hawaiian 

Homeownership Opportunity Act of 2011, which reauthorizes housing assistance 

and loan guarantees for Native Hawaiians. 

I will provide additional information about why this program is so important to 

HHCA beneficiaries, but before doing so, I want to provide some context regarding 

the Department’s unique role as the administrator of the Hawaiian Home Lands 

trust. 

Hawaiian Trust Lands Under the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act 

Since Hawaii’s overthrow as an independent nation and the subsequent annexation to the United States, one of the most significant federal policy achievements 

for native Hawaiians was the enactment by the U.S Congress of the HHCA. The 

HHCA began as a resolution in the territorial government in Hawaii, and was 

championed by the territory’s congressional representative, Prince Jonah Kuhio 

Kalanianaole. Similar to other land allotment acts of that era for Alaska Natives 

and American Indians, the HHCA established a land trust of approximately 200,000 

acres of land located in every county in the state, to provide for the rehabilitation 

of native Hawaiians through the provision of land for residential, agricultural and 

pastoral homesteading. The Act is the clearest example of the United States’ recVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:51 Dec 11, 2012 Jkt 076305 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\76305.TXT JACK
14

2Section 4, P.L. 86–3, 73 Stat. 4 (1959) 

3P. L. 104–42, 109 Stat.357 (1995) 

4 Id. Section 206. 

ognition of Native Hawaiians as an indigenous people with whom the United States 

has a trust relationship. 

Hawaii entered the Union in 1959, during a period when federal responsibilities 

towards indigenous peoples were often delegated to the States. Consistent with that 

policy, the HHCA was incorporated into Public Law 86–3, the Hawaii State Admissions Act in 1959, ‘‘[a]s a compact with the United States relating to the management and disposition of the Hawaiian home lands . . .’’ 2 DHHL was established by 

the State of Hawaii in 1961 to manage the federal responsibilities delegated to the 

State of Hawaii associated with administering the HHCA. 

While the State of Hawaii has the authority to amend the HHCA, Section 4 of 

the Admissions Act requires the consent of the United States to amendments which 

reduce or impair certain funds, increase encumbrances on the Hawaiian Homes land 

trust, or change the qualification of lessees. By ensuring that actions that negatively 

impact the implementation of the HHCA require federal consent, the United States 

acknowledged its trust responsibility as it relates to the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act. 

In 1995, Congress enacted the Hawaiian Home Lands Recovery Act, 3 to recover 

lands that had been withdrawn from the Hawaiian Homes land trust. In recognition 

of the United States’ political and legal relationship with Native Hawaiians, the Act 

also required the Secretary of the Interior to designate an individual to administer 

the responsibilities of the United States under the Hawaiian Homes Commission 

Act. The Assistant Secretary of Policy, Budget, and Administration of the Department of the Interior, therefore, is charged with exercising the responsibilities of the 

Interior Department as it pertains to advancing the interests of the HHCA beneficiaries and assisting beneficiaries with obtaining federal services related to the 

promotion of homesteading opportunities, economic self-sufficiency and social wellbeing. 4

DHHL is governed by a 9-member Hawaiian Homes Commission appointed by 

Hawaii’s Governor. Its Director, a member of the Governor’s cabinet, also serves as 

the Chairman of the Commission. DHHL, therefore, has a unique role as a state 

agency managing a federally created land trust to reconnect native Hawaiians to 

their ancestral lands in Hawaii. We embrace this unique relationship and work in 

partnership with the federal agencies to fulfill the federal trust responsibility as it 

pertains to the Hawaiian Homes land trust. 

Like our American Indian and Alaska Native brethren with trust lands, we work 

with federal agencies to ensure that our native communities on trust lands are eligible to utilize federal programs like NAHASDA which provide much needed housing, 

access to capital, and opportunities for economic self-determination. We firmly believe that federal trust lands status should serve as a criterion for federal programming as a way for the United States to fulfill its federal trust responsibility to its 

native peoples. 

Self-Determination of Native Hawaiians 

In Hawaii, we do not refer to our Native peoples as tribal members or Indians, 

although it is clear that Congress intended the inclusion of Native Hawaiians in the 

federal policies of self-determination. The most common terminology most understood in the islands to represent native Hawaiians eligible for the HHCA land trust, 

are ‘‘beneficiary’’ or ‘‘homesteader’’. Moreover, the lands in the Hawaiian Home 

Land trust are referred to as ‘‘homesteads’’ rather than reservations. For the purposes of our testimony, these terms will be used to describe native Hawaiians and 

land areas under the HHCA, which was enacted by Congress during a policy period 

of the federal government wherein land trusts and Native allotment programs were 

commonly established for Native peoples in Indian Country and Alaska. The HHCA 

was an extension of those policies, as well as the federal policies of self-determination that have been well documents over the last century. 

For the beneficiaries of the HHCA, self-determination and self-governance is expressed through the existence of beneficiary organizations governed by beneficiaries 

or homesteaders themselves. These organizations, called homestead associations, 

have existed for decades, and have representative leadership through democratically 

elected processes for each homestead land area on differing islands within the state. 

Just as tribes are powerful partners with the Federal Government, homestead associations are vital to our state’s success in implementing the tenets of the HHCA as 

Congress intended. 

15

Homesteading Progress 

After 92 years since the enactment of the HHCA, just over 10,000 land leases 

have been issued to beneficiaries for homesteading purposes. In the past 10 years, 

approximately 2,500 leases were issued. An estimated 35,000 lessees and family 

members reside on homestead lands throughout Hawaii. Approximately 48 percent 

are located on Oahu, 23 percent on the island of Hawaii, 22 percent in Maui County, 

and 7 percent on Kauai. Among the lessees, the majority of leases are residential 

(89 percent), followed by 8 percent agricultural, and the remaining 3 percent in pastoral. 

According to a 2008 lessee survey conducted by SMS Research, DHHL lessee 

households consist of 3 to 7 people with a mean of 4.2 household members. The median household income among lessees was $48,731 in 2008, lower than the median 

household income for the State at $63,746. In addition, the survey estimated 51 percent of DHHL lessee households had incomes below 80 percent of the HUD median. 

In addition to the beneficiaries on the land, the wait list of beneficiaries to receive 

a land award under the HHCA exceeds 26,000, with waiting times ranging from 5 

years to 50 years. According to the SMS 2008 survey, 46 percent of the applicants 

on the DHHL waitlist had incomes below 80 percent of the HUD median. At least 

half (50.8 percent) of all applicants that are at or below 80 percent AMI on the 

waitlist, fall into the 51%-80 percent range, just under 30 percent fall in the 30–

50 percent AMI range, and approximately 22 percent fall in the less than 30 percent 

AMI range. 

Low Income Native Hawaiian Housing Need 

For low income native Hawaiian households (those making less than 80 percent 

of the area media income), housing needs are severe with 68 percent of these households experiencing some kind of housing problem such as affordability, overcrowding, structural quality, availability or some combination of these problems. For 

very low income households (those making less than 50 percent of the area median 

income) the needs are even more severe with nearly 75 percent of the households 

in this category facing some kind of housing problem. While housing needs are serious for the native Hawaiian population as a whole, the situation is more critical for 

the low and very low-income households. The percentage of low-income native Hawaiian households that experience housing problems is more than double the percentage of native Hawaiian households as a whole with housing problems—68 percent versus 27 percent. For very low-income native Hawaiian households, this percentage is almost triple 75 percent versus 27 percent. 

Addressing the Needs 

Given the housing needs, DHHL has focused the use of the NHHBG funds on increasing the supply of affordable housing units or to rehabilitate existing units to 

relieve some of the overcrowding pressures and substandard living conditions experienced in many low-income native Hawaiian households. In addition, DHHL has 

supported healthy and safe communities. We have empowered resident organizations and continue to promote self-sufficiency for native Hawaiian families. 

It is well understood, that the progress made to implement the primary purpose 

of returning native Hawaiians to their lands under the HHCA, is and has been inadequate. These numbers clearly show that in 2012, almost 100 years after the enactment of HHCA, there is still a strong desire by native Hawaiians to live and 

work on the Hawaiian Home Lands. There is no question that DHHL and the HHC 

have been underfunded and under-resourced for many years. Federal programs such 

as NAHASDA and the HUD 184A Loan Guarantee program help to fulfill the mission of the HHCA by reconnecting native Hawaiians to their ancestral lands. 

S. 65, Hawaiian Homeownership Opportunity Act of 2011

DHHL strongly supports S. 65, the Hawaiian Homeownership Act of 2011, a vital 

tool for native Hawaiian beneficiaries of the HHCA. S. 65 reauthorizes NAHASDA 

Title VIII funding, provides necessary credit subsidies to allow HHCA beneficiaries 

to utilize the HUD 184A loan guarantee program for purchasing and refinancing 

home loans like their Indian and Alaska Native counterparts, and makes DHHL an 

eligible entity for NAHASDA Title VI loan guarantees. 

NAHASDA 

In 2000, the congress enacted Title VIII of NAHASDA, creating for the fist time, 

a modest allocation of federal funding to support the development of affordable 

housing for low- and moderate-income beneficiaries. 

Since 2002, DHHL has received and utilized NAHASDA funding to support subdivision development. Approximately seventy-five percent of the open lands of the 

Hawaiian Home Lands trust remain undeveloped. One of the largest barriers to 

16

issuing land to the 26,000∂ individuals on the waitlist is investment in infrastructure for roads, utilities, water/waste water facilities, broadband and renewable energy sources. NHHBG funds have been a vital source of infrastructure funding for 

DHHL since 2002. These fund have brought vital leverage to our trust funds and 

have allowed us to continue housing development. 

In addition to subdivision development, NHHBG funds have provided grants to 

qualified entities with programs servicing homestead beneficiaries, loans, down payment assistance and individual development account programs, and home repair/rehabilitation programs. Likewise, the funds have supported financial literacy and 

homebuyer education and counseling, as well as foreclosure prevention/lease cancellation services. 

HUD 184A Program 

The HUD 184A program is one of a very few sources of home loan capital available to native Hawaiians residing on Hawaiian Home Lands. The HUD 184A federal 

loan guarantee is powerfully important in bringing private capital to new home development in every county of the State of Hawaii where Hawaiian Homes trust 

lands are located. This program is one of the most successful trust land focused 

home loan products to be sponsored by the federal government. S. 65 would provide 

credit subsidies that make mortgage capital available to native Hawaiian beneficiaries of the HHCA to purchase, construct, or refinance their homes. 

Title VI Loan Guarantees 

S. 65 authorizes DHHL for loan guarantees under Title VI of NAHASDA. This 

eligibility would allow us to borrow or issue debt for affording housing activities 

which helps us to leverage additional resources to increase opportunities of homeownership for homestead families. 

Conclusion 

Mr. Chairman, on behalf of the Hawaiian Homes Commission and the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, thank you for your unwavering support of homestead beneficiaries. You have always been a champion for Hawaii’s people. Your efforts over your longstanding career in the United States Congress have truly helped 

our people to reconnect with the ‘aina. You championed legislation that allowed 

homesteads to be inherited by family members meeting the 25 percent blood quantum. You created the Native American Veteran Direct Loan Program to address the 

unique situation faced by Native American veterans seeking to utilize the VA Home 

Loan Program on trust lands. Through the Hawaiian Home Lands Recovery Act you 

ensured not only that the Hawaiian homes trust was replenished after lands were 

wrongly withdrawn, but you also ensured that the United States designated a federal official to assist homestead beneficiaries at the federal level. And, most importantly, you created a pathway for the United States and Native Hawaiians to engage in a process of reconciliation to address the many longstanding issues resulting 

from the illegal overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii through the enactment of P.L. 

104–150, the Apology Resolution. 

As the Chairman of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, you have worked 

to ensure continued economic self-determination in native communities through increased access to capital and federal programs and services. You have championed 

the federal trust responsibility and worked to ensure that the United States fulfill 

its responsibilities to promote the welfare of its indigenous peoples. Mr. Chairman, 

we have been honored to share you with the rest of our nation and we welcome you 

back home with open arms at the end of 2012. 

S. 65, the Hawaiian Homeownership Opportunity Act of 2011, is vitally important 

to fulfilling the mission of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act to reconnect native 

Hawaiians with their lands. Thank you for the opportunity to share our mana‘o with 

you and your Committee.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Ms. Kauhane, for your 

testimony. 

I know our Senator Inouye has to leave, so I’m going to ask Senator for any questions he may have. 

Senator INOUYE. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I’ve submitted the questions, but I would like to thank Mr. Boyd for making the special effort to be with us for this important hearing. I 

know that you had to go out of your way to do this. We appreciate 

it. 

17

Ms. Kauhane, we appreciate your leadership. Thank you very 

much. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Senator Inouye. Thank 

you for your leadership in Hawaii and wish you well and have a 

safe trip. 

Senator INOUYE. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. My first question is to Mr. Boyd. Thank you so 

much for being here, Mr. Boyd, I appreciate it, your presence. 

There has been some discussion regarding the spend-down rates 

of some Tribes under the NAHASDA program. My understanding 

is that the NAHASDA allows Tribes some flexibility in how and 

when to spend their annual allocations. 

Can you provide examples, examples of why NAHASDA allows 

grantees to carry funds forward? And explain why this is an important ability for grantees to have it. 

Mr. BOYD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Since the inception of NAHASDA, and everything within the development of operating the Block Grant Program is done by negotiated rulemaking. So many things that we set into place, in addition to what was originated in the statutes and regulations, we 

have always added over the years. And as a matter of fact 

NAHASDA will be up for reauthorization in 2014. 

But at any rate, I wanted to make that statement because it’s 

not only HUD’s involvement in the process of developing the operations of NAHASDA, but it also includes a lot of participation from 

Tribes throughout the country. 

One of the things that Tribes noticed, and we noticed early on, 

was some of the smaller Tribes—and, again, we operate under a 

Grant Block formula and based on need. 

But at any rate, over the years, we’ve found out that some of the 

smaller Tribes may only receive like about $50,000 a year. And so 

for those smaller Tribes, and some of the medium size Tribes, it’s 

difficult to have enough money to some construct a home in one 

year given that amount. 

So through appropriations and no-year funding, Tribes are allowed to build on appropriations over several years so that they 

will obtain enough money to build a unit. In some cases, it’s pretty 

dramatic in some situations. 

Another example probably would be a good case like in Alaska 

where you have regional housing preparations that have many villages under their jurisdiction, and so I think the no-year funding 

helps them also to roll those funds over for a couple of years so 

that they can adequately serve everybody within their communities. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much for that response. 

Michelle, the waitlist for Hawaiian Home Lands include persons 

who have been waiting for award, sometimes in excess of 20 years. 

Can you describe some of the barriers to getting these people off 

the waitlist and onto the land? 

And describe what role NAHASDA funding and the Section 184A 

Loan Program played in helping the Department meet its mandate 

under the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act. 

Ms. KAUHANE. Thank you, Senator. 

18

Yes, many of those folks, particularly low and very low income 

families who have been on the waitlist do get passed when they are 

required to qualify for the mortgage prior to being awarded their 

lot. 

And so NAHASDA has helped the Department in many ways 

with dollars in the ground for infrastructure, which then represents 

subsidies to purchase down the sales price of the homes so that 

families in low income categories can actually qualify for the mortgages at hand. 

The HUD 184A Loan Program in particular has been partly important to add a new source of mortgage capital to homestead communities. Prior to that we had VA, USDA and FHA 247. FHA 247, 

which was the more highly used of the loan products, requires 

beneficiaries to add into its purchase price almost four percent on 

top of the sales price for mortgage insurance, whereas the 184A 

program is very affordable in that they can finance just one percent 

as a guaranteed fee. So the guarantee that comes from the Federal 

Government under the 184A Loan Program is vitally important to 

new access to capital for our homestead communities. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, very much. 

I want to commend your Department for the work you’ve been 

doing in helping the homesteaders out, and look forward to continuing to do that. 

To the both of you, does the census data related to the Hawaiian 

Home Lands tracts accurately reflect the financial condition of Native Hawaiians remaining on the waitlist? And is there a continuing need for NAHASDA funding to the Native Hawaiian people? Michelle. 

Ms. KAUHANE. Absolutely, Senator. 

I think that the U.S. Census data that is upholding households, 

existing families who may be currently living on the land, does not 

accurately reflect necessarily those folks who are on the waitlist. 

The folks who are on the land and those income statistics show 

those who are actually eligible to qualify for the mortgage financing, and therefore, are on the land and in those households today. 

Whereas, many of the folks on the waitlist who are in the lower 

income categories were unable to qualify for mortgage financing 

and, thus, remain on the list. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Boyd. 

Mr. BOYD. Senator, thanks for the question. 

We really see our partnership and our relationship with Native 

Hawaiians as being in the long term. We don’t think that it’s going 

to end at any time, to be honest. So we build our program, and certainly we do look at census data. I haven’t really had a chance to 

analyze the current census data. But just looking at the need, and 

the good work that the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands is 

doing, we think that the additions that I testified on this morning 

will be very, very helpful. 

I think the whole idea with regard to our present economy and 

every additional tool that we can lend to the Native Hawaiian community in fostering homeownership and housing within your state 

will be very beneficial, and help to create greater sustainability. 

The CHAIRMAN. I want to thank our federal and state government officials for their responses. We look forward to passing this 

19

bill in the U.S. Senate and, of course, in the House with the help 

of Congresswomen Hirono and Hanabusa, and look forward to further assistance to our people. 

So I want to thank you very much. If we have any further questions, we’ll get it to you. As Senator Inouye mentioned, he has 

questions that he has submitted for your answers. 

So, again, mahalo nui loa. Thank you very much. 

I would like to invite the second panel to the witness table. Serving our second panel is Honorable Colleen Hanabusa, Congresswoman for Hawaii’s First District; Professor Melody Mackenzie, Associate Professor of Law and Director of Ka Huli Ao Center for Excellence in Native Hawaiian law at University of Hawaii, Richardson School of Law in Honolulu, Hawaii; the Honorable Brickwood 

Galuteria, Majority Leader of the Hawaii State Senate in Honolulu, 

Hawaii; and Mr. Richard Naiwieha Wurdeman, President of the 

Native Hawaiian Bar Association in Honolulu, Hawaii. 

Welcome and aloha to you, and look forward to your testimonies. 

Now, I would like to call on Congresswoman Hanabusa for your 

testimony. Please proceed. 

STATEMENT OF HON. COLLEEN HANABUSA,

U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM HAWAII 

Ms. HANABUSA. Thank you, Senator Akaka. 

Good morning, Mr. Chairman. First of all I want to thank you 

for this opportunity to speak on Senate Bill 65, and I would like 

to ask that my written testimony become part of the record. 

The CHAIRMAN. All of your full statements will be part of the 

record. 

Ms. HANABUSA. Thank you. And the reason I ask that is because 

I would like to deviate a little from the statement to share with the 

members of our community as to how important Senate Bill 65 is, 

and the personal experience that I had in dealing with it. 

When I first got elected to Congress, we were on a continuing 

resolution, as Senator, you’re very well aware of. And one of the 

issues in H.R. 1, which was the continuing resolution that the 

House was offering as the appropriation measure to fund the 2011 

fiscal year, excluded the funding for the Native Hawaiians under 

the NAHASDA funding. 

And the reason why they could do that, is because under our 

rule, which is 21, and I believe the Senate has as comparable rule, 

that if it is not authorized in statute, then we are not able to actually amend an appropriation measure to have it included. 

I sat on the floor of the House until 3 o’clock in the morning as 

continuing resolution, the House Resolution 1, the continuing resolution for 2011 was making its way through. And I was told then 

that I would be ruled out of order, because as we all know, Title 

VIII technically expired in the year 2004 when it was first instituted in 2000. 

So the lack of the authorization in the NAHASDA statute made 

it almost impossible for anyone, if the appropriators did not put it 

in, that they would be able to add it in for funding. To me the consequence of that would have been absolutely devastating for the 

Department of Hawaiian Home Lands. We all know that the trust 

obligation exists. However, notwithstanding that, we also know 

20

that as of next year the settlement of what we used to call the 

waitlist claims, would also expire. 

And having said that, the funding now becomes a critical matter. 

NAHASDA has fulfilled that gap for us. And I know that from my 

role in the State Legislature and chairing Hawaiian Affairs along 

with many of my other committees along the way. 

So this Senate bill, the Section 1 is extremely critical for, I believe, the obligation of the United States to continue to fulfill the 

promises made of the provision of housing for the Native Hawaiians. Not only that, but it is also critical for really the preservation 

of the culture, as well as the people, which was how the Hawaiian 

Homes Commission Act of 1920 was initially initiated. 

In addition to that, Senate Bill 65 addresses what I consider to 

be very important provisions as well. One of the parts that was 

lacking, which is now set forth in Section 2 of the bill, is the reference to Section 184. And I’m not sure if everyone recognizes, but 

the word ‘‘refinance’’ is dominant in there. That was one of the provisions that was lacking in the original version. And that also, I believe, hampered the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands’ ability 

to assist in people receiving their housing and being able to move 

ahead, and that is the term ‘‘refinance’’. 

We also know that it also eliminates a lot of the other language, 

and makes it clear that the criteria standard housing and location 

on the Hawaiian Home Lands. 

In addition to that, Section 4 of the bill—that was Section 3—

amends Title VI of the NAHASDA. And Title VI is really the loan 

aspects of it. And it makes it also very clear that where the language was: Where Tribally designated housing identities with Tribal approval. And those language still remain and we insert: Also 

or by the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands. That is found 

throughout the title, and whatever title is referenced, whether it’s 

Title I of the NAHASDA, we have also added in Title VIII, which 

would now, by Section 1 of this bill—Section 2 would authorize its 

continuation until the fiscal year 2015. 

Senator, I cannot impress upon everyone how critical this bill is, 

because it will be the funding mechanism for the Department of 

Hawaiian Home Lands. It will be as the Department of Hawaiian 

Home Lands struggles for funding from the state when its trust 

monies run out, as to how we’re going to be able to fulfill this obligation to place Native Hawaiians on the land. 

So I cannot thank you enough for Senate Bill 65, and for the 

ability to have co-sponsored it in the House. And to ask, again, that 

you inform your colleagues, which I know you will, and that for the 

community to recognize how significant a piece of legislation this 

is. And though it may only be four pages, it really does hold within 

it the future of the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands. 

Thank you very much, Senator, for the opportunity to be here 

with you, and to testify on this very important measure. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Hanabusa follows:]

21

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. COLLEEN HANABUSA, U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM

HAWAII

Good morning Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee: 

I appreciate the opportunity to submit my comments on S. 65, the Hawaiian 

Homeownership Opportunity Act of 2011 which would reauthorize Title VIII of the 

Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act (NAHASDA), benefitting native Hawaiians. I am a cosponsor of the House companion bill, H.R. 2648 

and feel strongly that passage of this legislation is of critical importance for this 

Congress. 

Title VIII of NAHASDA is more than an affordable housing initiative—it is a critical piece of legislation for the people of Hawai‘i because it fulfills a trust obligation 

that Congress created in 1920 with the passage of the Hawaiian Homes Commission 

Act. The Act recognized that it was necessary to return native Hawaiians to their 

land to ‘‘fully support self-sufficiency.and the preservation of the values, traditions, 

and culture of native Hawaiians.’’ This trust responsibility to the native Hawaiian 

people has since been reaffirmed by federal legislation aimed at protecting native 

Hawaiians on their land, such as the Hawaiian Homelands Recovery Act (P.L. 104–

42), the Native Hawaiian Education Act (20 USC § 4901–1909), and inclusion of Native Hawaiians in the Native American Programs Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 2991 et 

seq.), the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470 et seq.), the Workforce 

Investment Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C. 2801 et seq.) and many other statutes. 

This bill would extend the authorization to cover the costs of federal guarantees 

for financing for tribal housing under 25 U.S.C. 4195(b) from 2011 to 2015. The importance of this reauthorization became very evident when the House Appropriations Committee cut the NAHASDA funding for native Hawaiians in HR1, the Continuing Resolution (CR) for 2011. Rule XXI of the Rules of the House of Representatives for the One Hundred Twelfth Congress prohibits any amendment, not previously authorized by law, which would appropriate money to said program. In essence funding for native Hawaiians under NAHASDA will always be at the mercy 

of the appropriators, irrespective of the merits of the program and/or the trust obligations of the Congress. 

Funding of the program would allow for continued facilitation of affordable housing opportunities for eligible native Hawaiians on their trust lands, a program administered by the State of Hawai‘i with significant oversight by the Federal Government as a condition of statehood. This program has a history of being very successful, effective, and non-partisan—one that Hawai‘i’s former Republican Governor considers to be her legacy. The Department of Hawaiian Homelands has been able to 

extend support to native Hawaiians not only through placement of families on 

homesteads, but also through their down payment assistance program and home 

loan mortgage assistance program, and the development of renewable energy 

projects and the construction of energy efficient homes for beneficiaries. 

In short, this program does just what it was intended to do, which is support the 

self-sufficiency for native Hawaiians on their home lands, and it is the responsibility 

of Congress to continue to uphold this trust obligation. As a matter of policy, Congress must strive to ensure that Native Hawaiians have parity with other federally 

recognized Native peoples in the administration of the trust responsibility and the 

protection of their rights. 

Again, thank you very much for the opportunity to testify before the committee. 

I look forward to engaging in dialogue regarding the reauthorization of NAHASDA 

Title VIII and continuing the important work of the Committee to uphold these Native rights.

The CHAIRMAN. That you, very much, Congresswoman 

Hanabusa. Thank you for your stalwart service in the U.S. House 

of Representatives. You’ve served Hawaii real well. Thank you for 

your explanation of the bill further, and also to stress the importance of that bill for Hawaii, and people of Hawaii, for all the people of Hawaii. And so thank you much for your leadership in this. 

And now I would like to call on Ms. Melody for your testimony. 

Please proceed. 

22

STATEMENT OF MELODY MACKENZIE, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR 

OF LAW, MELODY KAPILIALOHA MACKENZIE; DIRECTOR, KA 

HULI AO CENTER FOR EXCELLENCE IN NATIVE HAWAIIAN 

LAW, WILLIAM S. RICHARDSON SCHOOL OF LAW 

Ms. MACKENZIE. Thank you so much, Mr. Chair. Mahalo for the 

opportunity to testify on S. 65. 

My testimony is going to be a little different from what you’ve 

heard so far. I’m going to specifically focus on the special political 

and legal relationship between United States and Native Hawaiian 

people, sometimes called the trust relationship. This relationship 

has been acknowledged and reflected in federal actions and legislation for almost a century. 

I also want to note that Native Hawaiians are really the only Native people in the United States who are in essence federally recognized, but do not have a specific government-to-government relationship clearly delineated and spelled out with the Federal Government. 

The relationship between Native Hawaiians and the Federal 

Government arises from many sources, but I wish to identify and 

talk about four specific sources. 

The first, of course, is federal and congressional authority in relation to Native peoples and the status of Native Hawaiians as indigenous, aboriginal, Native people of Hawaii. 

As you know, the Indian Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution gives Congress the authority to ‘‘regulate commerce with the 

Indian Tribes’’. 

This power is broad and has often been described as plenary authority. The Clause’s reference to ‘‘Indian Tribes’’ I believe does not 

limit congressional authority to take action only on behalf of Native 

groups organized as Tribes or indigenous to the continental United 

States. Instead, to the framers of the U.S. Constitution, an Indian 

Tribe was simply a distinct group of indigenous people set apart by 

their common circumstances, a definition that obviously applies to 

Native Hawaiians. 

Native Hawaiians are undoubtedly the indigenous, native, aboriginal people of Hawaii. And modern day Native Hawaiians are 

linked not only by ancestry, but also by culture, language, history 

and land to the original inhabitants of Hawaii. 

Indeed, in 2011, the State of Hawaii took extraordinary action of 

officially recognizing the ‘‘indigenous, aboriginal, maoli’’ status of 

Native Hawaiian peoples. 

I’m sure that Senator Galuteria will be speaking on that more. 

Secondly, I would like to point to the role of the U.S. in the 1893 

overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom and deprivation of the lands 

and sovereignty of Native Hawaiian people as also a basis for that 

needed relationship between the United States and Native Hawaiian people. 

The facts of that incident are very well known: The landing of 

U.S. troops at the behest of Minister John L. Stevens in support 

of a small group of non-Hawaiian businessmen, including citizens 

of the United States, to overthrow the indigenous and lawful government of Hawaii; and the eventual annexation of Hawaii in 1898, 

through a joint resolution which made no provision for vote by Native Hawaiians or other citizens of the Hawaiian Kingdom. Under 

23

that joint resolution, the United States receives approximately 1.8 

million acres of the ceded public crown and government lands of 

the Kingdom. 

As a result of these actions by the United States—its participation in the overthrow and its ultimate annexation of Hawaii—the 

United States was instrumental in depriving Native Hawaiians of 

their sovereignty and their national lands. 

Third, I point to the entire course of dealings, of federal dealings 

over an extended period of time, that demonstrated that the United 

States has interacted with Native Hawaiians based on the specific 

political and legal relationship and the responsibility that it holds 

towards its Native peoples generally. 

You discussed very eloquently this morning the 1921 passage of 

the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act and its enactment. I just 

want to note that in the congressional record, it’s clear that Congress found constitutional precedence for the act in previous enactments granting Indians and others special privileges in using public lands. 

Another action during the territory period, in 1938 Congress 

again exercised its authority by granting Native Hawaiians exclusive fishing rights to portions of the Hawaii National Park. 

In 1959 the Hawaii Admission Act has been discussed by several 

testifiers this morning as well as yourself. I also want to point out 

that Section 5 of the Admission Act commands the state to hold the 

ceded lands in trust for five trust purposes, one of which is the betterment of the conditions of Native Hawaiians, as defined in the 

Hawaiian Homes Commission Act. 

Section 4 of the Act has also been discussed, requires the State 

of Hawaii, as a compact with the United States, to incorporate the 

Hawaiian Homes Commission Act in the state constitution. And 

moreover, under the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act itself, Congress has retained the ultimate authority to alter, amend or repeal 

the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act. 

So while, indeed, the state gained principal responsibility for administration of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act in 1959, the 

Federal Government retains significant authority over that act. 

Significantly, of course, in 1993 the U.S. passed—the Congress 

passed the Apology Resolution and apologized to the Native Hawaiian people for the U.S. participation in the overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom. 

I would also point to other federal actions, such as the Mauka 

to Makai Report issued by the U.S. Department of Interior and 

U.S. Department of Justice and the establishment of Office of Native Hawaiian Relations within the Department of the Interior. 

As you obviously know, Congress has included Native Hawaiians 

in laws enacted to benefit other native peoples in the United 

States. And more specifically Congress has enacted specific laws relating solely to the Native Hawaiian people pursuant to its authority under the Indian Commerce Clause. These include the Native 

Hawaiian Education Act and the Native Hawaiian Health Care Improvement Act. And the findings in both of these acts specifically 

refer to the ‘‘trust relationship’’ between Native Hawaiian people 

and the United States. 

24

And, finally, I would point to the U.N. Declaration on the Rights 

of Indigenous People, which is now endorsed by the United States, 

that it supports the continued recognition and development of that 

special political and legal relationship between the United States 

and the Native Hawaiian community. 

Thank you again, mahalo nui for the opportunity to testify this 

morning. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Mackenzie follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF MELODY MACKENZIE, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR OF LAW,

MELODY KAPILIALOHA MACKENZIE; DIRECTOR, KA HULI AO CENTER FOR

EXCELLENCE IN NATIVE HAWAIIAN LAW, WILLIAM S. RICHARDSON SCHOOL OF LAW


413a1.eps
25


413a2.eps

to "regulate eommerce with ... the Indian Tribcs.~1 While this power is broad and has 

belm charncterized us pllmury, the acts ofCongrcss and ex.ecutive officials are subject 10 

judici~l review under constitutional and administralhc law principles? 

The United States Supreme Court fIrst analyzed the federal relationship with 

Native Americans in the "Marshall trilogy.") In sum, these decisions established th:!t the 

United States dealt with Indian tribes as sepwate, distinct sovereign entilies that h:!d not 

surrenden:d tbeirindependenee and right to se1~ovemment by assodating with a 

5trongcr govemmlmt and ''taking its protection. Rather, the fed~ral govermn~nt, as a 

ll:sult ofln:ati~~ and other ugrccm~nts negatWted will the tribes, b~eume II trustec for Ihl;: 

India/IS, with a special role to oversee and protect many of the possessions ofilldians 

from non-Indians. Indian tribes are not foreign nations, but are distinct politkal entities, 

akin to "domestic dependent nations," whose relation to Ihe United States is like that "of 

a ward to his guardian."s In more recent decisions, th~ United Slates Supreme Court has 

recognized Utllt Indian tribes arc distinct, independl;:JJ: political communities that posscss 

pOWCr:! ofself-govemmlmt by reason of their original tribal sovcrcignty.6 In gcnCflll, the 

powers of Indian tribes are uUllll3rent powers of alimiled sovereignty which h(lS never 

been elLtingnished.,,1 

The Indian Commerce Clause's reference to Indian Tribes does not limit 

congreg~ional authority to take action only 00 behalfofiodigeno1.lS groups nrganized as 

tribes or native to the continental United States.3 To the framon; oflhe Constitution, an 

"Indian tribe" WlIS simp\f a distinet group ofilldigenous people sct apart by their 

common circumstances, a defmition Ibut Native Huwaiians certainly satisfy. 

, V.S. CONST. art. I, §~. In addition, the Treaty Ctnu:;c, U.S. CONST. art. fl, § 2, Cl. 2, gives the 

President the authority, with the eonscnt oCthe Senate, to :nake treaties with the Indian tribes. The 

U.S. Supreme Court has also held that the ''eXi~ICl100 offedcral power 10 regulate and protect the 

India!l.'l and their proprnty" is also implicit in tbo structurooftlie Constitution. Board of County 

Comm'rsv. Seber, 318 U.S. 105, 115 (1943). 

I Delaware Tribal BILSincs5 Committeo v. Weeks, 430 U.S. 73 (1977); U.S. v. Sioux Nation, 448 

U.S. 371 (1980). 

1 Johnson v. M'lnlosh, 21 U.S. (8 Wheat.) S4~ (1323); Cherokee NatiQn v. Georgia, 30 U.S. (5 

PeL) I (1831); Worcester v. Georgia, 31 U.S. (6 Pet.) :515 (1832). 

~ Worceslarv. Georgia, 31 U.S. (6 Pet) 515, 550 (1832). 

S Cherokee NntiQn v. Georgia, 30 U.S. (5 PeL) 1-2 (1831) . 

• United Stal<:~ v. Wb~d~r, 435 U.S. 313, 323-24 (1978); United States v. L1nl, 541 U.S. 193, 

198 (2004). 

7 Unitcd States v. Whecler, 435 U.S. at 32B. 

8 Sae Montoya v. United Slates, 180 U.S. 261, 266 {1901} for the U.S. Supreme Court's 

discussion of the term "Indian tr1b~." 

9 Columbus applied the telm "lndirm" to thenatjve people orlbe New World bclillVing tbat he 

had found uroute to India. The telm hllli bocIl umk:rlitood ~vcr ~inee 10 refer to Ihenalivc peoptes 

who inhabited the New World before the arrival ofEurop=aIls. See Johnson v. M'Intosh, 21 U.S. 

(S Wbeat.) 543, 572-574 (1823) (referring to Indians as "original jl1habilaI1L~" or"nalivc;s" who 

occupied tbe New World before discovery by "tlle great mtiOIlS of Europe"). 
26


413a3.eps

Native Hawaiians are undoubtedly the indigenous, native, aboriginlll people of 

Hllwni'i Ilnd mod<:m Nlltive: Hawaiians are linked not only by ancestry, bllt also by 

~ulture, language, history and land to the original inhabitants ofHawai'i. 1O Indeed, in 

2011, the Slate ofHawai'i look the extraordinary action of officially recognizing the 

"indigcnoU!3, ~boriginal, maoli" status of Native Hawaiians. 11 

As discussed below, Congrcs.s has often legislaled on behalf of Native HawaiiaR~, 

implicitly, !IlId afl.Cn explicitly, recognizing them as the native people ofHawai'i, and 

oftentimes including them in legislation for olher native poople of the United States. 

Nutive Huwuiians, lIS the modem day dcseemlants ofthe indigenous, aborigimll, native 

people ofHawui'i, full within congo;ssional authority under the Indian Commerce 

Clause. 

II. The U.S. Role in the 1893 Overthrow nftbe Hawaiian Kingdom and the 

deprivation of the lands and sovereignty of the Native HawaIIan people 

'rnrougllout the nineteenth century, the United States recogniz~d the 

independence oftlle Kingdom ofI-Jawai'i and e)l:tended full and complete diplomalic 

recognition to thl:l Hawaiian govemment. In 1842, U.S. President John Tyler recognized 

the sovl:ll"cignty ofHawai'i and d~clarcd it Ih~ official policy oftlle United SllItes 10 

support Hawaiian indcp(lJldenc~.I~ The Uniled SllItes enlered into trC!lllies and 

conv~ntions with the Hawaiian monarchs to govern ~ommen::e and navigation in 1849, 

]875, and 1884.13 In 1393, the United States Minister assigned 10 the Kingdom of 

Hawai'i, Jolm L. Stevens, conspin::d with a small group of non-Hawaiian residents of the 

Kingdom, including citizens ofthe United States, to overthrow the indigenoU!l and lawful 

government ofHawai·i.. 

In January 1893, Queen Lili'uokalani, constrained by a constitution that had been 

forced upon her brother in 1887, sought to promu\gde a new constitution returning 

authority to the throne and the Native poople.14 Using this as a pretext, II small group of 

men representing Western commercial interests fanned a Commill(!\: of Safety to 

10 See generally, Derek H. Kaualloc & Bwann Swmm Nu'uhiwa, We Am Wha We Thaugh! We 

Wl'rl'; Cangrl'S~' ,illt/writ)' (a Jl.1'~ognizl' Q Native. HmWliian Polity Unjf~d by Common DI'Sr.:<!nt, 

ASIAN·PAC. L. &POL'Y J. (forthcoming Spring 2012). Sea, al.lO, DAVIANNA MMAIKA'J 

MCGREGOR, NA KUA'.i\.INA 1-48 (2007) [bereinaf"ler .. NAKuA' .... INA''J; JON VAN DYKI!, WHO 

OWNSTIlIlCROWNLANDS OF HAWIII'I? 11-18 (2008) [h~inaficr"VIIN DYKI!, CROWN 

LANDS"]; FELIX S. COllEN'S HANDBOOK OI'FEDERALINDIAN LAw § § 4.07 [4] [a) (Nell Newll:m 

cd.100S) [hcrcinatlcr"COHIlN'S HANDnOOK~]. 

II Act of July 5,2011, No. I!lS, *S I & 2. MaoE mc:aas "(n]ative, indigenous, genuine, true, 

ma1." MARY KAWllNA I'UKUI &S,\~UIlL H. ELBERT, HAWAIlAN DrcnoNIIRY 222 (1971). 

I' Sen. E)I:. Docs., 52nd Coag 2d. Sess., No. 77,35-37 (1342). 

Illn 1826, the iiI"lit fmmal agreement betV,leen the United Stales and the HawaIian Kingdom was 

negoliated although it WlI5 never ratified by tlle U.S. Senate. CHARLES I. BEVANS, 3 TRI!ATIES 

AND OTllERINTl'RNATIONAL AGREEMENTS OI'TIlE UNtmo STATES Of AMERlCA, 1776-i~49, 

B61 (1971); id. at864, 9 Slat. 977; id. It 874, 19 Slat. 625; id. at 878, 25 Stat. 1399. 

11 TOMCOFFMAN,NATlONW1THIN 119-120 (2003). 
27


413a4.eps

overthrow the Hawniinn government.15 TIleY receiv~d the aid ofMinisler Stevens, who 

caus~d U.S. militnry forC<!s to l~nd in Honolulu 011 Janu~ry 16, 1893.16 011 the afternoon 

of January 17th, the: Commit-Ixl.: ofS~re~y lltoclaimed the H~w~iinu monarchy abolished 

and the establishment ofa provisional government. 11 Minister Stevens quiokly extended 

diplmm.tic recognitiro to tho provisional goYemlllelll-, cvm. befoI':' the Queen yielokd. 

The Queen, sa .. king to avoid bloodshed, relir,quished her aulllOrity to ilie: Uni\oo States 

under prott.'5l, fully expeCling \hal the United Stutes would repudiate Stevens' aCiions.lg 

On February I, Stevens proc!uimed HaWil-i'i a protectorate 'Of the Uoited Slates 

and the American nag was roised in HOIlOlulu. 19 The proyisiOlJal government 

immediately sought lluocxlltion to !hI.: United St~tes. After an investigation, however, 

newly inaugurated President Grover Cie"elliud caned for restoration of me monarchy. In n message to Congress OIl December IS, 1893, Prdsident Cleveland admitted that the 

government 0((1 pe(l(lefnl nnd friendly people WM nlBsal!y everthrl)Wn. "A substlmtial 

wronglus thtls been done.," ooncll1ded the President, "which II due regard lor our national 

character as mlllls the lights of tho injnred poople reqt:.ires that we should endeavor to 

repair."1~ Re~l!zlng Illat annexatioTI would lIot be ;n:medialely [urthcomrllg, on July 4, 

1894.I11e Provis!onal Government dec1art'.d itsetfto bcthe Rilpuhlic ofHnwm'i.ll 

In 1897, U.s. President 'William Mcl<il1Iey took office 0lI II platform adYoeatiug 

"control" ofHawni'i. The new administration negotiated an annexation Ir(.'l!ly ratified by 

the Republic's Senate?2 Native Hawaiians and oille: citizens ofHawm'i presented 

1~ loinl Resolution to Acknowledge !he lOOth Annivc,,",uJY of !be lurnw:ry 17, 1393. Owrthrow or 

the Kingdom ofHuwai'i, Pub. L. No. \(I3.-t50, 107 Stat. ISla (199J), pam. 5ll1ereirnlftcc 

"Apology lli::solution"J. 

I>l fd., pam. 6. 

1'1 ld., p1Ifn. 1. 

l~ LlL1UOKAr:..ANt,HAWAII'SS'TORYDY HAW-\Il'SQuEEN 3&7 {12th ed. 1976); Apu!()g)' 

Resolution, pam. 9. 

Ig Apology Reso]utkm, pilla. 11. 

:!IJ President's Mes~lge 10 Congrc.ss Relating to the Hnwa:ion Islands (Decembe~ la, \893). House 

Executive Docl1mcntS No. 47, 2nd Session, 53rd Congress, 1893-94, vol. 27, "Hawaiian blunds," 

iii-xvi. 

:1 Apulogy RC.~Ulion, pam. 20. WJLt.!AMADAM RUSS,JIt.,. TmrHAWA11ANREr'JalfC 

(i<lV4-U!!Il», at:>3-34 {1gel). Russ notes: 

Nativ,z Hawaiians W(lfC. pe~llaps, not extremely sopllistku\~ in go~crmncilt!li 

mll.uort.. blltlt MOl:. no greal amaunlllfpoliticalinsigbt to p;:rcci'l'C tilat ••• {the 

w:public's] con~titlltioual5yslcm was a heautifully devised oligarchy devoled 10-

tl1.~purpo~c Qfkccping the ArncricBn minorit)l iuconlrol ofthc Repuhlie. R!IIlCfl, 

ovcn thaooKanaka (Hawaiians) who could fulfill thc rcquir<.:m"'lIls generally 

refused to \\'IeiSler. to VOle, and to lAke part In the Government when it was 

established. 

'd . .lt3G. 

»Resolution offrre ScnateofFlmmii RatifYing the TtIlnly of Anncxationc>ft897; WILLIAM 

AllAM Russ,JR .. TH!i:iIAWA1IANREVO'..uTlON (1893-94). 198 (J959:). 
28


413a5.eps

petitions to tbe U,S. Senate-over 21,000 .~ignature£-protesting annexation and calling 

for the-restOl'ation of the Hawaiian monarchy?' The 1897 annexation trl'iaty fallecl.24 

But the next year, pro-mmemlioll forces introd1lced ajoint resolution of 

annexation. The amlCXati.m ofHawai'j by joint resolution was hotly debated In the U.S. 

Semite. with mllny 1lq,'Ulng that L~e UnitclStutes l:oukl acquire wrritory ooiytlUder tt.e 

trl:llly-rnwdng power oflhe U,S. Constitution, requiring ratit1cation byt'.'Io4birds Of the 

Sl:Ilale?5 ~vcrthelcss, with the advent offuc Spa."1ish-AmeriCM War, the islands 

became strategically significan:.25 Ultimately, the U.S. acquired Hllwni"j tllltough ajoint 

resolution, with a ~implc majority in each house.. 

TheJoint Resolution of Annexationn mnd~ no provision for a vote by Native 

Hnwuiians Or other citi2;ens. Under the resolution, the United States received 

apll:"0ximutcly 1.8 million acres of public, Govemment, and Crownlands.1S In the mid19 century convcrsion of lands to fcc sirtlplo oWJ:lersl'jp known as the tv!ahele. 

Kaml:hameha m had wtapart ''forcvcrto the chiefs and people," more than 1.5 million 

acres of Government Land.",]9 At the same time, Kumeba.'llcoo ill hud reser/cd tha 

Crown Lanilll as bis own Pl';!'sonal hm.Lb; and as;tl sourceoflnc(lmc Will support for the 

crown.~o Thus, although "the fee simple o\lmermip system :instituted by Ih~ MUheie and 

1J In 1897, a Hawaiian delegation carried two set.s ofp~lilioDS -one gatlmcd by the Hui Aloha 

'Ainu Ulld UIC othcrby the Hui Kalai'iiirm - with almost 3S,OO[l signarurcs against annexation, to 

Congress. ScnatorG~orgo Hoar, who met with th~ dclcglltion, rcud the lexl ofthe Hl.Ii Aloh~ 

'Ainu petitions, whi()h had garne,ed over 21,000 $igMtures, into. the Congressional Record duriog 

the Scnate dooakl onanncxation. NOENOEK. Stl.VA, ALOHA BETRAYED: NATIVE HAWAIIAN 

RnrSTM<CETO AMElllCANCOLONlALlSM ]57-59 (2CC4). 

11 Sitvu notes thst the HaWll.1imlth:legation WllS originally tokllhlt the.e were 5S vetc~ ill (h~ 

Scnatt! forthc tr~1.y, only two voWs shy oillie 60 n~w~-d for pass.'l.gc. Bylll(l.l!m~ lite ri~lega!ic.n 

left W~sbingtO!l, !he.-e were nnly 46 V(lles on the pro-annexation side. Jd. 

JS Anncxalionilltl; pointed It) theacquisilicn ofT~as in 1845 by joint resolution M !lreoodent, bot 

T(lXas h3d boon brought iuto the Union under Congt'llss' powcrto admit ncl\' sl:!le~. lIurthcr, the 

joint resolution u1il~d in the Tc",~~ ~illIe WilS upprQlI~d by a plebiscite held in T()K~S. No 

plebiscite wos proposed for Hawai'i. One Senator offered an amendment to Ihemcarure providing 

for such a vote by IIIl adu[tma!cs, but it WEl5 defeated. Finally, on Jillie 15, 1898, by n V(Jtc of209 

to 91, the Hous~ ~pprovcd the resolution. On July 6, 1898, thc resolution pas~cd the Senate by 42 

1021, with 26 absl~nlioos. Congressional RC~OI'd, 55 Cong .• 2nd SeS5 6149 (June 20, 1f:l98); ill. at 

6310 (June 30, 1898); k/. at 6709-10 (July 6,1 89B); id. at 60Ul (June J, lS9S); id. at6'/12 (July 6, 

IS98). 

~Scc, e.g., fd. nt5982 (June 15, lR9l!); Appenllix.t1l669~W ,Juno 13, 189l!). 

!1 JointRcsoilltlOn ((I Provide: for Annex1ng Ille HawllulI!l IsIoods to tlro UlIilCd SMes of J~ly7, 

[S98. 30 51at 750 [hereinaficr"Joint ResollltiM"J. 

2B Jd. Apology Resolution, para. 25. 

l~ See 2 REVISED LAws Of HAWAlI, 1925, ut 21.n·'.1 76 (liSti\lg oflands and act confilllling 

division ofl.mds); SQIJ a/s" An Act Relating to the Crown, Quvcmmt:Jlt, ood Fort Lund~, JIHle 7, 

1848 reprolud ill VAN DYKE, CROWN LANDS, at Appondix 2 . 

• oId. Sea Estate ofKamebameha IV. 2 Haw. 7:5, n2~723 (1364). In 1865, the Crown lands 

\Wr~ made inalienable.. Act Rendering !heCroWl:'I L~tds TnaITl!ltable, January 5, 1865, reprinted 

In VAN DYKE, CROWN LANDS, AppenWx S. 
29


413a6.eps

the laws that followed drastically ehange:d Hawaiian land tenure, the Government Lands 

and the Crown Lands were hold for Ihe benefit orall the Hawaiian poop!c ... 31 For Native 

Hawaiians, the Government lind CroWll IUllds "marked II continuation OrlhCl trust 

cOrlcept" that Ihc sovereign held the lands "on behalf orlhe gods and for thc benefit of 

aU.")"" 

At the time of annexation, Ihe United Stales implicitly recognized the unique 

nature of the Government and Crown Lands. Although the Joint RC::iOlulion of 

Annexation ceded ''the absolute fcc IllId QWJl(:l'Ship afull public, Govenunenl, or Crown 

lands"l) to the United Stales, fcdcrnl public land laws were not applied to Hawai'i. 

Instead, Congress wns to ennct "special laws for [the] management and dispooition"l4 of 

ceded lands. Moreover, the revenues from the ceded Iand.~, with certain exceptions, were 

to be used "solely for the benefit of the inhabitants ofthc Hawaiian Islands for 

educational and other public pwpo~e5."l:l 

In 1900, Congl"ess en~cled an Organic Acr6 for the new territory that established 

a territorial government aud confirmed the cession of lands to the United States. The 

Organic Act gave the territory the "possession, use, and control";' ofthe lands, but 

stipulated that proceeds from the lands were to be utilized for purposes "consistent with 

the Joint Resolution of Anne;o;ation.,,3g Consequently, while the Republic had ceded tbe 

Crown and Government Lands to the United Stales, both the Joint Resolution of 

Annexation and the Organic Ael recognized Ilmt these lands were impressed with a 

speei!!l truSI.l9 

As a result of these actions by the United Slates-its participation in the 

overthrow and its annexation of Haw ai' i-the United States was instrument!!l in 

Jl NATIVE HAWAIIAN RlGHTS HANDnOOK 26 (Melody Kupilialoba Mac:Kenzie 00. 1991) 

[hereinafter ~HANDBQQKnl. 

31 Id. Sel!. I!.g., Nli. KUA'A]N,.. 31-39 (2007); VAN DYKE, Cr:oWNLANPS, at 8-10, 54-58, 212-2[5. 

13 Joint Resolution. 

l<I !d. 

»Id. In an 1899 opinion, tile U.S. Attorney Geneml intcrpreteti the Joint Rcsoiulion as creating a 

"special trust" for the benefit ofHawai'i's inhabitants. 22 Op. AII'y. Gen. 574 (1899). 

]6 Aet of April 30, 1900, An Act to Providc a Government for the Territory of Hawaii, cb. 339, 31 

Stat. 141 (1900) [bereinafier "Organic Ace']. 

31 Jd. § 91. Section 95 oflhc 1S94 COllstitution of tile Republic bnd declared the Crown Lands to 

be the property oCthe I-iawailangovcrnmcni and ftce of any trust. Reprinted in Lilinokalani v. 

U.S., 45 Ct. C1. 418, 428 (1910). Similarly, section 99 oflbc Organic Act declared tballhc Crowo 

Lands WIlre "free and clear ITom any trust of or concerning the same, and from all claim orany 

UIllure whatsoever, IIpon tIlo rents, issues, and profits tIlercof." Organie Act, § 99. 

"'Id. § 73(e). 

J'J SeeCbcryIMiyahara,NOIc,HllwaiisCededLand~·,3 U. HAW. L. REV. 101, 115-118 (1981) 

[hcrclnafter"Miyahara, Ceded Lands"] for di.cWisicD of the unique nat pre ofHawai'i's lands and 

concluding that "lIlc federal government had become in effect trustee of the lunds cooed by 

Hawaii, bolding absolut~ but 'naked' title for the benefit oflbe people of Hawaii." 
30


413a7.eps

depriving Native Hawaiians of both their sovereignty and theirllntionallands.~D 

m. The course of Federal interaction and dealings "ith Native Hawaiians 

A. The Territorial Period and the Hawaiian Homes Commission A~t 

During the territorial period, the condition ofNativc Hawaiians continuoo to 

deteriorate, following a downward :>piralthat bcg~n on first contact with EuropcUTlS. In 

1920 territorial representatives sought assistance from Congress. Noting that Native 

Hawaiians h3d been "frozen out of their 13nds and driven into the cities," and that 

"Hawaiian people arc dying," the representatives recommended allotting land to Native 

Hawniinus so that they could reestablish their traditional way oflife.~l The Secretary of 

the Interior echoed that reoommendation, informing Congress th~t N~tive Hawaiians are 

"our wards ... for whom in a sense we are trustees," that they "are falling offrapidly in 

numbers" and that "many of them are in poverty.,>'IZ 

In 1921, those recommendations led Congress to enact the Hawaiian Homes 

Commission Act (HHCA),4l setting asido about 203,000 acres of Ol:ded lands for a 

homesteading program to provide residenoes, furms, and pastoral lots for Native 

Huwuiians of fifty pereent or more Hawaiian ancestry.44 Congress found constitutional 

precedent forthe RHeA in previous CllIlctments granting Indians and others sp~cial 

privileges in using pnblic lands.4S 

But pBssagc of the HHeA WIIS II compremise with large business interests. Prior 

to annexation, the Republic had established a general homesteading program on 

Government and Crown lands.46 In 1910, Congress amanded the Organio Ael, directing 

the Territory to open these lands for general homesteading in a given area when w.:entyfive or more qualified homesteaders applied for land.47 Sinc~ sugarplantation leases on 

about 26,000 acres of prime lands were due 10 expire during the 1920s lind 19305, 

Hawai'j's largo plantation owner:; feured that homesteading would impact their 

successful pialltations.4S 

40 Apology Resolution, at paras. 25, 29. 

41 II.R. Rep. No. 839, 66th Cong., 2e1 Sess. 4 (1920). 

411d. 

4! Hawaiian Homes Commio.~ion Act, 42 Stat. 108 (formerly codified as amended at 48 U.S.C. §§ 

691-718 (1958» (OlIIittcd from rodification in 1959) (scI oulin full os omended at I HAW. REV. 

STAT. 261) [hcrtinaftcr "HHeA·'j. 

4' Id. § 208. 

4) II.R. Rep. No. 839, 65th Cong., 2e1 Scss. 11 (1920). 

4~ The Land Act of 1895, ClVIL LAWS OF 1897, § 169; se~ ROBERTH. HORO\\~TZ IlT AL., PUBLIC 

LAND POJ.1CY lNIiAWAn: AN HISTORICAL-ANALYSIS 5-15 CLegi~lativ(}Refcrcnoo Burean Report 

No. 5, 1~59) (detailed analysis of the Act); VAN DYKE, CROWN LANDS, at 188-99 (di~cus~ing the 

1895 Land Act). 

47 ActofMay 27, 1910, cl!. 258, § 5, 36 SIIlt. 444, amending the Organic Act. 

41 Tml DINNELLET AL., THE HAWAIIAN HoMES PROGRAM: 1920-1963, LOOISLATIVE 

REFERENCE BUREAU REPORT NO. I, at (; (1964) [hereinafter "HOMIlS PROGRAM"]. 
31


413a8.eps

As dis~u~sed ubovc, during the smIle p~riQd, Hawaiian kBders bcc~mc ulllrrm:d by 

the rapidly d~teriorating conditions of the Hawaiian people,49 Dispossessed from their 

traditional lands and seeking \\'ork, Hawaiians became members of tile "floating 

population crowding into the congested tenement districtll of the larger towns lind cities" 

under I:onditions Ihal many believed would "inevitably result in the e;.;.t=nination oflhe 

race. n50 As one report on the HHCA program pllt it, "[e]conomical1y depressed, 

intemally disorganized and politicn11y threatened, it was evident that the reillnant of 

Hawaiians required assistance to stem their precipitous dcclim:.,,51 

These forces converged to promote passage orthe RHeA. The homesteading 

approuch to rehabilitation was "furthern:inforced ... by the suggestion Ihnl dispossessed 

Hawaiians would be returning to the soil. going back to the cultivation of at ICallt a 

portion of their ancestral lands .... ,,52 Although originally opposed, ultimately the sugar 

growers supported the HHCA because it carefully restricted the lands for hOlUestending,~ 

<:xcluding (;ultivated sugar c~m: lamls.!4 Chi:IIIges 10 the Organic Acl, enacted as part of 

the trade-off to gain support ofthe HHeA, eliminated the threat aflosing fertile sugar 

produciug Jands.ss Most homestead lands set aside for the RHCA lacked water and were 

ofmurgin~l agricullural vulue.~" Moreo'lt:[, Hawuiian lenders had originally preposed 

that all Native Hawaiians should be eligible for homesteading, but sugar inteTCsts 

maneuvered to have the blood Quantum set at fifty percent, limiting the number of 

Hawaiians thai could seck Illnd.)7 

The HHCA was not the only acknowledgement oflhe spedal politi(;al and legal 

relntionship between the United Smtes and Native Hawaiians. In 1938, Congress again 

exercised its authority by gronting Native Hawaiians exclusive fishing rights to portions 

orthe Uawai'i National Park.~s 

., See ge",:;mlly Davianna P"maika'i McGregor, 'Aina H,,'''plllapula; Hawaiian HUllWsrelldblg, 

24 HAwAIl/IN J. HIST. I (1990) [hereinafter''MeGrognr''). 

50 S. CON, RIiS, 2. 10th Leg. ofthe TerrltoryofHawaii, 1919 HAw.Sa'ATEJOURNAL 25-26. 

51 HmfES PROGRAM, at 2_3. Forinstante, tbe general cnmeratc:for pcople ofHawaiinn IUlceslry. 

as wen us tbe "lIe ofjuveniJe delinquency, was si~nificanl1y higher lImn that of 0111<::( groups. Id. 

slId. at 7. 

Sl SelJ McGregor, at 14-27. 

l41-II-ICA, § 203, 42 Slat at 109-10 (1921). Also excluded wer~ land.~undor a homestead 10=, 

right of purchase lease, or certificate of occupation. [d. 

5S H.\NDDOOK, 11144-48. 

S! S~C ALLEN /I.. SPITZ, LAND ASPECTS 0F11lE HA WAliAN HOMES PROGRAM, LEGISLAnVE 

REFERENCE BUREAU REPOR'LNo. Ill, at 19-26 (1964). 

"lilt. REf. No. 839, 66th Coag., 2nd Se!lS. (1920). SccKEllAULANIKAUANUI, HAWAIIAN 

BLOOD: CotONIi\LI5),i AND THEPOLlTICS OF SOVI!REIGNTY AND INDIGENBlTI' (2008) for 

background on the blood quantum restrictions of the m:lCA. See generally M.M. Vause, Thc 

Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, History and Analysis (Juno 1962) (unpublished M.A. thesis, 

Univorsity of Haw ai' i) (on fiI(I with Hamilton Library, Univer.lity afHawai'i) fardiS1:ussiDn of 

facton; leading 10 passage oflhe HHCA including the blood quantum limitations. 

53 Act of Juno 20. 1938. ch. 530, § 3(a). 52 Stat. 784. 
32


413a9.eps

B. Stat~hood RlId the Admission Ad 

Jr. 1959, Hawai', was-admitted as a. )!tatl: of the uniQIl.s~ The Hawai'i Admission 

Act rl:l:ogntzOO the speoicl stutus ofHaWlll'i's public Rnd~ and reflect'!:d the inletlt TO 

return those lands t.::> thl': new strite. This !!pJ'il'Cachdiffcrcl signfficrultty from the Ieg:'ll 

tlUrtme.nl -or lands in ctJ1e:r states, wher~ the St3tcs ~lved only " smajJ pe-r',i:.m of pub&: 

laflds. In 1:000ttasl, the fed:::rnl government tralliOfilrred to Hawal'!: title to;::JWSt oft,!!e 

ceded lands bek1 ~tthe tirneofst1\\cl1olXl60 The H'w.vl!i'i Admission Act also contains 

provisions sp~cific(}lly recognizing Il trust rot Nailv~ Hawaiians. 

Section 5(f) of the Admission Act comnwnc» the Stllte to hold c~ded lands! 

[AJs a !lublic trust for the support oft1Je pubUc schools and otller publk 

edlWatJollal i;lstitutions,jOr the beu~rm;ml tlilhe condftlons o!nath1e 

HawaiimlS, as ~fini!d in 1M HmllCfiian Homes: Commissiun Act, HI.?!), ()$ 

amfmdffi, for !l'..a development of farm: and hIDE: ownership on as 

wiMJlPrcn II ksis as poos1bic[,1 for ibe making ofuublie-lmptm'mnents, 

ami for the prcl,i;:ion of.ands fur pu,lic UlIe,'~ . 

Mc~·ver, the i~nd$, a.s well as any p!oeecd~'Q.nd income from the lends or theIr 

ciispmn1ion, rrtU!it be managedQr disposed offoronr;: ormore oftlm trustptUpt'lSC3, as 

provided by state Inw.6

:l 

Most relevant to S.6:5, the Hawaiian ao!!l~QWl1en;hip Act, section 4 urthe 

Admission Act r~quircs.l1!l a compac.t with Ih~ United Stales, that tlle Hawaiian Hom=s 

Commission Aut be :Wopled in the State COflNtilUlloa.tu Indced, th~ Hawai'i S\Jpreme 

Court has analogized the trust dutWs ilie Strrte acq'Ji~d: 11nOOt S~ction 4 wilh thou {)owoo. 

by !he-!Meral gO'lemmentto t:lther Native AmericllllS.. M- Sectro., 4 aisJ;) allow$ thr. State fa 

... Admiss,on Act of March Ill, 1959. Pull. 1.. No. S6·3, § S, 13 SM. 4,.5-6 [hCl'oinaiie, 

"Admissi(ln Ar.I"}. 

w Miyah~ra, Clld~d iAnris, at 102. Certain lallds-lhos~ that hud been set uside pt1!~1J<1l'1t II! an act 

of congress, ClIecmivc ordar, prcsid~nliat prllciamntIM, ~[ Z\lb~malorial prodal'!l~tiotl-)-cmained 

Ihe pmpertyllflbll United Slutes. AdmissillIl A¢I, § 5(0). Tllese "retained" land~ could bo 

Imn:;fcm:d to tl1"ooIV ~Ilte within five year:: ~fH(l;Wal'i'$ admission if the Unit~d Staoos no longer 

neede.J Ibem. kJ. § 5«(,1). CnngrllS& ffihscq!.letl;ty plISl!<:d !ill Ih.-\. allowing the '.nillS't'e, Qfth~ 1allds 

to Ih~ stile :tl My:rime !hr.y life declared =<:eesSll!}' Ul f1!:ifuml \lOOG<;. Act ofOea, 2l. 1%3, ruo. 

L }>.'o. 83-233, 71 Stct.4fl. 

"l AdmlSElon Act, § 5(t) (emyilll'.ili l1ddcd). 

I'l!)ecticn 5(f)J!lates: "Such lands,proceeds. a."Id fJloorn~slmn ;Jlllll.:\nagud lI:ld di.;pl.l;~dt:lffor 

!Ill\! or mlktloflh~ foregoing purposes in sucll nlsm)er;lS the constitutien 2Qd la'l\o1l ef~uid SlIIle 

may provide, Illld thaJruSfl fer any othorobjoct sh~1I constitute a breach oftmst 1\11: wlliGh snit 

may be brought by tll6 United States." 

61 Admission MI, ~ 4, provid()S. in part: "As a (;(Implct wIth th~ United Statc3 reladng W the m~nnG.ement ~"d dil'r""'lrion nfHaw~ihn h"m~ lands, the HawailallHomes Coxnmi$s(ct\ Am, ••. 

Shall be adopted lIS a provision of tho ComIiM:.m ot!lllfd Stat.:: •..• " 

G< In .4k,ma-v. Dept. aJHCllOOiig,'; Hom~ .l.a;w:I. 64-Raw.l27, 339, G~OP.2.;l11()C, ! 16B-ilmt, tll~ 

Hawat'i Su;m;rnt CC\Il:t $!aro.l! 
33


413a10.eps

inen::ase benefits to HHCA beneficiaries but the United Stales must approve auy changes 

in the quruificatioru; for beneficiaries.6s Moreover, under the HHCA itseIr, Congress 

m~intains the authority to ruler, umeud, or repeal the HHCA. 66 Consequently, although 

the Stute gained principnl responsibility for administration of the RHCA in 1959, the 

fcde'<l1 govcmment ruso retnins significant authority. 

C. The 1993 Apology Resolution 

In November of 1993, the U.S. Congress pll:lsed, IUId President Clinlon signed 

into law, Public Law 103-1:50, ajoint resolutioIlllpologizing 10 Ihe Nlilive HllwuiilUl 

pcoph: for U.S. participation in Ihe overlhrow ufthe Hawaiiall Kingdom.57 This Apology 

Resolution was enacted as II public law and signed by the President and is II statute ofllle 

United States, similar to any other law enacted by Coagress.58 

The Apology Resolution acknowledges the "special rclation:;hip" that ex-isIS 

between the United Slates and Ihe Native Hawaiian people. Congress confirmed in the 

Apology Resolution that Native Hawaiians arc an "indigellous peoplc," a key 

charllell:ru:ulion Ihat eSlablishes Ihat a "political" relationship ex.ists between the Native 

Hawaiian people und the United States govemmellt.6~ Iu d16 Resolution, Congress found 

In our opinion, the extent or nalnre of the ttustobligations of the [State] toward 

beneficiaries ... may be determined by cxaminieg well-settled pcillciples 

enunciated by the fedeml courts regarding lands set aside by Congrc.ss in trust fur 

the benefit ofolbernativc Amc:rictIllS, i.e., American Indians, Eskimos, and 

Alaska nativc~.ln PenCJ!~. KlepPI1, 529 F.2d 135 (9th Cir. 1976), the circuit 

court fcroynizcd that ilie wmd ~Indian" is commonly used ill the United States to 

mean "Ihe aborigines of Ameriea.n Id. a1138-39 n.5; see a/sf) 42 CJ.S. Indians 

§ I (1944). COllgress recently passed a religions freedom act which specifically 

included native Hawaiians among oth~ American Indians. &e American Indian 

Religious Freedom Act, ... Essentially, we are dealing wilhtclationships 

between the government aed aboriginal [IIlople. Reason thus dictates that we 

draw the analogy between native Hawailanhomcsleudcrli ami other native 

Aruorie3l1s . 

• , Scrtion 4 farther stllles: "[AjIlY amernlmeet to iucremre the benofits te lessee.~ of Hawaiian 

home land!; may be made in the constitution, or in the manner required for State Icj;islation, bUI 

the quulificalioliS oflessees shall nO! b~ changed cxceJltwith the ~on.~cnt of the United States." 

Id . 

.. HHCA, § 223, provides: "The Congress of tile United States rc~IlIVCS Iberight 10 aller, amend, 

or repeal the previsions oftbis title:' 

61 Apology Resolution. 

6>1 See, e.g., AlinArbor R. CQ. v. Unifed Slale;;, 281 U.S. 658, 656 (1930) (treating ajoint 

resolution as anyotber legjslation enacted by Congress). 

69 TIle Apology Resolution states: 

Whereas the indigenous Ha>miirlllpeoplc never directly relinquished their claims to rr1l1ir 

inflerellt sovareigmy as apeoplc or over their nalionallands 10 the United SI<lles, either 

through their monarchy or through a plebiscite orrefcrcndum .... 

Apology Resolution, at paras. 25, 29. AflerdQcUltlcnlipg in detail the wrongs done to the 

Hawaiian people at the time of the illegal overthrow-including "the d~valicn of the rights of 
34


413a11.eps

that the Hawaiian people had "never directly rclinquillhed their claims to tll(!ir inherent 

sovereignty as a people," and listed among the wrongs r.;rp~trotcd, "the deprivation of 

thl'l rights of Native Hawaiians to relf-detennination.'" The right to self-detenlllnation is 

the most basic ofhllmili"1 rigbu; under fedcl'll: and mtc:natiouallaw, lIud efforts 10 

facilitate the excrdsc of Uris right MC mI.lndated by fundamell1al humunrights principles, 

In the Apology Re:;ohnion. Congress ulso aokilOWledge<l that the Republic of 

Huwui<i .;edcd 1:8 million acres ofCrowu, Govemmentand Public Lliods of the 

Kingdom ofHawai'j without the con~ent of or compensation to the Native Hawaiian 

people or lheir sovereign govemmen~71 that the Native Hawaiian people lIev~r directly 

relinquished their ola!ms 10 their inherent Bovereign~ over their n(l.uona\lat\(is to the 

United Statesj'l1 and that the overthrow was illegal.? 

Congress ~xpresscd its commitment to ucknowledge therumificatlcns of the 

overJ1row of the Kingdom ofHawui'i, in crde: to provide a proper fO\lud!l.tlon for 

=onciliallon hct\vcc.'l the Una.cd States and fue Native Hawaiian people, arid Ill'glld ihe 

President of the United Srates to :mppo.:t reconciliation efforts betWeenlhe United States 

lind the Nr,!iw. H,.'lWlIihn penple?4 

The Apology Resolution's commitment to rel:onciliation, ho\Vev~r, may h.::ve 

been \lndennln~d by the United Slates Supreme Cowt's 2009 decision in Hilwaii v. Office 

a/Hawaiian Affail'S.75 In that ca~e, the Court dctennincd Ih~t the Apology Resolutio.n's 

findings had no. "o.perative effcct,,,15 lind thnt its ~l.lbs:antive provisioru; were merely 

conciliatory or precatory," I believe, ho.W ... 'Wr, tll(;(t it is important 10 point cut that 

nowhere in its opiniou does the Court question the veracity of the Apology Resolution's 

findings. Ins lead, tlle Court determi1l6d 'thnt thore findings did no! change subs(~ntive 

law since the Ap::llogy Resolution lacks an overt jndi~ation ''tlwJ Coogress mte!l<ied to 

umlllid cr repeal. ' ,righ':S and obligati01ls"lhat the S1ate acquired under the Admission 

Acr,1g 

D. Other Federal Actions 

1. Thll U.S. Department of Intel'ior and U.S. Department of Jllstice 

Mallka to Makai Report 

Native IIawaiians to self-dctcrminution"~th(l AjK.I[l1gy Resolution urges the President orlheUniwd Stales 10 ''support rcoonciliationcfforts b::twool1 tl:e United States and Ih(l Native }fu\\'~ii~n pll<lple." ld at § 1: AclmowledgmcntandApoiogy. (5~ 

'" Apology Resolution, RtP3fS> 29, $C.~ 1: Acknowledgnentand Apology, (3). 

7. Apc\ogy Rm:o!lltiOll, at pam, Z{i. 

T.! Apology Rerolation, atpata, Z9. 

1J Apology Rcsolation, § I: Ackncwlcclgment atl(\ Ap\)logy, (1). 

,.. Ap\)\ogy Resolution, § \: Acknowledgment !lod Apology, (4}-(5), 

15 Hawaii v. Office orHawaH,Ul Affairs, 556 U.S. 163 (2nO\l), 

~ Id. at 115. 

TI 1«. at 173 • 

... fa. ~( 175·6. 
35


413a12.eps

In October i 999, the U.S. Department oflhe lut.crior lIud the Depllctmeut of 

Justice annoum:ed Ualt Ih!"irn.1'rc~!""llllltives W()u\d be conciucting meetings in Hawni'i to 

further recouciliatioJ\ efforts as called fur in the Apology Resolution. Their'Purposc WllS 

to investigate progress on the reco.-u::i1ialiM c:~lled fur in the Apology Resolution 3Ild 10 

solicit input from the HlrNailan community so that Iilcirconc;:rns could be iuclnde>J in a 

fQrthcoming report to CougrC5s. I[liutc 1999. the Jurure und Interior represellfanves 

clHlsulteci the Native Hawaiian comrnuui1.Y<l1l Ki\I;a'i, Matti, MoJoka'i, L~rm'I,lInd In 

Hil(;l lind KQIIIl. QlI HUWlli'i blllnd. On 0'n1m nlone, moreo th:!n 300 pM!>!"," auended th~ 

meetings. Hundred~ testified, and 265 ~ubmilted written statements. These statements 

touched on topics ranging from sovereignty to commmity and economic <k.-veiopment, 

and from health and education to housing. 

Tn August 2000, the Departmentsjointly issued a detailed report, entitled Prom 

Mauka to MakaL' The River of Justice .lvius! Flow Frl.'eiy,7'J on the reconciliation process 

~aged on the cornmunRy input. iliu~ t::comruiuislg the Untted States to II I'CCorlciUnlion 

prm:css. Tile Maufr.a to Maliui report encouraged acts ofrxonci(lation to health<: wOl:nds 

of Native HOWllnalls. According to the report: 

Reconciliation is an evolving and continuingllf{lCCSS to address the 

politie.'11 status and rights of the Native HuwaiiWl people. based on 

dialogue IImong the Fcderul anu Stateo Governments, Native Hawaiians, 

and Hawai'i's Cungrcs~iounl delegation, and timher action by the United 

Stales Cou&rCss. This document oonta.in~ recommendations with resp~et 1.0 

the continuation oftne reconciliation process and should be rend a~ mel'ely 

the next sten, as thc United Stares and Native Hawaiinns nrove forward in 

fin1:her dialOgue. sn 

In acknowledging t1F;: 1993 AP'JIOb'Y Resolution and romllllly recommitting to 

feco..,cllialion, til:) Departments cast 1l1cir ):ccommendations in terms ofy.lSticc and mora! 

responsibility. The report's fif:ltand most significant recommendation relatt::d!o fedeml 

recognition. Tho r<lf'Ort staled, "To safeguard and cnhWlee Native Hawaiian self. 

determination over their iWlIIs, cultural rcsoW'ces, ~nd iuternal affairs, the Departments 

believe Congress should cnllct further iegisialiollto clarify Native Hawaiillll~' political 

status and to orcale a framework for recognizing il sov~mment-to-govemmcnl 

relationship with a representative Native Hawaiian governing body:,!!! The four other 

recommendatiolls werfl; est~b!j5h an office in btcrior to address Native Hnwuiian issues; 

assign a reprcsm1tatiVtl from the DepartIrn:n! of JU$li::e Off:ee of Tribal JustiC!;I to 

maintain dialogue with Native Hawaiieus 0.., pe;:tmellt i:ssu~s; crellla II Native Hawaiian 

Arl"ismyCommis~ion te consult with ugencies \100er Interior that manage land in 

Hawai'!; and continue t.o address past wro:lg5 to pm;note the welfare ofNativ~ 

Haw~iiall$.n 

,. Dcpurlmcnt of Interior and Department of]usllce, Mavlro 10 Malral: The Rf\IErQfJu~'lIc" Mrl,'1 

F(ow fud)1 (October 23, 2Q()()). 

SO M. at ii. 

a! Id at34. 

O! fd at 4. 
36


413a13.eps

Z. The Office of Native Hnwaiiau Rel:l.tions 

At It.:ast Olle ofthe.Malika (0 Makal recommendations has been impl~mented. In 

a 2004 appropriation bill. Congress established lhe Office of Native Hawaiian Relation£.. 

TIle OIr;u;e, housed in Ibe Office oflOO Secretary ofthe Interior, is charged with 

"eQuunul:ingj the p;:ocess Ofr<loonciE~lion "''illl the Native HaWlliren p!flple.81 Th~ 

purpose oCthe Office is w effectuate ~lld implMlertt the "special legal reJathmship" 

bc~wccn fll~ Native Hawiliian people and the Unhed States; contimm the prowss of 

reconciliation with the Native Hawaiian people; and fully integrate the principle and 

proctice ofmeruJingful, regular, and appTopriate consultation with thc Native Hawaiian 

pe'l'le by assuring timely notification of and prior consultation with tbc Native HaWlliian 

people before any F~d=l agency lakes anyaclions that may bave the potential to 

SigT'lificllntly affect Native Hawaiian resources, righls,. or lands.1M Tho Office of Native 

Hawaiian Relations also carries out the SCl:retary's responsibilities as set forth in the 

Hawaiian Hame Lands RcooYm)' Ac!'SS 

3. Modern Legislation 

Congress has also includcdNative Hawaiians in laws er.acted to benetlt nthill' 

native peoples ill the Uuiled States, suc:h as the National Historic Preservation Act, which 

provides protection to prop~rtics with religioUS and cultural importll.nce to Native 

American Inman tribes and Native Hawaiians; the Native American Graves Protection 

and Rllpatriation Act, which protects Native American Indian, Alaska Native, and Native 

HaWlliian anceslJai remoins and sacred object$; the Americiln Indilln Religious l''rccdom 

Act, which expresses U.s. policy to protect n~tive reJ!gions; and the Native Aroeric3n 

Llmguugcs Act, supporting the preservation ofl'llltive langnagc8.u In addition, Congress 

hes enacted specific laws reL.~Jing solely to Native Hawaiians pursuant IQ its autbcrity 

ur.tler the Indum Commerce Clanse. Tilesl! in-:!udc tht: Native &wuHIlll Education Act, 

wliich-esmblisbes programs to fucilitatl! [hI! education of Native HllWlliwns tum the Native 

Hawaiian Health Care Improvement Act, which seeks to improve thl'! health slatu~ of 

Native HaWl1l1ans,81 lndeed, the findings in both Ule Native Hawaiian EdllMt!on Act and 

tbe Native Hawaiian Health Care Improvement Act often refer to the "trllst reilltion~ilip" 

between the Unit~d Statos and the Native Hawaiian people. 

ThI1S, as ~~t Clnt above, the entin: course of dealings between the United Stat~6 and 

the Native Hawaiian community-over ~n extended period--demonstrates that the 

United States has intcrnctcd with Native Hawuiians b~s~d on the speoial political and 

legal reiationsbip aDd rc~onsibility it holds l(Iwa..'1l its lUltive poopies. 

IV. The U.N. Declaration UJ/. the RigJlts afIndIgt'Dous Pooples 

~ Consolidated Appropriations Act of2004, Pub. L No, 108-t99, 118 SlAt. 3, dlv.H, sec. 1411 

(2004). 

SA Id. 

s:; PUb. L No. 104-42, ~C(l, 206 (1995). 

u NHPA,42 U's.c. § 410 etscq.; NAGPRA, 2SU.S.C. 3"001 etseq;AIRFA,42 U.S.C. § 1996; 

NALA, 25 U.s.C. § 29(\4,et seq.; AIRFA, 25 U.s.C. § 2904. 

'ifl NHEA, 10 US.c. § 7511,clscq.;Nl-lHC1A, 42 U.s.c.. § 1170l,ct seq. 
37


413a14.eps

On September 13, 2007, after years of debate and consideration, the U.N. General 

Assembly adopted the Declaration on the Rights ofIndigenou5 P~oples,88 ~xtending the 

right ofself-detennination to Indigenous Peoples. The United States did not vote to 

approve the Declaration, but in D~cember2010, Pre.idenl Barack Obama announced thut 

after extensive review and input from iudigenous leaders, the United States would 

support the Declaration. 

Among other lhillgs, the Declamtion states IllUtlndigenons Peoples have the right 

of self-determination und self-governunc:e, and the right to maintain thclrunique t:Ulture 

and instimtions. 

Article 3 

Indigenous peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue oflhat 

right they freely delennine their political status and freely pursue their 

economic, social and cultural development.S

? 

Article 4 

Indigenous peoples, in exercising th~irright to self-detennination, have 

the right to autonomy or selfMgovemment in mattcrs relating to their 

internal and local affuirs, as well us ways und means for financing their 

uutonomous fWlCtiollS. 

Article 5 

Indigenou5 peoples have the right to maintain and strengthen their distinct 

political, legal, eoonomic, social and cultural iMtitutions, while retaining 

their right to Pll11icipate fully, if they so choose, in the poli.tic~l, economic, 

social and culturellife of the Slate. 

The Declaration uil;o recognizes a wide range of basic human rights and 

fundamental freedoms ofIndigenom; Peoples. Among these are an inali=ble collective 

right to the ownerl;hip, use and control of lands, tcrritoric:; and other natural resources, 

and the right to maintain and develop political, religious, ~ultural and educational 

institutions along with the protection of cultural and intellectual propcrty.~o Although the 

Declaration is non-binding, it is neverthcless a strong statemcnt ofllgreem()Jlt among the 

nation states and evidence ofintemational cmstomary law.91 

V. Conclusion 

Congress h~s id~ntified Native Hawaiians as a distinct indigenous g;oup within 

IS Unitee! Nations Declaration on the Righl~ ofTndigenous Peoples, NRESl611295, (fVaiiable at 

http://souinl.un.orglindexlindigenousPeoples!DoolarationontbcRightsofIndigenousPcoples.aspx. 

Only fuur rmlicm states-tllo United States, Canada, New Zealand, ami AUSlralla-voted against 

the Declamtion, while e1eycn others ~bstnined. Sinco tlum. all fonf of the major nation states 

have cbanged their positions and now support the Declnration. 

i'Id . 

.. See, c.g. Artiele~ 9. 10, 12. nnd 20 of the DecIamtioll. 

'I U.N. declarations and resolutiom, iIlumin~t(llhe position orthe international community on any 

given subject matter, and arc ftcquenlly invoked ns evidence of customary international law. IAN 

BROWNLtll,l'RlNCIPLIiS OFPUBLtC INTERNATIONAL LAW 15 (7th cd. 200&). 
38

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Melody Mackenzie, for 

your testimony. Thank you for highlighting all the points you did 

about Hawaii’s history, and the relationship we have had thus far 

with the United States and how important it is that we achieve 

that government relationship, and not only politically but legally as 

well. So mahalo nui loa. 

Now I would like to call on Brickwood Galuteria, Senator for the 

State of Hawaii. Please proceed with your testimony. 

STATEMENT OF HON. BRICKWOOD GALUTERIA, MAJORITY 

LEADER, HAWAII STATE SENATE 

Mr. GALUTERIA. Aloha, Mr. Chairman, welcome home. 

The CHAIRMAN. Good to be home. 

Mr. GALUTERIA. We love that you come home. And thank you for 

providing me with the opportunity to testify before you today in 

full support of S. 65 Hawaiian Homeownership Opportunity Act of 

2011. I currently serve as the Majority Leader for the Hawaii State 

Senate. I Chair the Hawaii State Senate Committee on Hawaiian 

Affairs, and as a member of the Hawaii State Legislature’s Native 

Hawaiian Caucus. 

So I bring you news from the state legislature. I’d also like to acknowledge our former Senate President, who now serves in WashVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:51 Dec 11, 2012 Jkt 076305 PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\DOCS\76305.TXT JACK

413a15.eps
39

ington with you, Congresswoman Hanabusa, and greetings from 

your former colleagues as well. 

Ms. HANABUSA. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Please pass my aloha to the group as well. 

Mr. GALUTERIA. I certainly will today when I head back. In fact, 

we head into session, so I apologize, but I’ll probably have to leave 

after this testimony, Mr. Chair. The Hawaii State Senate Committee on Hawaiian Affairs has oversight over the Department of 

Hawaiian Home Lands and its administration of the federal land 

trust created by the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act of 1920. 

Congress, through its enactment of over 150 statutes that protect 

the rights of and address the conditions of Native Hawaiians, has 

long recognized Native Hawaiian people as an indigenous people 

with whom it has a federal trust relationship, as Melody indicated. 

The Hawaiian Homes Commission Act is a clear example of federal policies towards Native peoples that have consistently been applied to Native Hawaiians, not always at exactly the same time, 

but often closely afterwards. 

The prevailing federal policies at the turn of the century focused 

on the assimilation and allotment. The Dawes Act and Burke Act 

focused on providing eligible Indians with allotments of lands for 

residential, ranching and agricultural purposes. 

The general concept behind this policy was to return Native people to the land. The Hawaiian Homes Commission Act was modeled 

after these Indian General Allotment Acts as it sought to ‘‘rehabilitate’’ the Native Hawaiian people by placing them back on their 

ancestral lands. 

Learning from tragic circumstances that resulted in American Indians losing some of their lands, the Hawaiian Homes Commission 

Act created a federal land trust that provided for 99-year leases to 

qualified Native Hawaiians, thereby ensuring longevity of the trust 

lands to benefit the Native Hawaiian people. 

In 1959 when the State of Hawaii entered into Statehood, prevailing federal policies towards Natives were to delegate authorities over to state governments. As a condition of Statehood, therefore, the State of Hawaii agreed to administer the Hawaiian Home 

Lands trust. It provides especially that: ‘‘As a compact with the 

United States relating to the management and disposition of the 

Hawaiian home lands, the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, as 

amended, shall be adopted as a provision of the Constitution of 

said State,’’ and that’s what we enjoy today. 

While the State of Hawaii has administrative and rulemaking 

authority, the Federal Government retains oversight to ensure that 

the original intent of the Act is maintained. 

Now, Mr. Chairman, the Native Hawaiian people, despite the 

loss of their government, our government, and following the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii and subsequent annexation to the 

United States, we continue as a distinct Native community. 

While the Native Hawaiian people lack a formal government-togovernment relationship with the United States, we are repeatedly 

recognized by the United States as an indigenous people with 

whom the United States has a trust relationship. 

The State of Hawaii established the Department of Hawaiian 

Home Lands in 1961 to fulfill the State’s responsibilities in adminVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:51 Dec 11, 2012 Jkt 076305 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\DOCS\76305.TXT JACK
40

istering the federal land trust. As indicated, the Hawaiian Home 

Lands is governed by a nine-member Commission appointed by Hawaii’s Governor. And the Commission Chairman also serves as the 

Director of the state agency and is a member of the Governor’s cabinet. 

Now, in addition to this, Mr. Chairman, the Hawaiian Homes 

Commission Act beneficiaries also govern themselves through the 

existence of beneficiary organizations called homestead associations. These organizations, which have existed as long as homestead communities, have representative leadership through democratically elected processes for each homestead area. 

And they’re important partners. They’re important partners with 

the State of Hawaii and important partners with the Federal Government. They know their communities, they know their lands, and 

are best able to engage and communicate with state and federal 

policymakers to address priorities. 

S. 65, the Hawaiian Homeownership Opportunity Act reauthorizes financial tools that provide much needed access to capital for 

Hawaiian Homes Commission Act and beneficiaries. Whether already residing on home lands, or still on the waiting list, access to 

capital remains a barrier for many, many beneficiaries. We, the 

state, fully support any and all tools that help us to meet the mandate of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act with the knowledge 

that the State’s commitment and obligation ends in 2014. 

And measures like S. 65 is critical to the DHHL funding mechanism. Mr. Chairman, the State of Hawaii has embraced its role in 

managing the Hawaiian Home Lands trust, and continues to support efforts to enhance self-determination and self-governance. 

As an example, as Melody indicated, in 2011 I joined my colleagues in introducing and enacting legislation, commonly referred 

to as Act 195 to establish Native Hawaiian Roll Commission that 

recognizes the Native Hawaiian people as the only indigenous, aboriginal, maoli people of Hawaii—excuse me, Mr. Chairman—that 

expresses the State’s support for the continuing development of the 

reorganization of the Native Hawaiian governing entity, in part, for 

the establishment of a federally recognized government-to-government relationship with the United States. 

The enactment of Act 195 was yet another example of Hawaii’s 

ongoing desire to recognize the unique contributions and traditions 

of the Native Hawaiian people. We, as a state legislature, find 

every opportunity, where appropriate, to bring Native Hawaii practices into public policy. 

We also designed Act 195, Mr. Chairman, to complement your efforts in Congress and to present the Federal Government clear evidence of the State of Hawaii’s recognition of and continued support 

for self-governance and self-determination of the Native Hawaiian 

people. 

Furthermore, to bring us to a clear call for action towards creating a governing entity, former Governor John Waihee, Hawaii’s 

first Native Hawaiian Governor, has been appointed to lead a fivemember commission charged with preparing and maintaining a roll 

of qualified Hawaiians that would work toward the reorganization 

of a Native government. 

41

The commission is to prepare and maintain a roll of qualified Hawaiians who meet specific criteria. Once the roll is finished, the 

commission would be required to publish the registry to start the 

process of holding a convention to organize Native Hawaiian governing entity. At this point it would be incredibly premature, Mr. 

Chairman, to say what that model would be, what that model 

would look like, but now that the dye has been cast, I will see that 

we will arrive there sooner than later. 

Mahalo, Mr. Chairman, for your unfailing leadership and representation of our Native Hawaiian people at the highest echelons 

of government. You’ve served as the role model for so many of us 

who have followed in your noble footsteps in elected service. Your 

unwavering ability to demonstrate the Spirit of Aloha and to represent Hawaii’s values in your actions and words even in the most 

trying of circumstances, has shown us how to successfully ‘‘walk in 

both world’s’’, both native and western. 

Your accomplishments in representing all people of Hawaii are 

staggering, but we particularly appreciate your success in ensuring 

the Federal Government’s fulfillment of its trust responsibilities to 

the Native Hawaiian. 

The Apology Resolution, as an example, will forever stand as one 

of the most poignant Acts by the United States in apologizing for 

its role in the overthrow, and begins the process of reconciliation. 

And we thank you for your role in that. 

And, finally, as I mentioned earlier in this testimony, I maintain 

full support of S. 65, the Hawaiian Homeownership Opportunity 

Act of 2011, along with any and all initiatives to meet the mandate 

of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act. 

So with that, I say mahalo to the Committee of one today, and 

mahalo to you, Mr. Chairman, for this opportunity to testify. Aloha. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Galuteria follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. BRICKWOOD GALUTERIA, MAJORITY LEADER, HAWAII

STATE SENATE

Aloha Mr. Chairman, Senator Inouye, and Distinguished Members of the Senate 

Committee on Indian Affairs. Thank you for the providing me with the opportunity 

to testify before you today on S. 65, the Hawaiian Homeownership Opportunity Act 

of 2011. 

I currently serve as the Majority Leader for the Hawaii State Senate and as the 

Chair of the Hawaii State Senate Committee on Hawaiian Affairs. I represent the 

districts of Iwilei, Chinatown Downtown, Kaka‘ako, Ala Moana and Waikiki and am 

a member of the Hawaii State Legislature’s Hawaiian Caucus. I have spent my life 

actively involved in efforts to honor our kupuna, by preserving and perpetuating the 

language, culture, and traditions of the Native Hawaiian people. 

The Hawaii State Senate Committee on Hawaiian Affairs has oversight over the 

Department of Hawaiian Home Lands (DHHL) and its administration of the federal 

land trust created by the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act of 1920 (HHCA). Congress, through its enactment of over 150 statutes that protect the rights of and address the conditions of Native Hawaiians, has long recognized the Native Hawaiian 

people as an indigenous people with whom it has a federal trust relationship. Federal policies towards native peoples have consistently been applied to Native Hawaiians—not always at the exact same time, but often closely afterwards. 

The Hawaiian Homes Commission Act is a clear example. The prevailing federal 

policies at the turn of the century focused on assimilation and allotment. The Dawes 

Act and Burke Act focused on providing eligible Indians with allotments of lands 

for residential, ranching, and agricultural purposes. The general concept behind this 

policy was to return native people to the land. The Hawaiian Homes Commission 

Act was modeled after these Indian General Allotment Acts as it sought to ‘‘rehabilitate’’ the Native Hawaiian people by placing them back on their ancestral lands. 

42

Learning from tragic circumstances that resulted in American Indians losing some 

of their lands, the HHCA created a federal land trust that provided for 99-year 

leases to qualified Native Hawaiians, thereby ensuring the longevity of the trust 

lands to benefit the Native Hawaiian people. 

In 1959, when Hawaii entered into statehood, prevailing federal policies towards 

natives were to delegate authorities over natives to state governments. As a condition of Statehood, therefore, the State of Hawaii agreed to administer the Hawaiian 

Home Lands trust. Section 4 of the Admissions Act (P.L. 86–3, 73 Stat 4) specifically 

provides that ‘‘As a compact with the United States relating to the management and 

disposition of the Hawaiian home lands, the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, 

1920, as amended, shall be adopted as a provision of the Constitution of said 

State... subject to amendment or repeal only with the consent of the United 

States . . .’’. While the State of Hawaii has administrative and rulemaking authority, the federal government retains oversight to ensure that the original intent of 

the HHCA is maintained. 

The Native Hawaiian people, despite the loss of their government following the 

overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii and subsequent annexation to the United 

States, have continued to exist as a distinct native community. While the Native 

Hawaiian people lack a formalized government-to-government relationship with the 

United States, they have been repeatedly recognized by the United States as an indigenous people with whom the United States has a trust relationship. The State 

of Hawaii has embraced its role in managing the Hawaiian Home Lands trust, and 

continues to support efforts to enhance the self-determination and self-governance 

of the Native Hawaiian people. 

In 2011, for example, I joined my colleagues in introducing and enacting legislation, commonly referred to as Act 195, to establish a Native Hawaiian Roll Commission. Act 195 recognizes the Native Hawaiian people as the only indigenous, aboriginal, maoli population of Hawaii and expresses the State’s support for the continuing 

development of the reorganization of the Native Hawaiian governing entity for a 

federally recognized government to government relationship with the United States. 

The legislation was unanimously passed by the State’s House of Representatives 

and was approved by 23 of 25 votes in the Hawaii State Senate. Act 195 serves as 

clear evidence of the State of Hawaii’s recognition of and continued support for selfgovernance and self-determination of the Native Hawaiian people. 

The State of Hawaii established the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands in 

1961 to fulfill the State’s responsibilities in administering the federal land trust. 

DHHL is governed by a nine-member Commission appointed by Hawaii’s Governor. 

The Commission Chairman also serves as the Director of the state agency and is 

a member of the Governor’s cabinet. Beneficiaries of the HHCA govern themselves 

through the existence of beneficiary organizations called homestead associations. 

These organizations, which have existed as long as homestead communities, have 

representative leadership through democratically elected processes for each homestead area. Homestead associations are important partners that help the State of 

Hawaii to fulfill its responsibilities under the HHCA because they know their communities and lands, and are best able to engage their communities and to communicate with state and federal policymakers to address issues of priority. 

S. 65, the Hawaiian Homeownership Opportunity Act of 2011, reauthorizes financial tools that provide much-needed access to capital for HHCA beneficiaries. 

Whether already residing on the Hawaiian Homes Land Trust or still on the waiting 

list, access to capital remains a barrier for many HHCA beneficiaries. We fully support any and all tools that help us to meet the mandate of the Hawaiian Homes 

Commission Act. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your unfailing leadership and representation of our 

Native Hawaiian people at the highest echelons of government. You have served as 

the role model for so many of us who follow your noble footsteps in elected office. 

Your unwavering ability to demonstrate the Spirit of Aloha and to represent Hawaii’s values in your actions and words even in the most trying of circumstances 

has shown us how to successfully ‘‘walk in both worlds’’—both native and western. 

Your accomplishments in representing all people of Hawaii are staggering, but we 

particularly appreciate your success in ensuring the Federal Government’s fulfillment of its trust responsibilities to the Native Hawaiian people. The Apology Resolution, P.L. 103–150, will forever stand as one of the most poignant Acts by the 

United States in apologizing for its role in the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii 

and committing to a process of reconciliation with the Native Hawaiian people—a 

process that is ongoing and provides the path forward for self-governance and selfdetermination by the Native Hawaiian people.

43

The CHAIRMAN. Aloha, thank you for your mana’o, and that of 

your colleagues in the U.S. Senate as well as the Legislature. So 

mahalo nui for that. 

Now, I would like to call on Mr. Wurdeman. Please proceed with 

your testimony. 

STATEMENT OF RICHARD NAIWIEHA WURDEMAN, PRESIDENT, 

NATIVE HAWAIIAN BAR ASSOCIATION 

Mr. WURDEMAN. Aloha, and thank you so much for this opportunity to allow me and the Native Hawaiian Bar Association to testify on such an important piece of legislature. 

I would like to start by concurring with Senator Galuteria’s comments about you and your service in Congress and the United 

States Senate. 

Senator Akaka, you truly have been a role model for the Native 

Hawaiian people. It is such an honor just to be here today, to be 

sharing what little insight I have to add. In all your years of service, it is just so greatly and deeply appreciated what you have done 

for the Native Hawaiian people and for the community as a whole. 

And I just wanted to thank you for all those years of service and 

commitment. And your example of showing what real aloha is and 

always being yourself in all the challenges that you faced up in the 

Senate and the U.S. House before that. And you never steered 

away from being and showing people what the Hawaiian people are 

about. And I just wanted to again thank you for all of your services 

and your role, Senator. 

The CHAIRMAN. Mahalo nui loa. 

Mr. WURDEMAN. Senator, you started off this morning with a 

very good overview of the history of the trust obligations that the 

United States does have. And the Hawaiian Homes Commission 

Act of 1920, of course, was the first congressional act that clearly 

defined that trust obligation. There was absolutely no if, ands, or 

buts about it. That trust obligation was established. It was acknowledged, subsequently acknowledged, and recognized by our 

federal courts over the years. 

And you also touched, and Professor Mackenzie also talked about 

the Admission Act later, and the compact that the United States 

entered into with the Admission Act with the State of Hawaii, really a condition of Statehood that this Hawaiian Homes program continue and be administered properly and adequately. 

And so with these legal responsibilities, it’s really sad, but also 

a great testament to you, Mr. Chairman, that you’re addressing 

these issues through this legislation, that after over 90 years of 

this program, we still have many of our Native Hawaiian people, 

especially those who are in the lower income brackets, unable to receive awards because they’re not able to qualify. 

And this current legislation is really, as Congresswoman 

Hanabusa stated earlier, so very important to close that gap and 

to address those problems. And we thank you for calling this bill 

for hearing, for pushing it through the Senate, and it is long overdue, and something that certainly will continue the process of closing these gaps and giving the beneficiaries of the Hawaiian homestead Commission Act, especially those of the lower income brackets, an opportunity to have a home; to have their keiki be in a safe 

44

environment; to be able to live as a regular functioning family; and 

to go to school and not have to worry about all the other challenges 

that come without having a stable home life. 

There’s one other point that I would like to make, and it was 

touched briefly upon by Senator Galuteria as well, the Apology 

Resolution of 1993, that I know you were very significant in pushing through the U.S. Congress. And this is another very necessary 

step in that whole reconciliation process. I think the legal obligations are very clear. It’s the need now to continue the reconciliation 

process, and this bill certainly is another important step in doing 

that. 

And so the Native Hawaiian Bar Association and myself, we 

strongly support this measure, and I thank you again for this opportunity to present testimony, Senator. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Wurdeman follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF RICHARD NAIWIEHA WURDEMAN, PRESIDENT, NATIVE

HAWAIIAN BAR ASSOCIATION

Chairman Akaka, Vice Chairman Barrasso, and distinguished members of the 

U.S. Senate Committee on Indian Affairs: 

On behalf of the Native Hawaiian Bar Association, I would like to thank this 

Committee for the invitation to present testimony on S. 65, The Hawaiian Homeownership Opportunity Act of 2011. 

The Native Hawaiian Bar Association is an association of lawyers, judges and 

other legal professionals of Native Hawaiian ancestry which seeks to promote unity, 

cooperation and the exchange of ideas among its members. Formed in 1992, NHBA 

strives for justice and effective legal representation for all people of Native Hawaiian ancestry. NHBA represents attorneys whose practice range from solo practice 

to large firms, corporations, legal services organizations, nonprofit organizations and 

governmental agencies. NHBA has trained over 30 practitioners of traditional Hawaiian peacemaking through its Ho‘oponopono Project. These haku are active today 

in our community. NHBA has also convened symposia and meetings on the issues 

affecting our Hawaiian community today: sovereignty, access and gathering protection, water usages guaranteed under State law, Hawaiian Home Lands and ceded 

lands breach of trust claims. 

As this Committee is aware, the Native American Housing and Assistance and 

Self Determination Act of 1996 (NAHASDA) reorganized the system of housing assistance provided to Native Americans through the Department of Housing and 

Urban Development by eliminating several separate programs of assistance and replacing them with a block grant program. The legislation authorized for Indian 

tribes two programs—the Indian Housing Block Grant program and Title VI Loan 

Guarantees which provided financing guarantees to Indian tribes for private market 

loans to develop affordable housing. Similar opportunities were extended to Native 

Hawaiians when NAHASDA was amended in 2000. Loan guarantees for Native Hawaiian Housing was added to provide access to sources of private financing on Hawaiian Home Lands. The Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant Program has allowed for numerous families to receive home buyer education and has allowed for 

the development of affordable homes for low-income native Hawaiian families who 

are beneficiaries of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act of 1920. A number of success stories can be told by the Department of Hawaiian Homelands and various 

other organizations which are currently serving qualifying native Hawaiian families 

through the programs that were extended to Native Hawaiians with the amendments to NAHASDA in 2000. However, far too many Native Hawaiian families still 

remain on the Hawaiian Homes waitlist and still far too many need to be reached. 

The reauthorization of NAHASDA funding to Native Hawaiians and the extension 

of programs that will occur with passage of this Act are very important and the 

trust obligation of the United States Government to the Native Hawaiian people, 

including the trust obligation to those direct recipients or those intended direct recipients under this Act, is well established. 

Under the treaty making power of the United States, Congress had exercised its 

constitutional authority to confirm treaties between the United States and the Kingdom of Hawaii, and from 1826 until 1893, the United States had entered into treaties and conventions with the Kingdom of Hawaii to govern commerce and navigaVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:51 Dec 11, 2012 Jkt 076305 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\76305.TXT JACK
45

tion in 1826, 1842, 1849, 1875, and 1887; and the United States had recognized the 

sovereignty of the Kingdom of Hawaii and had accorded full diplomatic recognition 

to the Kingdom of Hawaii. 

In 1993, the United States Congress ‘‘on the occasion of the 100th anniversary of 

the illegal overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii on January 17, 1893,’’ extended an 

apology on behalf of the United States to the Native Hawaiian people for the United 

States’ role in the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii. See Public Law 103–150 

(107 Stat. 1510). The Apology Resolution acknowledged that the overthrow of the 

Kingdom occurred with the active participation of agents and citizens of the United 

States and, further, Congress ‘‘expresse[d] its commitment to acknowledge the ramifications of the overthrow of the Kingdom of Hawaii, in order to provide a proper 

foundation for reconciliation between the United States and the Native Hawaiian 

people . . .’’ Id. Congress also acknowledged in the Apology Resolution that ‘‘the indigenous Hawaiian people never directly relinquished their claims to their inherent 

sovereignty as a people or over their national lands to the United States, either 

through their monarchy or through a plebiscite or referendum.’’ Id.

Following the Newlands Resolution in 1898 (which was passed after the failure 

of the Treaty of Annexation in 1897 and the protest of Queen Lili’uokalani) and the 

Organic Act of 1900 and, by 1919, the Native Hawaiian population had declined tremendously (from an estimated 1,000,000 in 1778), and in recognition of this severe 

decline in the population, Congress enacted the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act 

of 1920 (42 Stat. 108), which designated approximately 203,500 acres of public lands 

for the welfare and rehabilitation of native Hawaiians. See Native Hawaiian Education Act; Keaukaha-Panaewa Community Association v. Hawaiian Homes Commission, 588 F.2d 1216 (1978). Congress enacted the Hawaiian Homes Commission 

Act which mandated that certain lands, designated the Hawaiian home lands, be 

held in trust for the benefit of native Hawaiians. Keaukaha-Panaewa Community 

Association v. Hawaiian Homes Commission, 739 F.2d 1467 (1984). Under the Admission Act in 1959, Section 4 of that Act required that the provisions of the Commission Act be incorporated into the Constitution of the State of Hawaii. Id. at 1469. 

This incorporation was described ‘‘as a compact with the United States.’’ Id. While 

the responsibility for the administration of the Hawaiian Home Lands was transferred to the State of Hawaii, the United States retained the exclusive right to consent to any actions affecting the lands included in the trust and any amendments 

to the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act of 1920 enacted by the legislature of the 

State of Hawaii affecting the beneficiaries under the Act. 

Also, under the Admission Act in 1959, public lands that were transferred from 

the United States to the State of Hawaii were to be held as a public trust for five 

purposes, one of which was ‘‘for the betterment of the conditions of native Hawaiians, as defined in the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, 1920, as amended.’’

In addition to the special trust relationship between the United States and the 

Native Hawaiian people being recognized and reaffirmed through the Hawaiian 

Homes Commission Act of 1920 and then the Admission Act, other Acts of Congress 

have also recognized and reaffirmed this special relationship through the passage 

of the Native Hawaiian Education Act, and with the inclusion of Native Hawaiians 

in such legislation as the American Indian Religious Freedom Act, the National Museum of the American Indian Act, the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act, and other legislation. 

The Native Hawaiian people continue to maintain their separate identity as a distinct native community through cultural, social, and political institutions, and to express their rights as native people to self-determination, self-governance, and economic self-sufficiency. The Native Hawaiian people also, once again, never relinquished their claims to their inherent sovereignty as a people or over their national 

lands and to their claims of their national lands. Although the passage of this Act 

is certainly just one step in the reconciliation process and is far from adequately 

addressing what the United States did to and what it legally and politically owes 

to the Native Hawaiian people, the loan guarantees and the Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant Program does, as our esteemed Congresswoman from Hawaii, Representative Colleen Hanabusa, stated last year during the introduction of H.R. 2648, 

‘‘help [to] fulfill a trust obligation this Congress created in 1920 that recognized it 

was necessary to return Native Hawaiians to the land in order to preserve their culture, their tradition and values.’’

Chairman Akaka and Honorable Members of this Committee, I respectfully urge 

your passage of the Hawaiian Homeownership Opportunity Act of 2011. Thank you 

very much for this opportunity to testify on this important matter before this Committee. 

Mahalo nui loa.

46

The CHAIRMAN. Mahalo nui loa for your testimony, and all of 

your support. Please pass the aloha to the lawyers. 

I would like to, before I ask my questions, ask Congresswoman 

Hanabusa, will you please join me on the dais, and ask you for 

your comments here, and also you may ask any questions you have 

of this panel. 

Melody, mahalo nui loa for all you’ve been for Hawaii, and what 

you’ve contributed already, and in helping to shape the future of 

Hawaii. 

Your testimony provides a comprehensive review of the federal 

trust responsibility, and relationship with the Native Hawaiian 

people of the United States. 

Generally, has the United States’ treatment of the Native Hawaiian people been consistent with prevailing federal Indian policy in 

your view? Is there more the United States must do in order to ensure parity, parity in adaptation of federal policy to its Native people? 

Ms. MACKENZIE. Thank you, Senator, for that question. 

I alluded to that in my comments, but Native Hawaiians, indeed 

are, I think, the only native group in the United States that has 

a long history of basically federal recognition, but does not have a 

clearly acknowledged government-to-government relationship with 

the U.S. government. And I think that is the crucial factor that’s 

missing in our relationship with the United States, and certainly 

one that you yourself have sought to remedy in the past. 

To me that is a crucial point, something that we, as indeed Senator Galuteria indicated, that we are working towards. 

And, you know, it’s been argued very often that Native Hawaiians are federally recognized. The only part that is missing is that 

government-to-government relationship specifically acknowledged 

by the Federal Government. 

The CHAIRMAN. Mahalo for your mana’o on that. 

Naiwieha, in your testimony, you talk about S. 65 and one part 

of fulfilling the federal trust obligation to the Native Hawaiian people. 

Can you describe what other concrete things the United States 

can do to better fulfill its trust obligation to the Native Hawaiian 

people? 

Mr. WURDEMAN. Well, that’s a very open-ended question, Senator, and the easy answer to that is to have the United States return all the lands back to the Hawaiian people. 

But Congress has, in many different acts, included Native Hawaiians, whether it’s through the Graves Repatriation Act, through 

the Native Hawaiian Education Council, all of these different 

measures over the years to address its obligations and its legal responsibilities to the Native Hawaiian people. 

Certainly allowing funding for the Hawaiian Homes program is, 

as I stated earlier, a very significant step, and it is very encouraging to know that our Hawaiian Homes Department has very capable leadership and will take to heart and will work endless 

hours. I know, I’m very confident, in making these goals happen on 

Hawaiian home lands and making these opportunities available for 

the beneficiaries that this legislation intends to address. 

47

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. We’ll keep in contact. I 

know you will you have perceptions and ideas and mana’o in the 

future, what we’re trying to do in Congress of the United States. 

To both of you, do you have any additional comments, additional 

comments or information you believe is important for the Committee to know in contemplating this bill or the federal relationship 

with the Native Hawaiian people? 

Ms. MACKENZIE. Senator, I included in my written testimony, but 

I think it might be appropriate to talk a little bit about the Apology 

Resolution. And as you know, there was a recent U.S. Supreme 

Court case that interpreted and looked at the Apology Resolution. 

That was in relationship to the ceded lands. 

I wanted to point out that, although in that particular case the 

U.S. Supreme Court did not think it was appropriate to rely upon 

the Apology Resolution in order to uphold the moratorium on the 

sale of the ceded lands, that the court in no way dismissed the 

findings or overturned the findings in the Apology Resolution. 

So from a legal perspective, those very strong findings about the 

role of the United States about the relationship between the Native 

Hawaiian people and United States, about the loss of sovereignty 

and control over national lands, and the claims of Native Hawaiians, those findings are still very, very valid, and I just wanted to 

just make that clear in the record. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

Mr. WURDEMAN. I concur with Professor Mackenzie’s comments 

about the Supreme Court case. The issue really that had gone up 

to the Supreme Court was whether, as far as the Apology Resolution was concerned, was whether the 1993 legislation created a 

cloud on title. And, you know, from the Native Hawaiian’s perspective, that cloud to title always existed. It wasn’t this act of legislation that did so. But that is really, with respect to the Apology Resolution, the court said that that’s not what the Apology Resolution 

did. And as Professor Mackenzie adequately and accurately stated 

that the findings were accurate and still exist. 

The CHAIRMAN. Mahalo. Thank you very much. 

I would like to ask Congresswoman Hanabusa for any comments 

she may have or questions she would like to ask. 

Ms. HANABUSA. I think what’s missing in this record is this is 

an opportunity that we all have to educate members of Congress 

in particular situations, the members. This is a unique opportunity 

where we can educate or help better understand the situation that 

we’re in. The NAHASDA, which is the underlying legislation and 

the changes that are being made in terms of HUD, is really an opportunity to look at housing as well. 

So if you can shift your gears a little bit, and if you can put into 

the record, either one or both of you, the significance of homeownership to the Native Hawaiian people, and why, in the creation 

of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act of 1920, it was deemed to 

be so important a part for the preservation of the people and the 

culture? 

And I think that if we can put that forth from that perspective, 

we will have a record that Senator can take back, and we can take 

back to the Congress to show how NAHASDA is significant. As you 

48

know, NAHASDA really began as a Native American housing issue 

and also covers Native Alaskans as well. 

But if you can help us by telling the members of Congress how 

critical this one piece is. 

Ms. MACKENZIE. I think I can help in the sense of looking a little 

bit at the history of Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, and noting 

that the representatives from Hawaii who sought session act 10 

had basically been concerned because Hawaiians had been frozen 

out of their lands and driven into the cities, and that they were 

dying. 

And the idea was that returning to the land would help to reestablish a traditional Hawaiian way of life. And you can see the reestablishment of that if you go into the homestead communities 

today. And what this bill would do by allowing more Native Hawaiians to participate and indeed to get homesteads, would be then to 

encourage and reenforce the idea of Native Hawaiians returning to 

their lands and being able to be themselves in their own territory. 

Mr. WURDEMAN. Thank you for the question, Representative 

Hanabusa. As I alluded to briefly earlier, I think homeownership 

provides stability in a people, in a community, and the social statistics of Native Hawaiians, welfare rolls, incarceration rates, health 

issues are very, very significant in Hawaiians rank on the top of 

all of those social ills at this point, and have been for many, many 

years. 

And the legislation and NAHASDA and homeownership I think 

is an important step in providing stability. 

I have ohana, and we all have ohana who don’t have those opportunities, that have been homeless. That, you know, and I see a lot 

of that. Those are issues in my own family, and amongst some of 

my own friends. And I have a cousin who recently received an 

award on Hawaiian Home Lands and was a recipient of these programs who raised a family of seven children and moved from house 

to house, apartment to apartment throughout the raising of his 

kids, and never had a stable home life. 

He is just one example of success and how happy they were to 

finally own a home after all these years, after being on these 

waitlists. And I really believe that similarly allowing others and 

creating these opportunities for others that don’t have these opportunities will go a long way in helping address some of these social 

ills that I talked about in providing our Native Hawaiian families 

with the stability of a normal home life. 

Ms. MACKENZIE. I would just like to add, in looking at this, I 

thought, you know, in many ways we’re back in the same situation 

we were in 1920 with people coming to Congress basically saying 

our people are dispossessed from their lands. They’re dying. They 

don’t have a place to live. And we’re in that same situation. 

So I see this S. 65 as an opportunity to really fulfill the promise 

of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act. Thank you. 

Ms. HANABUSA. One of the issues that has always bothered me 

from the time that I served in the State Legislature, and I was in 

a very ironic situation, because it was over the Felix—what I term 

the Felix investigative committee, and that was to learn that there 

was a period of time in our history where the State of Hawaii 

wasn’t a state then, I guess it was the Territory of Hawaii—I’m not 

49

quite sure what point it carried over—prohibited the speaking of 

the Hawaiian language in our schools, for example. 

It seems to me that what the great travesty that government has 

done is to have really taken away a lot of that cultural identity. 

This S. 65, to be the most critical component of it is the fact that 

it reauthorizes Title VIII of the NAHASDA, which then gives to 

2015 the authorization for really the Hawaiian Homes Commission 

to then receive those funding. 

So can you elaborate on the significance of the development of 

the community itself, and how it does right a major wrong that 

even those in state government today I don’t think recognizes what 

was done to our Native people. 

Mr. WURDEMAN. I’ll start with the comment about the state government and how it has failed over the years. And it was encouraging, just the other day they finally addressed the past ceded land 

revenue issues that have persisted since 1978 that there was a 

clear legal obligation for the state government to fulfill, but the Native Hawaiian people, and despite the legal obligations and responsibilities, have always taken the back of the room, always been in 

the lessor priority when there have been other needs for the community. 

So the Native Hawaiian people have persevered through all of 

this. Despite all of the legal mandates, they have continued to try 

to revitalize their culture through the language, as Congresswoman 

Hanabusa has stated, and that has been a lot of self-initiative, the 

formation of charter schools, and a pride within a people of regaining what was stripped from them or from their grandparents and 

their parents in generations before them to revitalize this culture. 

And part of this growth and development, again, is to allow these 

kind of opportunities that Congress set forth way back in 1920, as 

far as its rehabilitation process. And this is just another component 

to that rehabilitation process and the growth and development, or 

redevelopment of the culture in the Native Hawaiian community. 

Ms. MACKENZIE. I don’t know that I can add much more to that. 

But I would like to stress something, that the Native people have 

persevered in spite of oftentimes government opposition in things 

like Hawaiian language or Hawaiian culture. 

So imagine what we could do if we had support? And what I see 

this bill doing is offering the opportunity to the Federal Government and the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands to really support the Native Hawaiian people in this kind of second or third 

Renaissance of our culture, our language and our ways. 

Ms. HANABUSA. Thank you. Thank you, Senator. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, very much, Congresswoman 

Hanabusa, for your questions and your comments. 

I want to add that since the overthrow of the Hawaiian Kingdom, 

the people, Native Hawaiians have really, in a sense, suffered and 

were scattered to the point where Prince Kuhio Kalanaiana’ole was 

concerned about this, and wanted to find a way of bringing the people back. And, of course, the homestead concept came to being. 

He was able, in his years in Congress, to bring that about. And 

so in 1920, the Hawaiian Home Lands bill was passed. And remember this was by the consent of the Congress of the United States. 

50

So it really sent, in a sense, the future of a government-to-government relationship that we’re facing today, and want to complete 

that government-to-government relationship. 

So parity is so important. When I say ‘‘parity’’, I mean our country had laws to deal with our indigenous people, American Indians 

and Alaska Natives. And since we became a territory and now a 

state we have not dealt with indigenous Hawaiians. And so the 

time is appropriate for us to do that. It’s necessary, really, at this 

point in time. 

I want to thank you for your mana’o on this, and look forward 

for further discussions on this, and for the support. 

I want to tell you that support from Hawaii is very, very important to us in Congress, because opponents always want to say Hawaii doesn’t support it. And now it’s there legally, too. And so I’m 

really thankful and grateful that we have come to this point, and 

look forward to pursuing this even further. So I want to thank. 

Do you have any further questions or comments? 

Ms. HANABUSA. No, thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. I want to thank the second panel for your 

mana’o. It has been very, very helpful to us. Thank you. 

Now, I would like to call on a third panel, and invite you to the 

witness table. Serving on the third panel is Mr. Kali Watson, Chair 

of the Housing & Economic Development Committee for the Sovereign Councils of the Hawaiian Homelands Assembly; Robin Danner, President/CEO of the Council for Native Hawaiian Advancement in Honolulu Hawaii; and Ms. Kehau Filimoeatu, Chair of the 

Hawaiian Community Assets in Honolulu, Hawaii. 

I want to welcome you with much aloha, and good to see all of 

you here this hearing. Kali, will you please proceed with your testimony? 

STATEMENT OF KALI WATSON, CHAIRMAN, HOUSING &

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, SOVEREIGN

COUNCILS OF THE HAWAIIAN HOMELANDS ASSEMBLY 

Mr. WATSON. Thank you, Chairman, Senator Akaka, as well as 

Congresswoman Hanabusa. 

We appreciate the opportunity to be here today to present testimony on Senate Bill 65. My name is Kali Watson. I’m the Chairman of the Housing & Economic Development Committee for the 

Sovereign Councils of Hawaiian Home Lands Assembly, which represents approximately 30 different homestead associations throughout the state spanning from Anahola to Nanakuli on Oahu, all the 

way to Panaewa on the Big Island. I also represent the Association 

of Hawaiians for Homestead Lands. We support Senate Bill 65. 

Let me first start off. We all recognize that this is about money, 

about funding for housing. But I think it’s more than that. It’s 

more about people. I know when I first left the Department, we 

started up a non-profit and started working in the community. And 

one of the families, or one of the projects we started was the Replacement Home Project. 

I remember sitting in the basement of this home in Kewalo on 

this island. And as I was sitting there, I was looking around, and 

I saw this family that basically was living in a dilapidated house 

where the top floor was so unsafe that they couldn’t live there. The 

51

kids slept in a tent in the yard. And for their front door, they had 

this wooden plank that they would literally push it on the side and 

use it as a front door. It wasn’t even attached. When it rained, 

there would be a stream of water passing through the house. 

And so one of the things that really struck me is how can we 

help this family? And so we put together a loan package. And what 

was key to making that loan work was NAHASDA. It provided us 

$6,000 that was used to actually build this house. 

I worked with other associations and communities groups in 

order to help this family, Alger, they provided stipends so the husband could go to a nursing school. The other thing is I was kind 

of wondering, the wife and the daughter were present. They never 

said anything. They never smiled or anything. And some guys 

might think it’s funny, but they had no teeth. So the Alger Foundation stepped up and provided the dental work. And today, I got to 

say that it’s a good situation. They have a new house and they 

have a place they can call home. That was because of NAHASDA, 

in a major part. While I was working at the Department, and over 

the years working at my non-profit, we’ve been able to see the impact of NAHASDA in homesteading communities, and it’s been tremendous. We look at the newer subdivision and these large, beautiful homes in Kaneheli, in Kapolei. You look on Maui at Waiehu 

Kou, beautiful homes. As well as Laiopua on the Big Island. So this 

funding source has had a tremendous impact in helping our people 

obtain affordable housing. 

The Department has also undertaken innovative approaches 

which have made a difference. For example, the Hoolima project in 

Kapolei, which is rent to own. It’s enabled to access low income 

housing, tax rates, and put together different types of funding including NAHASDA, putting in infrastructure for subdivision to 

make it work. 

In Waimanalo, Kupuna housing, is also using various sources. I 

think with the Department in the process of, I guess, doing their 

housing plan, NAHASDA could be looked at in providing funding 

for rental projects. 

Some of the new products besides rentals that have come to fruition is in Nanakuli, for example. We’re doing a 48-unit low income 

rental housing project called Hale Makane. That particular project 

targets families in the 30 to 40 percent area median income. And 

has basically strung together a bunch of eight different funding 

sources in order to make it happen. 

The thing about the housing, we’re trying to address a waiting 

list of over 21,000 people that spans throughout the islands. And 

without this particular funding source, the NAHASDA, it would be 

very, very difficult to address that need. And I think that, you 

know, when you look at what’s happening around Hawaiian communities, the timing is critical right now for the continuation of 

this funding source. 

We had the $600 million settlement that was passed in 1994 

coming to an end. That’s $30 million a year that is going away. 

In the past couple years, the state has not provided general 

funds to our program. Contrary to the 1978 constitutional amendment that mandated not only administrative, but development 

52

funds shall be made available to this program. The legislature has 

not done that. 

There’s a lawsuit going on right now trying to address that. 

Hopefully we will be successful and we will be able to access those 

funds. I guess the point I make is that NAHASDA is very, very important to our Hawaiian community. This S. 65 bill is something 

that I think will be critical in us moving forward. 

The Department is at present time conducting their housing plan 

under this act. The community and the beneficiaries, I anticipate, 

will step forward and become an active participant in developing 

a plan that addresses this waiting list. 

What is also exciting is that we see in the Hawaiian communities 

a collaboration, not only by the homestead associations and the 

waitlists, the advocacy groups, but now OHA has started to step 

forward. They funded major infrastructure costs. They recently, I 

guess we were all at the signing ceremony where the $200 million 

in lands in Kakaako is being transferred to the Office of Hawaiian 

Affairs, and they’ve signed a resolution in agreeing to work with 

the Department of Hawaiians to make that, not only a productive 

relationship, but more importantly, an opportunity to provide housing, economic development, and other things that will have a very 

positive impact on our people. 

I’ve had the opportunity to talk with the Kamehameha Schools 

trustees, and they too are looking to start to collaborate and work 

with the Hawaiian organizations, the trust organizations. And I 

think collectively we have an opportunity at this time in history to 

really, really make a difference, but whether it be the Federal Government in the continuation of our funding, whether it be the Ali’i 

Trust working together to address the needs of our people, whether 

it’s the SCHHA, the Hawaiian Community Assets, all of these organizations work together as collective groups. That’s going to be key 

for our future and our people. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, very much, Kali, for your testimony 

and your support of the bill. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Watson follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF KALI WATSON, CHAIRMAN, HOUSING & ECONOMIC

DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE, SOVEREIGN COUNCILS OF THE HAWAIIAN HOMELANDS

ASSEMBLY

Dear Senator Akaka, Senator Inouye and Members: 

Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony in support to S.65 relating 

to the Hawaiian Homeownership Opportunity Act of 2011—which amends the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996 (NAHASDA) 

and the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992. This bill extends 

through FY2015 the authorization of appropriations for housing assistance for Native Americans and loan guarantees for Native Hawaiian housing. 

This Bill also amends the NAHASDA to: (1) make the Department of Hawaiian 

Home Lands of the state of Hawaii eligible for loan guarantees; and (2) extend 

through FY2015 the authorization of appropriations for the credit subsidy to cover 

the costs of federal guarantees for financing for tribal housing activities. 

Federal Block Grants from NAHASDA have provided significant infrastructure 

development and facilitated the construction of much needed affordable housing in 

many homesteading communities throughout State of Hawaii. At a time when 

DHHL’s residential waiting list has grown to 21,216 as of June 30, 2011, the need 

for the reauthorization and increase of NAHASDA funding is even more critical, especially with the anticipated end to State funding under the $600 million settlement. Without said continued funding, the affordable housing activities will take a 

major hit. 

53

DHHL is presently in the process of updating its Five Year Housing Plan as required under NAHASDA and significant input by its beneficiaries is anticipated. Besides the standard single-family residential housing, DHHL and its beneficiaries are 

embarking on more condense and far expansive development of rental housing and 

condominium developments. This will not only provide new types for DHHL housing 

products, and in larger numbers, but will also allow the leveraging of its funds with 

other funds. In the 48-unit low income rental Hale Makana O Nanakuli Project, the 

Nanakuli Hawaiian Homestead Community Association, with the assistance of the 

nonprofit Hawaiian Community Development Board was able to access federal 

CDBG and HOME funds from HUD, Rural Development 515 and 521 funds of close 

to $14 million. With continued NAHASDA funding, more projects like this are possible. 

The Sovereign Councils of the Hawaiian Homelands Assembly, formerly the State 

Council of Hawaiian Homestead Associations was founded more than 20 years ago 

to unite homestead communities and to advocate for the beneficiaries of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act of 1921. The SCHHA is the oldest statewide advocacy 

organization representing the interests of more than 30,000 beneficiaries and families residing in the communities of the Hawaiian Home Land Trust. Its mission is 

to promote the self determination of native Hawaiians and the well being of homestead communities. 

I urge you to please pass this measure, S. 65.

Robin, will you, please proceed with your testimony. 

STATEMENT OF ROBIN PUANANI DANNER, PRESIDENT/CEO, 

COUNCIL FOR NATIVE HAWAIIAN ADVANCEMENT 

Ms. DANNER. Welcome home, and welcome to the Committee 

staff for making the trip to our home lands. For the record my 

name is Robin Danner. I am the President of the Council for Native Hawaiian Advancement, which is most comparable to organizations like UNSET, or NCAI or AFN. 

CNHA is governed by a 21 member board of directors, consisting 

of all Native Hawaiian leaders from across the nation representing 

diverse areas of service including education, culture, affordable 

housing, civic affairs and relevant to today’s topic, homestead leaders on our board working directly on trust land solutions. Many of 

our CNHA board members are here today, Mr. Chairman, because 

of your leadership in bringing a field hearing here to Hawaii. They 

can physically see that when I tell them that I’m going to Washington, DC, I’m actually doing something, and today they can actually participate in that. Our vice chairman is here, Billy Ornellas, 

and about a dozen of our members. 

As a 14-year homesteader, I have raised four of my children in 

my homestead, and over the last 11 years, have lead CNHA to become one of the most active policy advocates, along with the 

SCHHA, on the unique issues of the Hawaiian Home Land trust. 

While these trust lands may be limited by blood quantum under 

the homesteading program, we know that these lands are nourishing all of our children, regardless of blood quantum, by providing lands for charter schools, the language programs, lifting up 

our communities by creating centers of commerce on these trust 

lands, providing places to heal and to reconnect through the placement of relevant health and other services on these trust lands. 

Definitely, as Kali said, providing shelter to thousands of family 

members through the development of housing on these lands. 

Every home certainly that CNHA has assisted a family with over 

the last decade, in partnership with Hawaiian Home Lands, has included families that are small in Hawaiian, big in Hawaiian, even 

54

in some cases no end residence. These are powerful lands, not just 

for beneficiaries, but for everyone. 

CNHA’s full testimony submitted to the record approaches the 

hearing topic of the Senate Bill 65 under three main areas. First, 

NAHASDA funding and impact, which I think Congresswoman 

Hanabusa alluded to over the last decade. Second, access to capital 

strategies under the reauthorization; and third, the priority of selfdetermination in the implementation of NAHASDA. 

The modest levels of NAHASDA funding dedicated to Hawaiian 

Home Lands is really the first and only consistent federal funding 

to flow to Hawaiians since passage of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act 90 years ago. And this first time consistent funding 

source has only been flowing for the last ten years. Baby steps in 

comparison to our counterparts in Indian Country, prior to 

NAHASDA flowing to their trust land areas which began for them 

in 1996, federal housing dollars flowed under the 1937 Housing 

Act, providing a miniscule one percent of the national public housing allocation to trust land areas on the continent and Alaska. Indian Country, and most certainly Hawaiian Home Lands have 

much to catch up on. 

With only ten years under our belt, the impact of NAHASDA 

funds has been a fantastic beginning, and it must be said, 

NAHASDA is the lifeline of hope to the low and moderate income 

families on the waitlist that year after year are passed over due to 

the inability to qualify for high end housing costs. NAHASDA is 

vital to ensuring that the promise of Prince Kuhio in enacting the 

HHCA is accessible to every beneficiary regardless of income. 

While DHHL has utilized the vast majority of its NAHASDA allocation each year to much needed infrastructure and subdivision 

development, the annual portion dedicated to community based 

service providers such as CNHA, and many of our member organizations, have been dedicated to financial education, credit history 

repair, and down payment assistance that is helping low and moderate income families achieve homeownership. 

We have leveraged NAHASDA seed funding to attract other capital sources, and today, have more than 350 Native Hawaiian families in our Financial Education & Counseling pipeline. 

I would like to mahalo Aunty Keahu, who is here today from our 

Board of Directors, for creating an environment for CNHA to partner with her organizations, such as Hawaiian Community Assets 

to deliver these powerful services. 

NAHASDA funds have also been used by CNHA and its member 

organizations to develop and deliver solar water heating systems, 

and photo voltaic renewable energy systems. Senator, I cannot express enough how important this area is and will continue to be 

in making sure that our communities are not left behind and last 

on the grid. NAHASDA is essential to ensuring that low income 

families are first to benefit from the technologies of renewable energy and reduced energy costs in their homes. 

Under the Access to Capital element of NAHASDA, we applaud 

the community for including language to upgrade the HUD 184A 

home loan product, to allow for refinances. Thank you. 

55

This ability to refinance to historic low levels of interest rates is 

worth tens of thousands of dollars over the life of a mortgage loan. 

Families need this exactly right now. 

We also strongly support the Committee’s work to include in Senate Bill 65, the extension of Title VI from the Indian NAHASDA 

program to Hawaiians. 

As you know, Senator, Title VI allows DHHL to leverage its annual NAHASDA allocation up to five times the amount to access 

capital for very large developments. 

Our final area in our testimony addresses the ‘‘self-determination’’ that are very much part of the NAHASDA Title, the Native 

American Housing Assistance and Self-determination Act. We 

would ask that the Committee include more specific language and 

encouragement to clarify the self-determination goals of the legislation are for the collective people, the collective beneficiaries in the 

homesteads, and not State Government. Consultation by HUD, by 

DHHL, with beneficiaries and their homestead association leaders 

should be emphasized. 

In closing, as the Committee moves Senate Bill 65, I appreciate 

the educational aspect of the Chairman’s work in educating fellow 

Committee members, the Congress and other Native peoples, that 

as Hawaiians, we are a federally recognized Native peoples, yet we 

are the only group of the three that has yet to engage in a government-to-government relationship like American Indians and Alaskan Natives. 

Chairman Akaka, in just one year as Chairman under your leadership and the work of your staff, and Director Loretta Tuell, you 

have done more to remind and to educate others that our people 

and the federal programs dedicated to addressing our condition are 

not race-based, but rather are within the power of the Congress to 

address the issues of unique category of Natives under the U.S. 

Constitution. 

So I thank you, Chairman. I have worked in the federal arena 

on Native issues for just under 24 years now, and the last 12 

months have shown an incredible sensitivity and accuracy as to our 

status among the family of Native nations. Mahalo. 

[The prepared statement Ms. Danner follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF ROBIN PUANANI DANNER, PRESIDENT/CEO, COUNCIL FOR

NATIVE HAWAIIAN ADVANCEMENT

Aloha Chairman Akaka and Members of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, 

My name is Robin Puanani Danner. I am the President and Chief Executive Officer of the Council for Native Hawaiian Advancement (CNHA), founded in 2001 to 

enhance the cultural, economic and community development of Native Hawaiians. 

CNHA, with a membership of over 150 Native Hawaiian Organizations, 28 percent 

of which are Hawaiian home land organizations, is dedicated to addressing the challenges in our communities from education to business, affordable housing to cultural 

preservation, and is a statewide advocate most comparable to the National Congress 

of American Indians (NCAI), and the Alaska Federation of Natives (AFN). 

I am native Hawaiian, born on the island of Kauai, raised in the fishing village 

of Niumalu, the Indian reservations of the Apache, Navajo and Hopi, and spent 

many years among the Alaska Native peoples. For the last 14 years, I have lived 

on my Native homestead issued under the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act, with 

my children and husband. 

My background includes former positions in finance as a bank executive, a Tribal 

Housing Authority executive director, and county housing director serving Native 

populations. Currently, I am the chair of the board of the Homestead Community 

56

Development Corporation that in addition to my position with CNHA, is highly relevant to the field hearing topic of S. 65—Hawaiian Homeownership Act of 2011.

Native Hawaiians and the Federal Trust Relationship 

As the Committee knows, Native Hawaiians are among the families of Native peoples of the United States, and although not as well known, are included in the federal Indian policy and trust relationship. In 1920, the U.S. Congress enacted the 

Hawaiian Homes Commission Act (HHCA), establishing a federal land trust that 

nearly mirrors the content of the 1906 Indian Allotment Act. In 1959, the U.S. Congress enacted the Hawaii Admissions Act, which includes language to further recognize the trust relationship with Native Hawaiians. Over the last 90 years, the U.S. 

Congress has enacted over 150 statutes recognizing my people as Native, like American Indians and Alaska Natives, using the plenary power authorized under the 

U.S. Constitution to address a myriad of issues. 

Similar to the Office of Insular Affairs for the territorial peoples of the U.S. and 

the Bureau of Indian Affairs for American Indians and Alaska Natives in the Department of the Interior, Congress created the Office of Native Hawaiian Relations 

to continue the process of reconciliation in accordance with P.L. 103–150, the Apology Resolution, and to oversee the trust responsibilities of the United States to Native Hawaiians, with a particular emphasis on the HHCA and the 1995 Hawaiian 

Home Land Recovery Act. 

Native Hawaiians and the State Trust Relationship 

One of the conditions of statehood enacted by the United States was a compact 

between the federal and state governments, to administer the HHCA referenced 

above through the establishment in 1961 of the state of Hawaii Department of Hawaiian Home Lands (DHHL). The Hawaii state constitution incorporates and embraces the United States’ trust relationship to Native Hawaiians, which was further 

strengthened by the 1978 Constitutional Convention establshing a second state 

agency, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA). Each of these state agencies are public trusts of the people of Hawaii, not representing Native Hawaiians, but rather 

representing all of the people of our state to deliver on the trust mandates established under federal law and state law. There are similar ‘‘Offices of Indian Affairs’’ 

in other state governments, including Utah and Arizona. 

In 2011, the state of Hawaii enacted Act 195, to assist the Native Hawaiian people in the development of a roll that can be used for government reorganization efforts, and to urge the federal government to recognize a Native Hawaiian government. In 2011, this honorable committee, the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, 

voted to approve the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act, to similarly 

recognize the self-governance of Native Hawaiians, creating parity with the more 

than 560 Native governments in approximately 35 states of the country. 

In summary, the relationship of Native Hawaiians to state and federal governments, is very similar and mirrors the policies and agencies of our counterpart Native peoples in the other 49 states. The Department of Hawaiian Home Lands 

(DHHL) and the Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA), are Hawaii state agencies with 

trust responsibilities to Native Hawaiians. Similarly, the United States government 

has acknowledged its federal trust responsibility to Native Hawaiians and administers it through agencies such as the Departments of the Interior, Health and 

Human Services, and Housing and Urban Development. 

Native Hawaiians and Their Trust Land Representative Organizations 

Similar to Indian Country and the organization of Native governments around 

trust land areas, eligible Native Hawaiians have long held and established governing organizations organized around the trust lands established under the HHCA. 

These organizations are commonly referred to as homestead associations, or homestead beneficiary organizations. Over 30 such homestead associations exist across 

the state, tied directly to homestead trust lands of the HHCA. Each has enrolled 

homestead members and residents, and each democratically elects its leadership. 

In many ways, these homestead associations mirror the mission and representation that pueblos, tribes, or villages do in other areas where federally created trust 

land areas exist. Participation is voluntary in nature by eligible members, and the 

actions of these homestead associations are governed by the participating eligible 

members. 

Many other significant types of Hawaiian organizations exist, including social justice private nonprofits, member nonprofits like CNHA or the civic clubs and Royal 

Hawaiian Societies. These organizations are similar to the service focused, cultural 

and advocacy organizations of many Native organizations around the country. The 

homestead associations are significant in the context of the hearing topic of S. 65—

Hawaiian Homeownership Act of 2011, because it calls for the reauthorization of 

57

Title VIII of the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act 

(NAHASDA). Self-determination in the title of this powerful housing law is indicative of the connection between housing solutions, and the self-determination of the 

people themselves, through their respective homestead associations. 

S. 65—Hawaiian Homeownership Act of 2011

Our testimony is organized into three distinct areas of discussion and recommendations—NAHASDA, Access to Capital and Self-Determination. 

NAHASDA 

This discussion content focuses on the amendment that added Title VIII to 

NAHASDA, through enactment of the Hawaiian Homeownership Act of 2000. 

A. Trust Relationship & First Federal Funding to the HHCA 

Although the promise of the Hawaiian Home Land Trust has existed for over 90 

years when the HHCA was enacted in 1920, the only federal funding of any significance to be dedicated toward its success consistently each year, has been NAHASDA 

funds which began flowing only a short 10 years ago. 

Eighty years of little to zero federal resources makes for a situation of extreme 

catch up, but the last 10 years of modest but stable NAHASDA funding has been 

the beginning of incredible opportunity. It must be acknowledged that one decade 

of consistent funding is a very short period of time, yet the impact during that time 

is not only visible, it has created a new energy and enthusiasm for the possibilities 

in fulfilling the original promise of residential homesteading under the HHCA. 

NAHASDA is one of the only tools and resources available to the Hawaiian Home 

Land trust to bring the HHCA within reach of the hardworking low and moderate 

income families that remain on the waitlist. 

We offer our full support for S. 65—the Hawaiian Homeownership Act of 2011 for 

the following basic reasons:

1) Trust Responsibility—It embodies an important and long awaited component 

of the trust responsibility to native Hawaiians by providing stable and consistent funding;

2) Affordable Housing Planning—It continues the benefits to the management 

of the Hawaiian Home Land Trust by requiring DHHL to organize a strategic 

plan and to deliver to HUD at regular intervals, an updated Native Hawaiian 

Housing Plan;

3) Self-Determination—It lays a strong foundation for the Hawaiian Home Land 

Trust to transition from a 90-year paternal approach to land development and 

land management to the incredible power of including homestead beneficiaries 

in the administration of their land trust through the time tested success of federal self-determination policies.

B. NAHASDA Funding Impact 

While DHHL is the direct grant recipient from HUD of NAHASDA funds, the 

agency has over the years, set aside roughly 10 percent of its annual funding award, 

to provide sub-grants to community based organizations. CNHA and many of our 

member organizations have competed for and received sub-recipient NAHASDA 

grants. Following are a handful of examples of the impact of these funding awards:

1) Solar Water Heating Systems—NAHASDA funds have been vital seed funding to create an environment for the transformation of household energy costs 

by low to moderate income households on Hawaiian home lands. This is perhaps one of the areas where we must lead the charge to ensure that regular 

every day families have full and unfettered access to the incredible renewable 

energy technologies.

There are approximately 7,000 existing residential homes located in our trust 

land areas. Only 15 percent have one form or another of solar power to either 

generate electricity or heat water. The projected capital need to achieve a 100 

percent transformation of homestead neighborhoods is just under $40 million. 

With a small grant from NAHASDA, the journey has begun, but more importantly, the residential solar projects funded by NAHASDA have attracted private capital and is leveraging dollars and attention to homestead areas. In addition to reducing utility costs for struggling families, these investments are creating jobs and an entire cottage industry for small businesses in Hawaii.

2) Down Payment Assistance—NAHASDA funds have been utilized to develop 

meaningful and culturally designed Individual Development Accounts (IDA) to 

support down payment assistance on home purchases, as well as youth financial 

58

education curriculum that reminds us of the ingenuity of our ancestors in resource management, something that financial education is all about.

3) Homeownership Centers—NAHASDA funds are responsible for the development of a Homeownership Resource Center that delivers affordable housing 

services from inside a neighbor island homestead area. The homestead association embraced its responsibility to bring valuable services to the people, and 

with the support of NAHASDA, operates a full service foreclosure prevention, 

financial education counseling and preparation for mortgage loan qualifications.

We would recommend that NAHASDA funds expended by DHHL begin to take 

an investment direction of vertical housing units over subdivision infrastructure, including homeownership, farming/ranching housing, and multi-family rental development. 

Perhaps most important beyond the funding level and direct investment of 

NAHASDA funds in the projects described above, is the power of validation and empowerment that legislation like the Hawaiian Homeownership Act of 2011 creates 

on the ground in community. It cannot be underestimated, the impact on community 

leaders when Congress acts upon the issues that are most pressing and most relevant to the day-to-day challenges of families. Passage creates momentum of 

projects yes, but it also creates a momentum of community spirit to tackle tough 

issues together and in a systematic way. 

II. Access to Capital 

This discussion content focuses on information and recommendations relevant to 

the availability of capital for home development, qualify of life home improvements 

and leveraging of federal funding in the capital markets. 

A. HUD 184a 

The HUD 184a component of the legislation authorizes a home loan guarantee 

product to attract capital to the construction and purchase of homes located on trust 

lands. This product cannot be overstated as to its important. Capital is the lifeblood 

of any healthy community, and as is well known on Indian reservations and Hawaiian Home Lands, there are only a handful of home loan products available. 

The significance of the HUD 184a program can only be truly appreciated when 

one considers what would happen in their own neighborhoods if access to capital 

was shut down, and empty homes were not able to be purchased for lack of mortgage capital and overcrowding of families beyond the safe capacity of a residential 

structure. The Reauthorization of HUD 184a is paramount, as is the upgrade to the 

program to allow for refinancing, and equity extraction for education, home improvement and small business investment. 

B. Extending Title VI to Hawaiian Home Lands 

The trust land nature of Hawaiian Home Lands is both a blessing and a curse 

for affordable housing and economic development. It is a blessing for many of the 

same reasons it is for Indian Country, which is a preserved land base held in trust 

that cannot be alienated, for our people to nurture Native Hawaiian language and 

culture, and continue our life ways as the original peoples of the Hawaiian Islands, 

regardless of homesteading eligibility by any individual Native Hawaiian. However, 

access to capital is made more difficult due to the trust nature of our lands. 

It need not be a curse, with strategic approaches that ensure capital can flow to 

trust land developments and projects. Title VI is a section of NAHASDA that is currently only available to Tribal NAHASDA grantees. It authorizes the grantee to leverage up to five times the annual NAHASDA allocation to plan and implement developments that would be made more expensive if piecemeal funding were the only 

option. Title VI is an excellent, no-cost amendment that would provide flexibility to 

leverage the modest annual NAHASDA allocations. We support inclusion of native 

Hawaiians to Title VI of NAHASDA. 

C. Needs Assessment Study 

It has been a full decade since the initial passage and inclusion of Native Hawaiians in NAHASDA. Funding levels have been at the discretion of Congress and the 

Administration over that period of time. We recommend that a needs assessment 

be conducted, with full engagement of homestead beneficiary leaders to inventory 

the need based on consultation, the realities of development challenges due to the 

location of lands in the trust, and the recent results of the 2010 Census. 

III. Self-Determination 

This section discusses the significance of the self-determination intent of 

NAHASDA and recommendations to maximize the opportunities to create relevant 

59

and long term solutions in trust land areas. It should be noted that some at the 

state agency of DHHL have wrongly assumed that the self-determination intent of 

NAHASDA, and even the HHCA, is for DHHL, when in fact, federal self-determination policies are for Native peoples and their representative organizations, not state 

governments. Although state government is improving its education of its employees 

in this regard, the confusion by even a small minority of state employees can create 

barriers to the implementation of the goals of self-determination to the people. 

A. Homestead Beneficiary Consultation 

Consultation with beneficiaries by DHHL has greatly improved over recent years, 

and has relied upon the precedence and the best practices of tribal consultation 

when state government is contemplating significant changes in policy or program 

direction. One of the continual misnomers in the administration of NAHASDA as 

it relates to Hawaiians is the confusion by DHHL and sometimes HUD, who these 

agencies should be consulting with. 

In Indian Country, HUD consults with tribes, the technical recipient and authority for their allocation of NAHASDA funds, unless it is tribally designated to another entity like a tribal housing authority. For Hawaiians, the recipient and authority for our NAHASDA allocation is a state agency intermediary. The homestead 

associations that are representative of the beneficiaries collectively, are the comparable to Indian Country’s tribes, therefore, consultation by HUD and DHHL 

should be conducted with beneficiaries and their geographic representative associations. We would recommend that the Committee encourage DHHL and HUD to 

maximize the benefits of consultation by bringing clarity to the issue of Homestead 

Beneficiary Consultation. 

B. Empowerment & Capacity Building Programming 

Not more than 5 percent of the annual NAHASDA allocation can be used for administration by state government (DHHL). Over the last decade, DHHL has utilized 

administrative resources on its state government employees to engage and be 

trained at national convenings, and to strategize with HUD and Native leaders. The 

complete absence of empowering homestead associations and beneficiary community 

leaders themselves is detrimental to the short term and long term capacity building 

of the people and associations that remain in our communities when state government employees retire or leave employment. 

Indeed, opportunities for beneficiary leaders to network and become educated on 

national affordable housing solutions, and especially with other Native counterparts 

is an incredible missed opportunity. For example, the cross pollination of ideas, of 

strategies such as the coordination of Native CDFIs, of leveraged funding strategies 

that are taking place in other areas of Indian Country, can only be implemented 

by homestead associations, and not state government. 

We strongly recommend that HUD’s oversight ensure that the self-determination 

tenets embodied in NAHASDA include review of how state government is building 

the capacity, empowerment and self-determination of the people it was intended to 

serve. We applaud DHHL in its recent efforts to improve in this area, and would 

recommend that the self-determination and capacity building of homestead leaders 

be a standing component of its Native Hawaiian Housing Plan. 

Self-determination is a corner stone of success in federal policy. It has resulted 

in more progress made in bringing solutions to the challenges of Native communities than any other policy. NAHASDA is a powerful tool to embrace the power of 

self-determination when our people are engaged, consulted with and challenged to 

implement solutions. We emphasize the continual recognition and encouragement of 

federal and state agencies to administer its programs with this over-arching goal of 

NAHASDA. 

Summary & General Recommendations 

In conclusion, we thank the Committee for its championship of good public policy 

that enables Native communities to achieve our full potential. Congress has the plenary power under the constitution to address the issues of Native peoples, and we 

mahalo Chairman Akaka for his lifelong work and service to all Native peoples of 

the country. 

We support the reauthorization of the Hawaiian Homeownership Act, and appreciate the committee’s work to improve on the tools available to address the affordable housing needs of our people. 

Mahalo for the opportunity to submit comments to the Committee.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Robin, for your mana’o 

and your testimony, and, of course, your support of the bill. And 

60

thank you for what you and your group is doing to help the Hawaiians. 

Now I would to call on Kehau. Please proceed. 

STATEMENT OF KEHAU FILIMOEATU, CHAIR, HAWAIIAN 

COMMUNITY ASSETS 

Ms. FILIMOEATU. Aloha, Honorable Senator Akaka, Representative Hanabusa and staff. Aloha. 

My name is Kehaulani Filimoeatu. And I have been privileged to 

serve as the Board President of Hawaiian Community Assets, a 

nonprofit HUD approved housing counseling agency and emerging 

Native CDFI that assists low and moderate income communities 

secure and sustain permanent housing with a particular focus on 

Native Hawaiians. 

I speak with you today to share my mana’o about the need to reauthorize NAHASDA through S. 65, which will ensure equal access 

by all indigenous peoples of the United States to funding for the 

purposes of financing affordable housing activities and housing-related community development activity as consistent with the purposes of the Act. NAHASDA funding has played a key role in our 

organization’s history, but more importantly it has enriched the 

lives of thousands of Native Hawaiian families who have received 

our services, achieved the dream of homeownership, and continue 

to work toward self-determination. 

Hawaiian Community Assets was founded in 2000 on the Island 

of Maui, with the charge to create a community development financial institution that would address the housing needs of Native Hawaiian individuals and families. Our mission was, or is to increase 

the capacity of low and moderate income communities to achieve 

and sustain economic self-sufficiency, with a particular focus on 

Native Hawaiians. 

HCA supports permanent housing, culturally-relevant financial 

education, and asset building programs to achieve its mission. 

Our particular focus on home ownership stems from philosophy 

that roots itself within the organization and every aspect of our 

work. This philosophy, known as Kahua Waiwai, espouses the 

basic philosophy of ‘‘A Sense of Place’’. The home is viewed as a 

foundation or Kahua. Upon this foundation is built the family’s 

spiritual values, teachings and cultural traditions for Waiwai. It is 

that spiritual value of the home and its surroundings that provides 

stability and the opportunity for families to build a secure future. 

Opportunities that help stabilize family life help to create a more 

stable community. Thus, it be can be said that home ownership encompasses more than just purchase of a house, it is an investment 

in the future. A strong foundation, if built properly, will serve generations to come. 

HCA has two long-standing program areas: Financial education 

services and community lending. Both drive the organization’s comprehensive approach to achieving its mission. 

Our financial education services program include homebuyer and 

financial education workshops, individualized housing counseling, 

including foreclosure prevention services, and training and technical assistance to help community-based organizations develop 

61

and implement culturally-appropriate financial education using our 

Kahua Waiwai: Building a Foundation of Wealth curricula. 

Our community lending program, known as Hawaii Community 

Lending, has experience originating mortgages on and off Hawaiian 

Home Lands, and currently provides loan packaging services, 

micro-loan products, and matched savings accounts to assist Native 

families secure and sustain permanent housing. 

We have submitted a Homebuyer and Financial Education Program Report with our testimony that highlights our fiscal years of 

2007 through 2011. It’s made possible in part by NAHASDA funding. 

I would like to take this opportunity to just highlight some key 

pieces of this report. With NAHASDA funding, HCA has provided 

services as a HUD approved housing counseling agency and Native 

CDFI for more than six years under grants and contracts with the 

state Department of Hawaiian Homelands and as sub-recipient, 

under DHHL, of HUD Native Hawaiian Block Grant funds made 

possible through the Native American Housing Assistance and SelfDetermination Act of 1996. 

NAHASDA funding has assisted HCA to establish itself as the 

largest provider of homebuyer and financial education services and 

products for Native Hawaiian families statewide. We have been 

able to leverage funding from both local, state, and national 

sources to enhance community development of Hawaiian Home 

Lands, primarily for homeownership. We have been able to secure 

partnerships to increase the rate of homeownership for Hawaiian 

Home Lands Lessees. And we have been able to enhance our capacity to create a continuum of service in the realm of housing counseling with the goal of providing Native Hawaiian families with the 

necessary education and tools to move from the beach to the biggest investment in their lifetime, a home. 

In particular, since 2006, HCA has assisted Native Hawaiian 

family under the Home Ownership Assistance Program with becoming financially qualified to purchase homes and access mortgage financing in the following Hawaiian Home Lands Developments: Lanai, Kekaha, the Villages of Lealii, Kaupea Phases I, II 

and III, Waiehu Kou IV, Hoolehua, Kanehili Phases I and II. 

HCA has leveraged funding for its work in providing financial 

education services and for other products from two of the largest 

national rural community development organizations, Rural Community Assistance Corporation, and Rural LISC, as well as Federal 

Administration for Native Americans to expand mortgage origination services and establish a youth financial education program 

that has served more than 930 Hawaii youth residing in low income communities with age and culturally-appropriate financial 

training. 

In 2008 HCA formed an exciting new partnership between HCL 

and Bank2 Native American Bank to increase access to mortgage 

capital for beneficiaries of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act. 

The partnership allowed HCL to utilize NAHASDA funding to 

originate the Section 184A Native Hawaiian Housing Loan Guarantee program; a mortgage product specifically designed for Native 

Hawaiians on Hawaiian Home Lands. The partnership and implementation of the new 184A loan program resulted in HCL seeing 

62

a 367 percent increase in mortgage financing available to Native 

Hawaiian homeowners from fiscal year 2009 to 2010. This actually 

has been the highest volume of financing made available by HCL 

in a single year since its inception. 

NAHASDA funding has been a primary source of building the capacity of HCA to expand its services to address the diverse housing 

needs of our Native Hawaiian families including homeless families 

living in transitional shelters, low income buyers, homeowners at 

risk of foreclose, and families engaging in financial education services. 

The following key outcomes of HCA’s continual education Homebuyer Financial Program would not have been possible without 

NAHASDA funding. We have now 3,465 individuals that graduated 

homebuyer and financial education workshops; 2,282 individuals 

that received credit counseling. These individuals who completed at 

least eight hours of homebuyer education training and received 

counseling of over an 18–24 month period, improved their credit 

scores by 100 points, decreased their debt by over $5,000, and increased their savings by over $7,000. 

Twenty-eight Native Hawaiian families collectively saved 

$69,000 toward a down payment and closing costs in the Homestead Individual Development Account Program; and $123 million 

in mortgage loans have been made to serve Native Hawaiian families through Hawaii Community Lending. 

NAHASDA funding has been instrumental in helping our Native 

Hawaiian families achieve economic self-sufficiency through homeownership. With the ongoing economic and housing crisis that we 

have encountered, we see an extraordinary opportunity to dedicate 

these funds to address the diverse housing needs of our families 

and promote self-determination through the establishment of a 

comprehensive work plan, to not only assist first time homebuyers, 

but also the hard working families forced to live on the beach, 

multi-generational households renting together to offset extremely 

high housing costs, and beneficiaries aspiring to building a foundation for wealth through aquaculture, agriculture, ranching and 

business development. 

With this goal in mind, we see potential opportunities for 

NAHASDA funding for development of affordable transitional, 

rental, rent-to-own, multi-family, and self-help housing units to 

structure a broad pathway for our families to achieve and sustain 

the dream of homeownership that is in-line with our cultural values and traditions. 

Opportunities for NAHASDA funding increases opportunities for 

Native Hawaiian youth, their families and their grandparents to 

achieve and sustain economic self-sufficiency through homeownership on aquaculture, agriculture, and pastoral lots located on Hawaiian Home Lands. 

Implementation of loan products by CDFIs to further assist Native Hawaiian families overcome barriers to accessing credit necessary to become financially qualified to secure and sustain permanent housing and obtain financing for home purchase. Opportunities for NAHASDA funding, as far as leveraging local, state and 

federal resources dedicated to increasing and sustaining homeVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:51 Dec 11, 2012 Jkt 076305 PO 00000 Frm 00066 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\DOCS\76305.TXT JACK
63

ownership while simultaneously promoting self-determination 

through implementation of local food and energy initiatives. 

As you can see, and we can feel, NAHASDA funding has helped 

change habits, improve lives, and better our people so we can build 

healthy communities for our future generations. With the reauthorization of NAHASDA through Senate Bill 65 we will have that opportunity to do even more with our people to ensure that we fulfill 

the vision of our Prince Jonah Kuhio as carried forth by you, Senator Akaka and Senator Inouye, and to the rest of our congressional delegation there. 

Mahalo nui loa for the opportunity to share my mana’o on behalf 

of Hawaii Community Assets, but moreover the thousands of Native Hawaiian families we have served over the years. 

On behalf of my own ohana, aloha nui, mahalo piha for being in 

Washington DC for us. Senator Akaka, we rejoice in your homecoming and we pine for those left in DC. 

They will miss that senator whose name began with the letter 

A and ends with the letter A, who because he comes from Hawaii 

I’ve been told, ‘‘ah, you’re from Hawaii. Your senator is Mr. Aloha.’’

So until we can replace your pono in Congress, the absence of 

your aura of aloha certainly will be missed. Mahalo. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Filimoeatu follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF KEHAULANI FILIMOEATU, BOARD PRESIDENT/CO-FOUNDER, HAWAIIAN COMMUNITY ASSETS, INC. 

Aloha Honorable Senator Akaka, Senator Inouye, and Staff: 

My name is Kehaulani Filimoeatu. I am Board President and co-founder of Hawaiian Community Assets, Inc. a nonprofit HUD approved housing counseling agency and emerging Native CDFI that assists low- and moderate-income communities 

secure and sustain permanent housing with a particular focus on Native Hawaiians. 

I speak with you today to share my manao about the need to reauthorize 

NAHASDA through S. 65, which will ensure equal access by all indigenous peoples 

of the United States to funding for the purposes of financing affordable housing activities and housing related community development activity as consistent with the 

purposes of the Act. NAHASDA funding has played a key role in our organization’s 

history, but more importantly it has enriched the lives of thousands of Native Hawaiian families who have received our services, achieved the dream of homeownership, and continue to work toward self-determination. 

Organization History 

Hawaiian Community Assets, Inc was founded in 2000, on the island of Maui, 

with the charge to create a community development financial institution that would 

address the housing needs of Native Hawaiian individuals and families. Our mission 

is to increase the capacity of low- and moderate-income communities to achieve and 

sustain economic self-sufficiency, with a particular focus on Native Hawaiians. HCA 

supports permanent housing, culturally-relevant financial education, and asset 

building programs to achieve its mission. 

Our particular focus on home ownership stems from a philosophy which roots 

itself within the organization and every aspect of our work. This philosophy, known 

as, Kahua Waiwai espouses the basic philosophy of ‘‘A Sense of Place.’’ The home 

is viewed as a foundation (Kahua). Upon this foundation is built the family’s spiritual values, teachings, and cultural traditions (Waiwai). It is the spiritual value of 

the home and its surroundings that provides stability and the opportunity for families to build a secure future. Opportunities that help stabilize family life help to create a more stable community. Thus, it can be said that home ownership encompasses more than just the purchase of a house—it is an investment in the future. 

A strong foundation, if built properly, will serve generations to come. 

Program Areas 

HCA has two long-standing program areas—financial education services and community lending—that drive the organization’s comprehensive approach to achieving 

its mission. 

64

Our financial education services program include homebuyer and financial education workshops, individualized housing counseling, including foreclosure prevention services, and training and technical assistance to help community-based organizations develop and implement culturallyappropriate financial education using our 

Kahua Waiwai: Building a Foundation of Wealth© curricula. 

Our community lending program, known as Hawaii Community Lending, has experience originating mortgage loans on and off Hawaiian Home Lands and currently 

provides loan packaging services, micro-loan products, and matched savings accounts to assist Native Hawaiian families secure and sustain permanent housing. 

We have submitted a Homebuyer and Financial Education Program Report with 

our testimony that highlights the impacts of the organization’s homebuyer and financial education program during the Fiscal Years of 2007 through 2011 made possible, in part, by NAHASDA funding; however I would like to take the opportunity 

to highlight key pieces of this Report. 

NAHASDA Funding 

HCA has provided services as a HUD approved housing counseling agency and 

Native CDFI for more than six years under grants and contracts with the State Department of Hawaiian Homelands and as a sub-recipient (under DHHL) of HUD Native Hawaiian Block Grant (NHBG) funds made possible through the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act (NAHASDA) of 1996. 

NAHASDA funding has assisted HCA to:

(1) Establish itself as the largest provider of homebuyer and financial education 

services and products for Native Hawaiian families statewide;

(2) Leverage funding from local, state, and national sources to enhance community development of Hawaiian Home Lands, primarily for homeownership;

(3) Secure partnerships to increase the rate of homeownership for Hawaiian 

Home Lands Lessees; and

(4) Enhance its capacity to create a continuum of service in the realm of housing counseling with the goal of providing Native Hawaiian families with the 

necessary education and tools to move from the beach to the biggest investment in their lifetime—a home.

In particular, since 2006 HCA has assisted Native Hawaiian families under the 

Home Ownership Assistance Program with becoming financially qualified to purchase homes and access mortgage financing in the following Hawaiian Home Lands 

Developments:

• Lanai 

• Kekaha 

• Villages of Lealii 

• Kaupea Phaes I, II, and III 

• Waiehu Kou IV 

• Hoolehua 

• Kanehili Phases I and II

HCA has leveraged funding for its work in providing financial education services 

and products from two of the largest national rural community development 

organizations- Rural Community Assistance Corporation and Rural LISC as well as 

the Federal Administration for Native Americans to expand its mortgage origination 

services and establish a youth financial education program that has served more 

than 930 Hawaii youth residing in low-income communities with age- and culturally-appropriate financial training. 

In 2008 HCA formed an exciting new partnership between HCL and Bank2 Native American Bank to increase access to mortgage capital for beneficiaries of the 

Hawaiian Homes Commission Act. The partnership allowed HCL to utilize 

NAHASDA funding to originate the section 184A Native Hawaiian Housing Loan 

Guarantee program; a mortgage product specifically designed for Native Hawaiians 

on Hawaiian Home Lands. The partnership and implementation of the new 184A 

loan program resulted in HCL seeing a 367 percent increase in mortgage financing 

available to Native Hawaiian homeowners from FY 2009 to FY 2010 and the highest 

volume of financing made available by HCL in a single year since its inception. 

NAHASDA funding has allowed HCA the opportunity to work with families in a 

variety of contexts, including through self-help and private developers, county housing agencies, DHHL, and special populations such as the Kalapana community displaced by Kilauea lava flows and Niihau immigrants on Kauai. 

NAHASDA funding has been a primary source of building the capacity of HCA 

to expand its services to address the diverse housing needs of our Native Hawaiian 

65

families including homeless families living in transitional shelters, low-income 

homebuyers, homeowners at-risk of foreclosure, and families engaging in financial 

education activities together. 

Program Outcomes 

The following key outcomes of HCA’s Homebuyer and Financial Education Program would not have been possible without NAHASDA funding as a foundational 

piece of implementing the organization’s Homebuyer and Financial Education Program:

• 3,465 individuals graduated homebuyer and financial education workshops;

• 2,282 individuals received credit counseling;

• Individuals who completed at least 8 hours of homebuyer education training 

and received counseling over a 18–24 month period

—Improved their credit scores by 101 points from 540 to 641; 

—Decreased their debt by $5,012; and 

—Increased their savings by $7,003;

• 28 Native Hawaiian families collectively saved $68,677.35 toward down payment and closing costs in the Homestead Individual Development Account Program; and

• $123 million in mortgage loans have been made to serve Native Hawaiian families through Hawaii Community Lending.

Potential Opportunities 

NAHASDA funding has been instrumental in helping our Native Hawaiian families achieve economic self-sufficiency through homeownership. With the ongoing economic and housing crises, we have an extraordinary opportunity to dedicate these 

funds to the address the diverse housing needs of our families and promote self-determination through the establishment of a comprehensive work plan to not only assist our first-time homebuyers, but also the hard working families forced to live on 

the beach, multi-generational households renting together to offset extremely high 

housing costs, and Beneficiaries aspiring to build a foundation for wealth through 

aquaculture, agriculture, ranching, and business development. 

With this goal in mind, potential opportunities for NAHASDA funding may include:

• Development of affordable transitional, rental, rent-to-own, multi-family, and 

self-help housing units to structure a broad pathway for our families to achieve 

and sustain the dream of homeownership that is in-line with our cultural values 

and traditions;

• Increasing opportunities for Native Hawaiian youth, their families, and their 

grandparents to achieve and sustain economic self-sufficiency through homeownership on aquaculture, agriculture, and pastoral lots located on Hawaiian 

Home Lands;

• Implementation of loan products by local CDFIs to further assist Native Hawaiian families overcome barriers to accessing credit necessary to become financially qualified to secure and sustain permanent housing and obtain financing 

for home purchase; and

• Leveraging of Local, State, and Federal Resources dedicated to increasing and 

sustaining homeownership while simultaneously promoting self-determination 

through implementation of local food and energy initiatives.

As you can see, NAHASDA funding has helped change habits, improve lives, and 

better our people so we can build healthy communities for our future generations. 

With the reauthorization of NAHASDA through S.65 we will have the opportunity 

to do even more with our people to ensure we fulfill the vision of the late Prince 

Jonah Kuhio carried forward by you, Honorable Senators Akaka and Inouye. 

Mahalo nui loa for the opportunity to share my manao on behalf of Hawaiian 

Community Assets and the thousands of Native Hawaiian families we have served 

over the years. 

Malama Pono. 

Attachment

66


413b1.eps

Homebuyer and Financial Education 

Program Report 

April 2012 

The following report was developed by Hawaiian Community Assets (HeA), a 501(e) (3) 

nonprofit I-IUD approved housing counseling agency and Native Community 

Development Fimmcial Institution, dotumcnting the results of its Homcbuyer and 

Financial Education Program between Fiscal Years 2006·2011. Funding for the program 

was in part provided by Native Hawaiian Block Grant CNHBG) funds made possible 

through the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determiniltion Act 

(NAHASDA) of 1996. The data included in the report was I::olh:cted and managed 

through HCA's HUD approved client management system, Home Counselor Online. 

ApriiZ012© 
67


413b2.eps

Organization History 

Founding 

Hawaihm C\l-mnnmity Assets, h~ (HCA) 

was founded in 2000, on tbc island of Maui. 

with tbl! charge to creme: Ii community 

dev~lopment financial institution (CDFI) 

thllt would addmss the hOllsing needs of 

Native Hawaiian individuals and families. 

Arter iniually focllsing on fonnation of a 

bunking institution, RCA eventually settled 

on it mortgage broker op(!filtion within the 

e:dstingnonprofit as the most efficient we 

of its capital msOliI'ccs. While del/eloping 

lending programs for construction and long-term morr~s forllse on HaVlUiilm Horne 

L:mds, HCA staff also develOped it unique (United Statc,~ D!."pamncntofHousing IIJld 

Urban Dewlopmcnt) HUD apr-fove-oJ homeowncr$hip and financialliteraey curriculumKahua Waiwai: Uomebllyer Edition© _ adapted from standard HUD and Native 

American curricltium to reflect local culture and values. 

For its lending program, HCA opened UII (office in Honolulu aud adopted th", trade name, 

Hawaii Community Lending (HCL). By mid·2002, HCA was offering a fllily illtcgmted 

program. Services included: outreach, training ill fiuaneiallitcraey and horrn:ownership, 

counseling for debt reduction, credit repalr lind saving. mul. acccs;; to cOMtruction ami 

mortg~ge kKtns. rn uddrtioll to thes~core$ervlee,~, HCA was providing important 

complemerl:nry services - forfarnilies. teohnical as'Si&tance ot! working through 

gove.llmcnt processes mW the complexities ofhavlng a home built, and forrommnnitills, 

assistallce organizing to better address exiemnl barriers to successful community 

developmellt. 

In lnly, 2006, HCA moved its principal office from Maui to Honolulu in order to better 

serve families across th~ entir~ stlil~. 

Today, HCA maintains its primary goal of increasing the. RUCcc.'IS rate mnong Native 

Haw.. ... iians pursu.lng borne ownership. This goal is al:-eomplil;hed by providing a 

tXlmprernmsivc program Thatlnclndes o"'fl!loch, financial education and homeownership 

training, indiviclualized counseling, ~ access to asset building progrnm, loan packaging 

scrvi .. c:s. and micro-loan products. 

Mission 

HCA is a 501 (~) (3), nonprofit HUD approved housing counseling ngcm::y find enlerging 

Native CDR, The organiz~tion's mission is to increasc the capacity oflow- and 

moderate-incomc: communities to a~hieve and sus\lIin economic ~~lf-~uf£iciel1cy, with a 

panil:ular foclIS on Native HlIWlliillns. 
68


413b3.eps

HCA suppOrtS pOtmMent housing, cullUtally"rcle\l~m financial education, a:u(i !lsset 

building progrnms to iwhieve its misswn. The organization's pardcular focus on home 

ownershlp stems from I!. philosophy whkh lOots itsclfwitllin the organization and every 

asp-.."ct orill!: work. This philosophy, known es. Kaliua WailVai espoU$Cs the bask 

phi;ooophy of "A Sense. of Place, ~ Tile home 15 \'i.cwed II>: lI. foundalio!l (Kahua). Upon 

tms fuilildatlon is built the famity's spirimnl values, tcm:hings, and culluml Iroditionl; 

(Waiwci). It is the ~pirituaJ value of tl1e home;md its surrmmdings that provides stability 

and the opportunity for familiru; to build a secure future. OpportUnities that help stabilize 

family life help TJ:I create a more stable community. Thus, it can be said that home 

ownership encomp~sses more than juSt lhe purcha!:e of a house - it is an Investment in the 

fuMe. A strong foundation, if built properly, will ~erve generntions to comt'_ 

NAHASDA.FIl,Udi..!l.s 

RCA h;;.s provided services for more than su. yean; under grnnts and contracts w!th the 

Slllw Dl;pat'ornen! o;Hawaihm HomelllrNS (DHHL) and as u sub-recipient (under DHHL) 

of HUD Native Hawciiun Bb::k Grunt (NHBG) fUads made possible thrMgh the Native 

Am!lrican Hom;ing Alilij:stanre and Se!f-Determina'.ioIlAcl (NAHASDA) of 19%. With 

suppon ofNAHASDA rJnding HCA has: 

(I) Established itself as the lill'gest provld~r of home buyer and financial education 

services and prOdUClS for Native Hawaihm families statewide; 

(2) Lever~ged funding from loc:al, stnte, and n.tional sources to enhance communiI)' 

development ofHllwniian Home Lands; 

(3) Secured pllrtnershipsto increase the mte ofhorneownership for Hawaiian Home 

L~nd~ ~ssoos; and 

(4) Enbam.:ed i~ e!lpacity to =tc llcontimUUll. of ser~ice!n the realn: ofllousiug 

cOllilseling with the goul of providing Native Hawaiian famiIies with the 

ncce.~sary education ~;)d tools 1.0 mol'c from :he wac!: 10 the bIggest investment in 

their lifetime -ll. home. 

EstalJlishrJd ifscifas tIle largest provider of horne buyer alldjiluUJclal education 

services and product.sfor NaliM HawaimnfmniJies statewi&. Wim NAHASDA 

funding, HCA bas maintuined itselfil.$ the largest provider of home buyer education 

and counseling ~ervices under the DHHL and Office of Hawaiian Affilirs Home 

Ownership Assistance (HOAP) progrom. III pmticular, NAHASDA funding bas 

allowed for delivery ofllomcbuycr education ¥'orksl\ops. individoolized cou.."lseling. 

matched savings fur down payment and closing CQs~, ami mongt\gew:l.gll1uulll.llllal 

!oa.'l plli:lmgirJg ~!lNiCC8 from its 4 County-booed offices on Oahu, M1UIi, Blg Island, 

and Kauai. Since 2006, RCA has ~sistcd Natlve Hawaiian faI~ilics with mongnge 

financing ill the following Hawaiian Home Land!l Devdopmcnts: 

• L~nai 

• Kekaha 

• Villages ofLealij 

• Kaupea Phaes r, II, and III 

• Waiehu Kou IV 

• [looJehua 

• Kanchili Phases I ;<r.d rr 
69


413b4.eps

Leveraged/undillgfrom local, .~tat(J, mm national sources to enilarwe community 

development oj Hawaiiall Home Lands. The organization has leveraged funding for 

its wOl'k in providing financial education scrvicc~ urn! products from two of thc 

hugest national rural community development organizations-Rural Community 

Assistance Corporation and Rural USC (Local Initiatives Support Corporation). 

I-ICA has also leveraged Federal Administration for Native Americans to expand its 

mortgage origination services and eslubli~h a youth fimUleial education program that 

has served more than 930 Hawaii youth residing in low-income communities with 

age- and culturally-appmpriate financial training. 

Secured partnerships to increase the rate oj homeownersfl!p for Hcru'afiall Home 

Lands Lessees. In 2008, HCA fanned an exciting new parmership between HeL and 

Buill Native American Bank to increa~1'l acce.% to mortgage capital for beneficiaries 

of the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act. The partnership allowed HeL to utiliZe 

NAHASDA funding to originate the. 5e.ction 184A Native Hawaiian Housing Loan 

Guarantee program: a mortgage product specifically designed for Native Hawaiians 

on Hawaiian Home Lands. In addition, NAHASDA funding has allowed HCA the 

opportunity to work with families in II. variety of COlltexts, including through self-help 

and private .:levelopers. county housing ngencies, DHHL, and 5pcciul populations 

such us the Kulapana community displaced by Kilauea lavlI flows and Niihau 

immigrants on Kauai. 

Enhunced its capacity tu creale a 

continuum ofservice ill the reahn 

ojlwusing counseling wilh the 

goa! ofprQ~jdillg Native 

Hawaiianjamilies with the 

necessary education and tools to 

mo~'efrom tile beoch to the 

biggest i,,~estmr!/lt ill t1lCir lifetime 

- (l home. NAHASDA funding 

lUIS been u primllfY source of 

building the capacity orI-lCA to 

expand its services to address the 

diverse hansing needs of our 

Native Huwaiian fumilics. In particular. the ongoing housing crisis has led to the 

organization developing foreclosure prevemion, youth and family financial education, 

and rental housing and homeless oorvices programs over the course oflhe last 4 years. 

With a intimate understanding of our communities, HCA is not only ~bJe to see tbe 

various necd~ of communities, but aho potential solutions that can be brought 

together in a comprehensive service delivery model to increase the rates of families 

securing and sustaining permanent housing. 
70


413b5.eps

Program Model 

Progrnm AreJ.l~ 

HCA h..'\S two p«lgram are.15 - fil11m::wl education ,<:erV:Ice.~ And community lending - &.at 

drlve die OI'gunizatiou's comprehenslw apprO<.1.ch to achieving its miss-ior.. 

>~iil1:if~)~~ttred ¢~ifus~fing '.-; '(Retller/Pre:iP;jst~Purcwa.s:~,,'- ,.'; .: _.0, -. ,,-' .. 

J "'FOreoIJSute,P.rev~tihn) '-·'.~c",,,"±+~-,:c,c·, c";,,',' "",'.:","". ,"-' 'inri!lllig-Ilfij;f~cli.-rikl -: . .':: K~ct:~i4i.Jj'hg'-PnJ~i:~~;i"; ,,',':' ," --;:~'i~j,St1pd~,_ ,-'i".· ... - _'",,_' .. ,,1, - " -':.,' , 

, ", ;., .> .::. - '.-,:: '.~l" j- ,',~, 

Hnmebuver apJ:l-.f.jgallcial Education Warkshop§ 

HCA's homt.l)uyer and financial education work~hops seck to cngag!;l the entire family in 

the home buying process in a cuhurally-approprlate manner. The I-day, 8-bour 

wor:kstmp~ cover leswns 0:1 hOllselKlld economics, family values and savings goals, 

buying versus renting Ii home, money management. credit and credit reports, qualifying 

fer a m~ge, rhe home ol.lyingprocess, and slINiving a fimmcial crisIs. TI'!e 

workshcps. are provided forfreeeverymont'lln undersem:d, rural communities PIl OullU, 

Muui, Kalla!, and Hawaii Island. The workshops regularlyfearure local credit unions, 

insurance providers, and oth~rparlll~rs offel'ing fimmcial products specific to thr. needs of 

our families, 

Indjvjdll!l!iru Cgunseling 

HCA cncaurnges imlividuals: who attend its homebuyer and financial education 

workmopsto sign upfer free individlllllizt:d housing counseling, In 2011, the average 

DHHL homebtlyet took part in 5.08. bours of ~mfividualizcd prc-purchase counseling and 

2.951IolJl'S of post"pt'rch;,se counseling. As ru;nlred hy I-IUD, IlCA coUllseiors follow a 

ilefim::d qualIty control process wIlen engaging families ill too sessi:ons which lnclut1es (I) 

rovicw of the houseilold budge!., (2) completion of r. fuumcin! mmlysls, (3) devel(lFm~nt 

or review ora cu!ltomizcd financial actiOtl plan, and (4) referrol to approptintl!. asset 

buildingservicllS and product.~ to addres~ the client's diverse housin,g needs. 

Loan Pnckagiu[,l 

With 10 years eXperiCllce providing loan :.:ervkes on Hawaiian Home Lands, HCA's 

Icndingprogrolm, HCL, hus u proven tr~clc rllcord of assisting families achieve thp. drllam 

ofh_omeow!let~hip. Since the progr~m was cstQbli!:ihed, HeL has originated more than Sx 
71


413b6.eps

in purcha50 lIud refiuunce morlguge IOMS. Cunently, HCA provide!; loan packagIng 

~crviccs for USDA 502 Dirccl Loans lO assist hQlUebuyers enrolled In self·Jl~lp pfOj~fs 

on Huwailall HOille Lmds. 

Micro-Loan Products 

Through the BeL progrMl., the Ofgani"l:atkm ()f'fers secured C~edit Builder miero-ltlanli ill 

low-inc¢l11.e individuals It) help improve credit I!nd build sa\ings. The secllrt:d loan~ Me 

low-principal and hlIVe fixed interest rateS with repayment periods ranging from 6-24 

months. Thongh II leehnicnlly a loan Prod\lct, tbe Credit Builder micro-loans function 

more like "forced savings" vehicles in that HCA provides the collateral without actually 

louniug the nloney. Once n program participant "te-pays" their loan in-full they not only 

improve their credit but they nlso receive Iheir money back, minus Ihe intere.~t whiGh 

goes to serve the next frunily with n micro-Jonn. 

A!!Sct Building P!"ogmms 

HCA ir.lpkmcnts various MSetbuildir.g programs tofurther its rrJss\¢I1 in building the 

economic sclfwSufficiency of iIldiviclllnls und fElInilies throcgh home ownerShip. In 

particllUu:, HCA !ems clients to the Hawaii P;lmily Finl\llCe Project's Haw,lii Jndlvjduul 

Development Ac(;ount administered by t1J,~ Council for Native Hawaiian AdW1nc-ement 

(CNHA). HIDA OffeI;$ Hawaiian homebuyerSl\ 6: 1 match on sayings up to $2,50Q for a 

total of S17,500 to cover down payment aad ¢lcsiflg costs f()r homes on or off HawaIIan 

HomeLands. 

RCA also ndmlnisters its own matched iIlIving 

programs. Its Youth MA TeI-I S:tVlngs program 

provides yoolh, 13-24 wJth n 3:1 mmch on ~avingl! 

up 10 $100 forpurchnse ofa l~ng,·term gool rekl.ted 

to jobk-areer tining. hOU!ling, educmtion, or small 

business d~velopment. Its Renters MATCH Savings 

progl.1\1U provides homeless individunl$ with up to a 

5: 1 match on savings up 10 $500 10 SfX;ure and 

sustain reutn! housing. The programs are moo;l.eled 

ruter the I·]omestend Individunl Development 

Account progrrun. HCA established In 2007 In 

purtnership with CNHA and Df-nIL 

Finally, HeA partners wi.!h CNHA to offC!"wurking 

fnmilies and individuals with free ~l!.):' p~cpaTatiilll to 

access Child and Earned Income Tax Credi~, the 

largest anti-poverty progrum ac1rninistttc:c1 by the 

Federnl govenuncnt, yet the most underutilized. Additional referrals nre mace to selfhelp housing opportunities, frcc life insurance 6rough Mass Muuml, and savings 

ilceounl:i with localimnks lind credit unions. 
72


413b7.eps

Program Results 

Homcbuver and Fillllndal EduE:~tiol! 

RCA has nSSlSled mere :..ian 700 families malize the dream ofhoJTIe{lwnership. Ir. 11 

yClIDI of operation, HCA hll~ pro~i.dcd homebuyer edllCir:lonand illdividuniizecl 

co;1rlse1ing to more tlmn 8.000 prospective homebuyers. 

More specjflc~lly. between Fiscal Years 2007 aod 2011, HCA trainecl3il65 individuals 

through its homebllyar and financial edu~alion workshops and engaged 2,232 inoividualll 

in credit counseling (sec Table below for more infonnation). Clients who nttende(i HCA 

wDrksh0Pl' and took part in 18-24 months of individualized credit coulls~ling (1) 

identified s~vings goals, (2) inereased theiT use of budgeting tools, and (3) inr.roased their 

knowl!:dge of how 10 read credit reporn illld improve tll::ircrcclit scores. 

As the foreclosure crisis started to have significant impacts on our Hawcii fllmilies ill 

2008, IleA I:Ulm:h~d II cnropaig:l!(l pr(lmote Its foreclosure. mitigation services fulkrl?'Cd 

by a pilot pl"Qi()\.'1 in 2010 to serve homeless families livinll in tr.lnsitional shelters with 

high rates of Native Hawaiians. The campaign and project have resulted in HCA 

expanding its services to all low-income cortmlUnities across tll~ state. 

47 

Betw~n Flsctll Ye;.;rs 2007 and 2010, HCA clients who received II minimum ofS hours 

or homeb-l,I),et and financial education training aIld participated in individualized credit 

counseling OYe)' n perIod of 18-24 months: 

• Improved their credit scores by IIJ 1 poin(s from 540 to 641; and 

• Decrensed their debt by $5,012; 

Incrcasad their savings by $7,OC13, 
73


413b8.eps

In Fiscal YeO! 201 1. RCA clients who 

received a minimum of 11 hours of 

homcbu),cr and fU1l1ucilil education 

trnining ~nd partidputcd in at l;;:u~t 5 

hours ofindividullliz::d credit counseling 

ovcr the 12-month period: 

• hnproved tiJeir credit scores 

by 32 points: 

• Decreased their debt-toincome rntio by 6 points from 

34% to 28% ; and 

• Increased their savings by $4,904,60 

Mortgage QrigilFltign:mel LmL.1 Packaging 

HCL was esmbllshed as thestate's first non-profit mortguge broY..er, Net re'/enU~3 c:arncd 

through the pIogmm suppert RCA's sltifewlde homebltyerand financial education 

programs so they CUll be pr-ovided rorfree. 

Since inception, HeL h:ls provided more than SI23 million in mongage loan 

originations, Of the mortgage loans origin.'Ued! 

• 90% !lave been made to familie~ on Haw~iian Home Lands; 

• 35% lI!we been made to First-Time Homebuyers: and 

• 42% have been made to low- or modcrate-in::omc fumilie~. 

The following Table providel; ~n overview of the SlICC:!SS: of HCL bi!twren fhcnl Yems 

2007 and 2010 .,--_.,.,," , ,,. , '. , ,JiY,20,06;f.\7 . :,FY 2007,:08 FY.2008·09. _. FY;2009.;-ro--~, 

Amount (5) of $14.5 million $16 milllon $6.4 million $23.5 million 

Mortgage LOAUS 

Provided 

% of Loans to 25% --1'1% 28% 66% 

First-Time 

Homebll'ers I 

% of LOMS to 67% 79% 89% 99% 

Families-on 

Hawaiian H(llM 

Lands 

Avemge.Sales $263,015 $190,664 I $299,818 S258,242 

Price of Home 

Today, HeL c(lmmits itself to a vision of providing a~cess to capital to those most in 

need through micro-loon products and loan packaging ~erviccs, The housing needs of our 

Native Hawaiian fumines are diverse, allowing thh viJ;ion to b::st address those needs 

with flexibility, innovation, and community f,uidan::a" 
74


413b9.eps

Mutch Savings for pown Puyment und Clo~ing Costs 

The progl1lm ullowed Huwuiiun Home Lauds Undivided Interest Lessees to enron for a 

IDU1i:imum 24 months with a requirement of completing homebllyer education training 

and individualized l::{ltIn~elingto receive a 3:1 matcil on snving5 up to $2,500 to covcr 

down Pll)ment and clolimg costs. Ovcrall. 19 fumiUcs gruduut.ed from the p,ogrum, 

savlnga total 01$52,372.04, 9 falnilies v.ho were unable!Q close-on their loans during 

the progrom pllriod were r-eferred 10 CNHA's new ['Inl.'.oaii Family r-inance P:ojecr. HIDA 

program (see Table below for more jnformation). 

The results ofthcprogrumcor.rum fullt low-income fmr.ilies enroned in the program; 

• built long-term savingll habits and dt:Crcru;cd unnecessary spending overtime; 

• can and wll! !:ave wher. properly Incentivized, and; 

• IlIf! rnornlikely to save above [he program's maximum match savings amount 

of $2500 when they are simllltanooll~ly Cllgllgcd in individualized fimwcial 

counseling. 
75


413b10.eps

Potential Opportunities 

mver5C I-Iam;Il'I[N!l!;'.;ffi 

NAHASDA fund!ng has been im:trumental in helping our Native Hawaiian f'lImiliI2 

achieve economic self-sufficiency lhrough homeow!'le!Ship. With me ongoing economic 

and hOU!ling crises, we have an extraordinru'Y DppOI1Unity 10 dedicate these funds to the 

address the-diverse housing needs of our ramHies and promote self-determination through 

the establishment of a comprehensive work plan to not only assist our :rJt~Hime 

homebuyers. bill also the hard working families forced to live on the bench, multigenerntionai ilollsehQlds ~ntilJg together to offset e):tremely high honsing CogL~, and 

Beneficiaries aspiring to build a foundation for wealth through aquaculture. agriculture, 

ranching, and business development. 

Witt this goal in mind. potential opportunities fer NAHASDA ftmding may iDduckl: 

• Development of affordable traru!itiOIlllI, rental, rcnt·tQ.owt:, multi.frunily, &!Ul 

5elf-help housing units to structure II broad pllthway for our femmes to achiew 

and Sllstain the dream afhameownership that is in·line wilh our cultural values 

and trllditlon,~; 

• Increasing opportunities for Native Hllwllihm youth, their families, and theif 

grandparents to achieve and sustain c¢()uomic self-sufficiency through 

homeowner$hip on aquaculture, agriculture, and pUlitorullots located (lll Hawaiian 

Home Lands; 

• L"llpleme'Jltation ofloan products by 1000.ai CDFIs to. further assist Native Hawaii:m 

families overcame barriers to accesrung credit ne.:essary to become !inancialiy 

qualified to secure a;d sustain pemanent hau~ng and obtain financing for bome 

pllfChnse; and 

• Leveraging of Local, S~, and Federal ReSQUrGe5 dedicated to increa:>iog and 

stlstaining homcewIlCIShip while simultaneously promoting self·d~termin-ation 

through implementation of local food and ellcrgy initiativ~3. In parti¢uJar; 

• National Mortgage Settlement: Approximately sn million dedicated to 

Hawaii homeown~rs forprindpal rt:du~lion, refinancing, one-time c~sh 

payment, public education campaign, and HUD approved housing 

enur.ation and counseling to prevent foreclosure. 

• Hawaii Famil)' Ff1tallce Project; $3.1 millicn pilet project fundeu by the 

US Department ofTreasul)" adm.!ni~tered hy the-Council for Native 

Hawaiian Advancement, and delivered by HUD hou&ngcounscling 

agtmci~ to ~ncn:!ase the hom~ownership r.ales of low- and modcrntc· 

income Hawaii families through the dell very wfrcc homebuycreduc:utilln, 

individualized counsellng. tax preparation lIS~istancc, and matched savings 

fO)' dt;lwII payment, closing ~ost.~, and debt reduction. 

• Local FoQd and Energy lnilfotivel>; The Hawaii Slate Department of 

Bu~iness, Economic De\'e!opmcnl, ami Tourism currently administers n 

fund dedicated to the implememation oileca! food aod energy initiatives. 

The fund has been established through a $1.05 retention fcc 01. oil 

companies fOT every barrel of oil imported into Hawaii. 
76


413b11.eps

Sununary 

C.;mc1usioll 

RCA's HomctJUyer and Fimmdal Educatioil 

Progrmn Report highlights the lmpilctS ofth;:: 

OIgunization's homebuycr UlU! fimmdul 

education progrnm during the Fiscal Years of 

2007 and 2011. Th~ organization's 

comprehensive service delivery model was able 

to be created and implemented with fundillg. 

from DmIL and NAHASDA as well as Rurlll 

Community Assistance Corporation and Ruml 

LISe. 

NAHASDA ftmdmg hus ussi:>1cd HCA to: 

(l} Established ilJ;dflis the Jllfge~t providerofhomebuyer Il.nd financial c;ducntion 

~ervk:cs and prodUClS for Native Hawaiian families ~talcwirle; 

(2) Leveragt} funding from local, state, und lIatiQn~1 SIlUrct:ll to euhance 

community davelopment ofHaw"ilan Home Lands; 

(3) Se~\'" partnerships to increase the rate ofhomcownership for Hawaiian 

Home umds Lessees; lind 

(4) Enhance its capacity to creat<: a continuum of service in the realm of housing 

counseling with the gmll of providing Native Hawaiian families with the 

necessal1'edu-::ation and too!s to move from Ihe beach to the bigg\..'S! 

investment .In their life6no - a nome. 

The following key program outcomes W\lllld not bave been p{lssible withOtJ, I'IAHASDA 

funding as a rollmlalional piec;t: of implementing the ol"glUli~ation's Homcbuyer and 

Pinilncial Education Program: 

• 3,465 indivhluws gmduuled homebuyer and fiulUlcial educ:ation ,vor}:shops: 

• 2,232 individuals received credit cO\m~cling; 

• Individuals who completed at lCilst 8 hours ofhomebuycr education trnining 

and rcc:eived credit cOllllllding over a 18-24 month period (1) improved their 

credit soores hy !OJ points from 540 to 641, (2) d~C::ClU\.:d their debt by 

S5,012, QT1d (3) incrusoo Iheir savin.g8 by $7,003; 

• $123 million in mortgage!oans have been rrnlde to serve Nmi~ Hawaiinn 

families through Haw.aii Community l.ending; and 

• 28 NlI.tive Hliwaiiam fumilk:s oollectivcly saved $68,677.35 tow.U"(J down 

pfl)'mcnt and o;;irn;ing cmts 1n the Homestead Individual Development A~~ount 

Progmm. 

To ~ddress the diverse housing needs of our Native r·lawaiian p~opl~, potential 

opportunities for NAHASDA funding mo.y hlclude: 

• Davclopmcm of affol"dable transitional. rcnlul. l"Cnt-lo-own. muILi-farnily, and 

self-help housing units to s.tructure a broad path .... 1!.y for our fnmili(:S to achieve 
77

The CHAIRMAN. Mahalo nui, Kehau, for your testimony and for 

your support as well of the bill, S. 65. 

And for all of you, your commendation and the need of 

NAHASDA, and how important NAHASDA is to the Hawaiian 

Home Lands programs. So mahalo nui loa for that. 

First, Kali, I want to ask you. You served as Chairman for the 

state Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, as you mentioned, before NAHASDA was enacted. 

In your view, how important is Title VIII of NAHASDA, and accessibility of Section 184A loans to the Department’s ability to meet 

the federal mandate to return Native Hawaiians back to the land? 

Mr. WATSON. Senator, thank you for the question. 

I think without a doubt, the ability to obtain financing, especially 

as you relate it to some of the other loan products like the HUD 

247, some of the others, as well as the cost of those, versus the 

process used under the NAHASDA approach is very critical, because just those few dollars that you can save by using one loan 

product versus the other, and then what made or broke the ability 

of that family to get a loan, to get a house, to have a place for their 

family, I think that without a doubt all these loan products are important. 

We need to continue the use of this particular loan package as 

provided under NAHASDA. I would say that the refinancing portion, which allows the families to get better, I guess, monthly payments as a result is also critical, because it frees up funds for other 

things that the families might need to do, such as get an education, 

support the kids, feed the family. 

So without a doubt, Senator, I think that with the continuation 

of this loan product, as well as its reauthorization, it will make an 

impact, a good impact. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Kali. 

Robin, does the council have any additional policy or recommendations that would strengthen Native Hawaiian communities, or enhance the state Department of Hawaiian Home Lands’ 

ability to carry out the purpose of the Hawaiian Home Lands Commission Act? 

Ms. DANNER. Thank you for the question. 

Absolutely, Senator. You know I’m never at a loss for any policy 

recommendations. 


413b12.eps
78

Two things come to mind when you say how do we advance forward. The first decade, Department of Hawaiian Home Lands and 

the beneficiary community has spent our time figuring out what is 

this NAHASDA. First decade in terms of reporting, and getting to 

know HUD. Getting to know a whole new division at HUD called 

ONAP, that most beneficiaries and most officials at DDHL didn’t 

know existed. 

So it’s been a good decade for learning for the Department, and 

engaging with HUD, and then implementing consultation policies. 

So I would hope that the next decade, and with the influence of 

the Committee to encourage that beyond the current administration HUD and DHHL, we have an awesome Deputy Assistant 

Rodger Boyd who gets us. He fully embraces the parity issues that 

we face. 

We have an awesome Deputy Director at Hawaiian Home Lands 

that for ten years has worked with us. So we have really knowledgeable officials right now have in the Obama Administration and 

the Abercrombie Administration. 

What I would like to see solidified beyond those administrations, 

the focus on empowerment and capacity building being squarely invested in the people, that the next ten years be spent implementing 

that self-determination in the homestead leaders and the organizations beyond the state government officials and employees. 

So that what we have known over the last ten or 15 years, I 

think I’m on my eighth chairman of Hawaiian Homes, Kali, you 

were my first. The administrations will come and go, but it’s the 

land and the people that end up remaining. 

And so I think my advice would be for the next decade for state 

government, for Federal Government to join together to now implement stronger the self-determination policies of NAHASDA, so that 

the beneficiary leaders can come to the table, join and bring their 

awesome solutions and we can move more quickly to catch up on 

the 80 years that we have not had resources. 

And then my second and last policy recommendation, Mr. Chairman, I know it has a small budgetary impact, but perhaps for the 

record I would like to say it. I hope that we can work together to 

get parity with HUD 184 in one more step, the final parity issue 

would be to extend the same language that Indian Country has for 

their 184 program, which is the allowance of that mortgage product 

on or near trust lands. That would be an extraordinary parity issue 

that would not only enhance Hawaiian Home Lands, but truly enhance the State of Hawaii across the state fee simple and non-fee 

simple land. 

So I put that in answer, Mr. Chairman, for the record, perhaps 

at a future time that we can work on that policy issue. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Robin, for your mana’o 

and your response. 

Kehau, first, I want to commend HCA for its commitment to financial literacy, as well as credit counseling that you do. Financial 

literacy is key, really key to empowering our committees to lifting 

themselves out of poverty. 

I notice in your testimony that people have completed your training and participated in your counseling services on average moved 

79

their credit scores over 100 points from 540 to 641. That’s tremendous. 

Now, can you give me concrete examples of what moving a credit 

score from 540 to 641 means to the average individual in terms of 

expanded options? 

Ms. FILIMOEATU. To many of those people it meant that you now 

could afford to get that home. And for many of our people that we 

have worked with, it was something that they did not really quite 

understand. And we realize for our people to understand finances, 

we had to take it to a different degree. 

We knew that Hawaiians historically knew how to handle and 

take care of everything. You know, we used, one of our topics was 

the baby luau that everybody knew came one year, oh, you going 

have big luau. And that no matter how poor or rich you were, you 

always had the necessary components to get there. 

They thought that having to save money up for that was going 

to be a hard thing to do. And part of what we needed to let them 

know that saving was all about how you spend. And that you know 

how we all get together and everybody go and gather little by little. 

You don’t go get all the opihi one time, but you go month after 

month, so that by the time it came one year old, you had enough 

for everyone. 

When our people could address those kinds of issues at a more 

familiar level, that, oh, the light went on, and they knew how to 

follow through. We found that very prevalent as well with youth 

people that we had NAHASDA funding to come up with our youth 

curriculum now. I think that is going to be very pivotal for our people in getting their dealings to become more self-sufficient and selfdetermining. 

I think we have been able to use these fundings to teach, or to 

at least make them aware of how very akamai they were in the beginning. It’s just the context and how we speak and how we talk 

and the terms we use about financing. A lot of Hawaiians they 

kind of go with that, but if you can bring them forward and give 

them the tools, they certainly can make good use of that. 

So we mahalo you and we mahalo the Native Americans for this 

act that they started, and we have been now able to take advantage of. 

The CHAIRMAN. Mahalo, thank you for your mana’o. 

Now I would like to ask Congresswoman Hanabusa for any comments or questions she may have. 

Ms. HANABUSA. Thank you, Senator. 

Let’s begin with you, Kali. The example you gave was very moving and you said that it was using NAHASDA funding. 

Were you Director at that time? Because you predate the year 

2000 when it was originally Title VIII that was authorized. 

Mr. WATSON. No, I wasn’t the Director at that time. After I left, 

I went over to OHA and worked on the ceded land settlement. That 

was way back. 

Ms. HANABUSA. I remember. 

Mr. WATSON. It was very frustrating, but I’m so happy to see the 

thing has finally been settled. After that one-year stint there, 

which was an interesting experience, but in any event, we started 

a non-profit, and we got some money from the Federal Home Loan 

80

Bank to fund this replacement home project involving 25. And it 

is one of the most challenging projects I’ve ever worked on in my 

life. It’s also one of the most rewarding. We’ve had some really interesting experiences. 

I remember one instance where I was talking on the phone with 

this homesteader from Papakolea who was standing in her garage. 

And she started screaming because her house fell down. 

You know, a lot of the other homesteaders we work with, their 

houses had either collapsed or in terrible disrepair. 

When I was a Director we did a survey and we found over four 

to 500 houses throughout the homestead areas needing that kind 

of replacement, not just repairs but replacements. So fortunately 

the Department was willing to work with our non-profit, provided 

us funding through the NAHASDA funding, which we used to replace these homes. We partnered up with a lot of other organizations, but that was a real good example, I think, where like I’m 

saying, NAHASDA is not just about money, it’s about people. And 

I think that has to be kept in mind when you think or talk about 

and try to justify this particular funding source. 

Ms. HANABUSA. Thank you. I just want to say, Kali, as somebody 

that was there when you were negotiating the settlement, that I 

thought you had a very good settlement. Too bad it didn’t go 

through, but people should know the hard work and the work that 

you put into that. 

Robin, you know, as always, we are looking at very similar parts 

of the bill. And I was also intrigued by the self-determination aspect of it. But as you know, in that NAHASDA statute, the reference in the Congressional finding basically talks about self-determination in terms of federal assistance to meet these responsibilities be provided in a manner that recognizes the right of Indian 

self-determination and Tribal self-governance, by making such assistance available directly to the Indian Tribes, the Tribally-designated entity that the authority similar to those accorded Indian 

Tribes. 

In addition to that, as you know, under Section subtitle B of the 

Section 2 of the NAHASDA statute talks about self-determine 

housing activities for Tribal communities. And it goes on in how it 

determines that self-determination. Self-determination is such a 

term of art for us over all of these years, especially with Senator 

Akaka’s bill, that it takes on different nuances. 

So when you reference the self-determination portion that you 

would like to see incorporated and applied to Native Hawaiians, 

are you looking at it in terms of being in line with like the preamble statement, including Native Hawaiians, and subtitle B, 

which begins in Section 201 of the NAHASDA statute? 

Ms. DANNER. Thank you, Congresswoman. I have been privileged 

in 1995, 1994 during those years, I was the equivalent of the 

DHHL chairman for a large multi-Tribal housing authority. And so 

I had the privilege of working with Jackie Johnson and other leaders around the country in putting together the original 1996 

NAHASDA. 

Self-determination was the starting point of our conceptualizing 

that legislation in making sure that it was self-governing by the 

people. So for Hawaiians, my interpretation of that is that we have 

81

a very unique relationship in that we have a double government 

layer, Federal Government and state government that passes 

through NAHASDA, we named DHHL when we did the amendment in 2000 and TDHE, Tribally Designated Housing Entity, because it was the most efficient and proper thing to do given the historical relationship for the state government to have to facilitate 

and administer. 

Then you can do sub-recipients. So the comparables to the 1996 

NAHASDA for Indian Country and Alaska Natives, is the homestead associations. They’re long-time organizations that are democratically elected. That is what I’m talking about in terms of the 

application of self-determination policy, the federal policies, capacity building of empowerment. We need to take our next ten years 

of investing in those homestead associations, those homestead leaders so that they become the sub-recipient TDHE’s and doing the 

types of housing that Kali is talking about, and that Kehau is 

working on, but more importantly so that the homestead leadership 

does not go away, has the opportunity to gain incredible networking and insight through their native counterparts on the continent by engaging in the Native American Housing Coalition on 

the continent, and working with Indian Country directly. 

My view is that the state government had to spend the first decade figuring out compliance and what is this NAHASDA. And now, 

like HUD, the state and the homestead associations to spend the 

next ten years implementing the big SD in NAHASDA, and investing in the actual collective people themselves. 

I am absolutely not uncomfortable comparing the homestead association to TDHE that is a pueblo that might be in New Mexico 

or one of the colonials in California, because the homestead associations, some of them are 30 years old. These are not pop-up, 

start-up, self-governing organizations. They have long tradition and 

protocols. And they are laser-beam focused. No matter what’s going 

on around them or in the state, they are laser-beamed focused on 

their homestead areas, just as a pueblo or a Tribe is laser-beam focused. 

So, yes, I am suggesting that the next ten years we get our arms 

around, our heads around together state government, Federal Government and the community based organizations and homesteads 

start to get our arms around how and what the federal policies of 

self-determination are intended for. 

Ms. HANABUSA. I don’t see former Representative Mike Kahikina 

here, but when Mike was in the House, we actually passed, it 

ended up being a Senate bill I introduced, which basically afforded 

the self-determination—well, actually a role more for homestead 

communities. And it went up as an amendment to the Hawaiian 

Homes Commission Act. As you know, it fell into a black hole 

somewhere and never went any further. 

It seems like, that if it’s amended into the NAHASDA, it would 

accomplish exactly what, sort of along the same lines that we’re 

looking at to try and give the homestead communities a more sense 

of self-determination, and that’s one of the reasons why I wanted 

to clarify. But I understand clearly what you’re saying, and I appreciate it, because I do believe that that is exactly where we must 

go. 

82

Kehau, you do amazing work, and I don’t really have a question 

other than to tell you that I know that the major success is in the 

refocusing, and I love the baby luau analogy, because that’s exactly 

what has always tripped up our families. And that’s another reason 

why I think the provision of this bill, the refinancing aspect of it 

is also so critical, and a major component. 

But I would just like to end by saying that as you are all aware, 

because Senator has been there and Senator Inouye has also been 

able to—they have both been able to massage the budget, that 

though we lost authorization in 2004, that it has been able to continue. And in 2011 it was a clear example of what can happen 

without the authorization. And that is that I could not amend the 

appropriation measure to put in, back in the funding for Native 

Hawaiians under NAHASDA, and the reason being very simply because the way it works up there, our rules prohibit it if we don’t 

have the authorization. So until then, you’re at the mercy of the 

appropriators. 

I hope that as part of this record, the real significance of the authorization is felt by everyone here and whoever you may know or 

whatever letters you can get out there, it is absolutely critical, because they don’t have to do it. 

I share your thoughts, Kehau. Senator Akaka has been such an 

amazing advocate, and as he retires and you folks get him home, 

assuming I don’t come home with him, because it depends, it’s really very important. So thank you all, very much. 

I’ll turn this back to the Senator. 

The CHAIRMAN. Mahalo nui, Colleen. 

My last question to the panel is you discuss at length the federal 

trust responsibility to Native Hawaiians. As community advocates 

and service providers, what more needs to be done to better meet 

the federal trust responsibility and advance the federal policy of 

self-determination and self-governance where Native Hawaiian 

people are concerned, looking at the history that we have until now 

in Congress, self-governance seems to be one of the final steps in 

bringing the Native Hawaiians indigenous people together from 

Prince Kuhio’s time of getting them homes. Many organizations 

coming together to try to bring them together in spirit. And the 

last thing that need to be done is government-to-government relationships. And that’s what we’re seeking to do. 

My question to the panel is what I just asked. Comments, Robin? 

Ms. DANNER. Senator and Congresswoman, as a member of the 

Native Hawaiian Roll Commission that was passed by the Hawaii 

Legislature, Act 195, I think what that portion has been done, a 

step forward for the state to embrace and to say to the world and 

especially to Congress to the State of Hawaii it fully embraces a 

government-to-government relationship. I think there are three 

things that are next on the next generation that you pass the torch 

to, and that first and foremost is for this year to pass the Native 

Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act, even in a streamlined 

version, especially due to the collaboration with our Hawaii State 

Legislators. 

So passage of government-to-government recognition, as you 

have taught us, we are federally recognized people, 150 statutes 

are based on our Native status. But the unfinished business to adVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:51 Dec 11, 2012 Jkt 076305 PO 00000 Frm 00086 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\DOCS\76305.TXT JACK
83

vance the trust relationship is for the Federal Government to once 

and for all deal with us and address us in a government-to-government fashion. 

The second area that I think is not as difficult to do on an administrative level would be to have our Hawaii Congressional delegation help and encourage the Obama Administration and officials 

to give flexibility to terrific officials like Deputy Assistant Secretary 

Rodger Boyd to have a more direct federal relationship with the 

people versus having a federal-to-state relationship. That has been 

small time, but necessary, but now we need to advance the federal 

relationship between HUD, between Department of Energy, Department of Interior, Office of Native Hawaiian Relations needs to 

come directly and start to engage so that we can learn about the 

federal trust relationship and that they, in their agencies, can 

learn, so that we don’t have this federal-to-state relationship get ingrained. 

Third, I think that one of the most powerful ways that our Hawaii Congressional delegation in partnership with Alaska and New 

Mexico and the other 35 states that have Native peoples is to continue doing, as Director Tuell has encouraged us to do over the last 

year, is to remind those legislators that we are the third Native 

peoples, and when there is an Indian energy bill, or when there is 

an education bill, that means Native energy, that means Native 

education. Just as your staff worked on the Native Class Act, and 

had Native Hawaiians included in it. We have got to keep educating and continuing that mantra that with trust lands, our Native solutions are very similar, if not exactly the same, and so to 

extend parity I think, Senator, you hit it on the head that word 

parity is a lifelong journey that the next generation of Hawaiian 

advocates, we will teach them to come up and to continue that 

story. 

The CHAIRMAN. Kali. 

Mr. WATSON. Senator, I think I’m more of a developer mentality. 

There’s no doubt about the need for the recognition of governmentto-government between the groups. But I think from a pragmatic 

standpoint, in developments, I think some of the difficulties have 

been because of the limitation on funding, limitation and changes 

that are coming about, and the different federal departments. 

For example, rural development, with the changes in the populations, for example, Kapolei, they’re going to lose their designation 

as rural area that would qualify for a lot of different funding that 

is available through that agency. 

So I think we need to change the laws at the federal level whereby instead of designating a rural area, rather designate it as trust 

lands that are available through these different departments. 

Similarly, with respect to the rural utilities under RD, it’s been 

very difficult in the existing structure to access some of the funding 

or loan products. For example, the ones that Anahola is using in 

partnership with KIUC to develop a ten and 12 megawatts PV 

farm. To try and access that fund, if you are not a rural utility entity versus a homestead association, it’s almost impossible. So I 

think there needs to be an analysis of the existing legislation or 

laws to make changes that provide that accessibility, so that our 

people, through their homestead associations or other types of entiVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:51 Dec 11, 2012 Jkt 076305 PO 00000 Frm 00087 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\DOCS\76305.TXT JACK
84

ties, can access the fundings to do the developments, the economic 

engines that will allow them to not only build and start businesses, 

but more importantly educate our own people. It’s very, very critical. 

I can go on and on about all the different federal laws that can 

be changed to help our people, but I think NAHASDA is a step. So 

we truly support and appreciate the work that you’ve done in the 

past and look forward to seeing you at home. 

The CHAIRMAN. Aloha. 

Kehau, do you have any comments on this question? 

Ms. FILIMOEATU. I would agree with everything they have said 

so far, including na’i, we should take back the land maybe. 

[Laughter.] 

Ms. FILIMOEATU. I’m not sure how much we can leverage with 

that. But I know you’re doing wonderful, and our wahine over 

there, mahalo. 

The CHAIRMAN. Mahalo for your mana’o. It has been really great 

to hear from you. What you said for the record will be very, very 

important to what we’re doing in Congress. So I want to thank you 

folks, mahalo nui loa for all of this. 

I want to say thank you to the third panel, and extend mahalo 

to everyone for participating in today’s hearing. Your mana’o helps 

building the record on the importance of U.S. Senate Bill 65, and 

demonstrates how it is an effective and necessary piece of meeting 

that trust responsibility to Native Hawaiian people. 

Finally, I want to say a few words about my top legislative priority, U.S. Senate Bill 675, the Native Hawaiian Government Reorganization Act. I want to again thank the Hawaii delegation, because this bill has been important to all of us, and to Hawaii, and 

we continue to work together to move it forward. Native Hawaiians 

was mentioned the only federally recognized Native people without 

a government-to-government relationship with the United States. 

And we want to bring that parity forward. And my bill provides the 

Native Hawaiian people the same mechanisms of self-government, 

self-determination that other Native peoples currently enjoy under 

existing federal law. Its passage is long overdue, governmental parity for Native Hawaiians, American Indians and Alaska Natives, 

all of the first nations of the United States is pono, it’s the right 

thing, and we’ll bring that about with your support. 

I will continue to work to ensure that the Native Hawaiian people have their right to self-governance honored. 

So this is what we look forward to. I want to commend 

NAHASDA and HUD for your work in helping the country, and the 

people of our country out, and also the Native Hawaiians as well. 

And as you’ve heard from all of our witnesses, NAHASDA is very, 

very important to our future here in Hawaii. 

I also want to thank my staff from the American Affairs, Indiana 

Affairs group here, both our Loretta Tuell and also our minority 

side, also mahalo for coming; and for the staff of Senator Inouye, 

Hanabusa, also Hirono for helping out with this hearing today from 

my staff as well. 

I am happy at what has happened, and to tell you that in our 

Committee of Indian Affairs we’ve had good relationships with the 

minority side, and Rhonda Harjo has been a Deputy Staff Director 

85

and is here representing that side as well for Senator Barrasso 

from Wyoming who is a Vice Chair of this Committee. 

And my staff, I think you should know the names of them, Loretta Tuell, Lenna Aoki, Jade Danner and Christine Cardoza. And 

from my staff here in Hawaii Joan Ohashi, and Jesse and Keone 

and Daphne. And so to all of them, mahalo nui loa for your work 

in bringing this about. 

But this has been an important area, and you’ve really helped us 

with the record, and that’s important to us and our work in Congress. 

And finally I want to say mahalo nui loa for the support you’ve 

given me in all of the years, and it has been a real privilege and 

an honor to represent you and the people of Hawaii of the United 

States of America, and really the rest of the world. And I thank 

God and ask for his blessings upon all of you, your families, your 

organizations, our great state and the governments here of council 

as well, and the United States of America. 

We are so grateful for the opportunities we have had. So mahalo 

nui loa. 

This hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 12:48 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] 

(87)

1There are approximately 566 federally-recognized Indian tribes and Alaska Native villages 

in the United States, all of which are eligible for membership in NAIHC. Other NAIHC members include state-recognized tribes eligible for housing assistance under the 1937 Housing Act 

and grandfathered in to the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act 

of 1996, and the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands that administers the Native Hawaiian 

Housing Block grant. 2 US Census Bureau, American Indian and Alaska Native Heritage Month: November 2011. 

See http://www.census.gov.

APPENDIX

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHERYL A. CAUSLEY, CHAIRWOMAN, NATIONAL AMERICAN

INDIAN HOUSING COUNCIL

Introduction 

Dear Chairman Akaka, Vice Chairman Barrasso, and distinguished members of 

the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs. I am submitting this written statement in 

support of S. 65, the Hawaiian Homeownership Opportunity Act of 2011, on behalf 

of the National American Indian Housing Council (NAIHC). My name is Cheryl A. 

Causley and I am the Chairwoman of NAIHC, the only national, tribally-established 

non-profit organization dedicated to advancing housing, physical infrastructure, and 

economic and community development in Native American communities throughout 

the United States. I am also an enrolled member of the Bay Mills Indian Community in Brimley, Michigan, and the Executive Director of the Bay Mills Indian Housing Authority. I want to thank the Committee for the opportunity to submit written 

testimony in support of Hawaiian Homeownership Opportunity Act of 2011. 

Background on the National American Indian Housing Council (NAIHC) 

The NAIHC was founded in 1974 and has, for 38 years, served its members by: 

providing invaluable training and technical assistance (T/TA) to all Native Americans and their housing entities; providing information to Congress regarding the 

issues and challenges that Native American communities face in terms of housing, 

infrastructure, and community and economic development; and through working 

with key Federal agencies to address these important and, at times, vexing issues, 

and to help meet the challenges. 

The membership of NAIHC is expansive, comprised of 271 members representing 

463 1 tribes and tribal housing organizations and, since May 2008, the Department 

of Hawaiian Home Lands. (DHHL), the sole recipient of the Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant (NHHBG) program and the entity responsible for carrying out affordable housing activities for low-income native Hawaiian families who are eligible 

to reside on the Hawaiian home lands. The primary goal of NAIHC is to support 

Native housing entities in their efforts to provide safe, decent, affordable, culturally 

appropriate housing for Native people, including native Hawaiians. 

Brief Summary of the Problems Regarding Housing in native Hawaiian 

Communities 

As this Committee knows, and as the Chairman is keenly aware, the Hawaiian 

home lands are located in various geographic areas of the islands, usually in rural 

areas, and a significant portion of the home lands contain topography that is problematic and costly for housing development. Like the remote locations of many Indian reservations on the mainland and in Alaska Native villages, there is a lack of 

basic infrastructure and economic development opportunities are difficult to identify 

and pursue on the native Hawaiian home lands. 

The poverty rate in Indian country is exceedingly high at 25.3 percent. 2 These 

same conditions exist on the native Hawaiian home lands. The employment and economic development challenges exacerbate the housing situation just as they do in 

Indian Country. Native Hawaiians face some of the worst housing and living conditions in the country and the availability of affordable, adequate, safe housing falls 

far below that of the general U.S. population. In Hawaii, according the Census, 17.4 

88

percent of native Hawaiians are below the poverty rate compared to 9.4 percent of 

the total population in Hawaii. 

To further compound this problem, the cost of housing in Hawaii is inordinate. Hawaii ranks first in the United States for median home value at $560,200, compared to the national average of $197,600 according to data from the Census for 

2008. In 1996, HUD issued a report indicating that native Hawaiians have the highest percentage of housing problems (49 percent) of any group in the United States. 

It is not an overstatement that native Hawaiians experience the worst housing conditions of any group in the State of Hawaii. They also make up approximately 30 

percent of Hawaii’s homeless population. 

According the Department of Housing and Urban Development, 68 percent of lowincome native Hawaiian households have a housing obstacle that includes such 

things as affordability, overcrowding, structural quality, and availability, or any 

combination of these housing issues. For very low-income native Hawaiian households (those whose income does not exceed 50 percent of area median income), the 

needs are more severe, with 75 percent of households in this category facing at least 

one of the housing obstacles identified above. 

Conclusion and Recommendations 

It is against this backdrop that the passage of S. 65, the Hawaiian Home Ownership Opportunity Act becomes so critically important. The Native American Housing 

Assistance and Self-Determination Act of 1996 (NAHASDA) was amended in 2000 

by the Hawaiian Homelands Homeownership Act of 2000. A new title was added 

to NAHASDA, Title VIII, Housing Assistance for Native Hawaiians, that authorized 

the Native Hawaiian Housing Block Grant (NHHBG) program to provide affordable 

housing opportunities and activities for low-income native Hawaiians eligible to reside on the Hawaiian home lands. S. 65 would amend Section 824 of NAHASDA to 

authorize appropriations for the NHHBG program through fiscal year (FY) 2015. 

NAIHC unequivocally supports this Section of S. 65. 

NAHASDA was enacted to provide Native American communities with new and 

creative tools necessary to develop culturally appropriate, safe, decent, and affordable housing. One such tool is the Section 184A Loan Guarantees for Native Hawaiian Housing program, known as Section 184A. The Section 184A program was established by Section 514 of the American Homeownership and Economic Opportunity Act of 2000 (P.L. 106–569, approved December 27, 2000), amended the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 (12 U.S.C. 1715z–13b). This program 

provides a 100 percent guarantee to lenders that make housing loans to native Hawaiian borrowers eligible to reside on the Hawaiian home lands. 

Native Hawaiians eligible to reside on the Hawaiian home lands have historically 

had limited access to private mortgage capital, due in large measure because lenders were understandably reluctant to do business on land that cannot be encumbered or alienated, such as the home lands. The Hawaiian home lands are held in 

trust. This program offers lenders a 100 percent guarantee in the event of a default. 

This guarantee makes private financing of home mortgages by private financial institutions possible, which would otherwise not be feasible because of the unique 

legal status of Hawaiian home lands. Through this program, eligible native Hawaiians can obtain a mortgage with a market rate of interest to purchase and rehabilitate, or to construct a single family home on the Hawaiian home lands. 

Section 3 of S. 65 would authorize this program through FY 2015 and make the 

program more flexible by including refinancing as a permanent eligible use of the 

guaranteed funds. 

The 100 percent guarantee provides the incentive for private lenders to market 

loans to this traditionally underserved population. Private financing is used to cover 

construction or acquisition costs, while Federal dollars are used only to guarantee 

payment in the event of a default. Individual native Hawaiian families who are eligible to reside on the Hawaiian home lands, the (state) Department of Hawaiian 

Home Lands (DHHL), the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, or private nonprofit organizations experienced in the planning and development of affordable housing for native 

Hawaiians are all eligible Section 184A borrowers. NAIHC enthusiastically supports 

this amendment to the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992. 

Section 4 of S. 65, would amend Title VI and Title VIII of NAHASDA to include 

the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands as an eligible entity to participate in the 

Federal guarantees for financing housing activities programs that tribes and tribal 

housing entities have participated in since NAHASDA was passed in 1996. Historically, as has been noted, private lenders and investors have been reluctant to do 

business in Indian Country or on native Hawaiian home lands for a variety of reasons, including remote locations, cumbersome procedures related to trust lands, and 

a simple lack of experience lending to this population. 

89

Under the Title VI program, HUD can guarantee 95 percent of outstanding principal and interest on a loan made by a private lender to an IHBG recipient for affordable housing activities. Borrowers pledge a portion of their current and future 

IHBG funds as security for the repayment of the federally guaranteed financial obligation. The 95 percent guarantee has proven to be an incentive for lenders to get 

involved in the development of tribal housing. Section 4 of S. 65 would authorize 

the DHHL to secure a 95 percent guarantee loan based on a portion of the NHHBG 

to pursue eligible housing activities under the NHHBG program. Section 4 would 

also authorize the Title VI Federal Guarantees for Financing Tribal and Native Hawaiian Housing Activities programs through FY 2015. Including the NHHBG program activities as eligible under the native Hawaiian Housing programs is an important amendment to NAHASDA and NAIHC supports this measure without hesitation. 

I wish to conclude this written testimony by thanking Chairman Akaka, Vice 

Chairman Barrasso, and all members of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, 

for letting us express our views and our aspirations. The path to a self-sustaining 

economy is not achievable without a robust housing sector and Native American 

housing conditions will not be improved without the necessary tools. NAIHC and its 

membership believe that S. 65, the Hawaiian Homeownership Opportunity Act, is 

an important tool to provide culturally relevant affordable housing for native Hawaiians. Native American housing programs are not just about constructing houses, 

they are about building sustainable Native American communities—communities 

where health and safety are a top priority and where education can thrive. Together, we can continue the important work of building vibrant Native American 

communities throughout this great country. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CRAIG ‘‘BO’’ KAHUI, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, LA’I’OPUA 2020

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. DON YOUNG, U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM ALASKA

Dear Chairman Akaka and Vice Chairman Barrasso, 

Thank you for organizing the Legislative Field Hearing on S. 65/H.R. 2648, the 

Hawaiian Homeownership Act. I would like to submit the following letter in support 

of this legislation. 

Homeownership is central to the American dream and one that has not been easily realized for many Native Americans. Because Native Hawaiians have an even 

more unique historical relationship with the State of Hawaii and Congress. This bill 

will help Native Hawaiian families and future generations become homeowners by 

reauthorizing critical federal programs. 


413b13.eps
90

In 1921 , Congress passed the Hawaiian Homes Commission Act (HHCA), which 

set aside land in trust throughout the state for Hawaiian individuals with at least 

50 percent Native blood. The HHCA also created the Hawaiian Homes Commission, 

a federal entity to administer the trust. 

When Hawaii became a state, it was given title to these lands. The Federal Government delegated administration to the state but retained the ability to enforce the 

trust and oversee the administration through reporting requirements and enforcement of HHCA. Because of this new responsibility the state created the Department 

of Hawaiian Homelands (DHHL) an agency that was created to replace the federal 

Hawaiian Homes Commission. 

To assist with the mandate of HHCA, Title VIII of the Native American Housing 

Assistance and Self-Determination Act (NAHASDA) was enacted. Title VIII authorizes a housing program for low-income residents of Hawaiian Home Lands. DHHL 

housing projects are focused on homeownership rather than rental properties. Unfortunately, Title VIII funds do not provide adequate funding which is why the Hawaiian Homeownership Opportunity Act is necessary. 

The Hawaiian Homeownership Opportunity Act would reauthorize programs within the Department of Housing and Urban Development that would provide loans for 

Native Hawaiians. Such loans would be used to construct, acquire, refinance, or rehabilitate homes located on Hawaiian Home lands. 

On July 26, 2011 Representative Hirano, Representative Hanabusa, and I introduced H.R. 2648 the companion bill to S. 65 the Hawaiian Homeowner Opportunity 

Act. It is clear that this bi-partisan bill acknowledges the importance of enabling 

Hawaiian homeownership. I strongly support the passage of S. 65 and will continue 

to reach out to the Hawaiian delegation and other Members of Congress to see this 

bill advance. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE OFFICE OF HAWAIIAN AFFAIRS (OHA) 

Aloha Committee Members. The Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA) thanks you for 

taking the time to conduct a legislative field hearing on April 13, 2012 on S. 65, 

The Hawaiian Homeownership Act of 2011. OHA is a unique, quasi-independent 

state agency established by the Hawai’i State Constitution and state statutes to better the conditions of Native Hawaiians (Hawai’i’s indigenous people). Guided by nine 

trustees elected by the voters of Hawai’i, OHA advances the interests of Native Hawaiians and serves as a fiduciary for Native Hawaiian public trust funds and other 

resources. 

One of the ten strategic results identified in OHA’s strategic plan is to increase 

stability in housing for Native Hawaiians. Accordingly, OHA offers the following testimony in support of the Hawaiian Homeownership Act of 2011. 

Native Hawaiians and Instability in Housing 

Limited resources required Native Hawaiians to develop careful land and resource 

management practices to support individuals and society, as well as to maximize 

available resources. Houses were developed with great consideration for their purpose to both the individual and the community. During the period of the Mahele 

in the 19th century, land use and resource management dramatically changed the 

economic, political, and social landscape of Hawai’i. In less than fifty years, development that was focused on economic profits from commercial agriculture operations 

diminished Native Hawaiian control of lands. Traditional Native Hawaiian building 

practices, land use, and ownership were virtually eliminated. These changes fostered the displacement of Native Hawaiians from ancestral lands and contributed 

to the breakdown of traditional kauhale or social housing communities. 

This legacy continues today. Over the past five years, Native Hawaiians have 

struggled with an unprecedented housing crisis. Growing numbers of homeless, limited affordable housing options, and difficult economic conditions are all contributing 

factors to housing instability. 

Census data alone does not reveal the entire story when it comes to housing instability and Native Hawaiians. Census tracts that cover homestead parcels show only 

the successful homeowners that have been able to qualify for and obtain leases. 

However, the remaining beneficiaries who are not able to qualify for leases, and Native Hawaiians who are not eligible for homesteads, have a need for housing as well. 

The definition of housing instability varies, but the term typically encompasses individuals who have difficulty paying rent, spend more than 50 percent of household 

income on housing, move frequently, live in overcrowded conditions, or ‘‘double up’’ 

with friends and relatives. Housing instability can be a risk factor for homelessness. 

(Cohen & Wardip, 2011.) 

91

Limited affordable housing stock and insufficient income are key underlying 

causes of housing instability for Native Hawaiians. Honolulu is considered the most 

expensive metro area in the nation for renters, and the median income for Native 

Hawaiians does not keep pace with the median Fair Market Rent for Hawai’i. (National Low Income Housing Coalition, 2010.) The lack of affordable housing options 

and rising housing costs may push Native Hawaiians into a state of housing instability. 

To support housing stability for Native Hawaiians, efforts must be made to raise 

Native Hawaiian income levels in order to enable Native Hawaiians to afford median home prices and rents. New affordable housing stock must also be created to 

meet the needs of the growing Native Hawaiian population. It is important to remember that stable, affordable housing has positive impacts on a myriad of quality 

of life indicators such as health, public safety, and family cohesion. 

Significantly, Native Hawaiians are overrepresented in both the unsheltered and 

sheltered homeless populations of the State of Hawai’i. Over 2,000 people, or 29 percent of shelter services recipients, were Native Hawaiian. Of those who utilize outreach services, including persons living unsheltered in cars, parks or other public 

places, 27 percent identified themselves as Native Hawaiian or part Hawaiian. 

When heads of households were asked to identify the cause of their homelessness, 

more than half stated that they were unable to afford their rent. (University of Hawai’i Center on the Family, 2010.) 

The Office of Hawaiian Affairs’ Role 

To promote systemic change in housing, OHA’s strategic plan identifies as a strategic result the increase in housing stability for Native Hawaiians. OHA is accomplishing this goal by providing resources to housing and shelter projects and services such as financial literacy and homeowner education. 

OHA has been a strong funding partner in a variety of areas that affect housing. 

Since 2004, OHA has provided over $8.5 million for housing and related services 

through its grants program, including:

• $3 million annually for 30 years to the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands 

as debt service for bond financing to help 20,950 Native Hawaiian applicants 

access affordable housing throughout the state;

• $1.5 million to establish a statewide revolving home loan with Habitat for Humanity to serve Native Hawaiians eligible for housing services;

• $3 million for the Governor’s Homeless Initiative, a shelter on the leeward 

coast, and programs provided by partners including Catholic Charities Hawai’i, 

Family Promise of Hawai’i, and the United States Veterans Initiative; and

• Funding for financial skill building and for renovations and repairs with partners such as Hawaiian Community Assets, Nanakuli Housing Corporation, and 

Hale Kipa.

The Hawaiian Homeownership Act of 2011

The programs that will be extended by the passage of the Hawaiian Homeownership Act of 2011 play a crucial role in Hawai’i housing because they provide beneficiaries of the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands with access to mortgage products, housing development and related projects. 

Significantly, passage of the Act would also effect a beneficial expansion of the 

184A loan guarantee program to include refinancing. Most homeowners with a mortgage take refinancing for granted. However, mortgages for homesteaders are largely 

limited to the 184A program, and as the economy has worsened, many homesteaders 

have found themselves in an unforeseen gap because they do not have the ability 

to refinance. Passage of the Act rectifies this needless disparity between homesteaders and other homeowners. 

Passage of the Act gives the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands access to the 

Title VI program, which allows the Department to leverage future block grant funds 

to finance affordable housing development. Affordable housing development in Hawai’i requires multiple financial partnerships to overcome the high cost of production. With limited access to state funding, the Title VI program gives Department 

of Hawaiian Home Lands an important tool to create stability in housing and be 

an attractive partner for the limited affordable housing development dollars in our 

state. 

Given the block grant program, Hawai’i’s share of Hawaiian Homeownership Act 

funds has consistently been the minimum amount available, despite the high level 

of need and cost of housing in Hawai’i. As the national economy recovers, we look 

forward to continued stability and an increase in the availability of Hawaiian HomeVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:51 Dec 11, 2012 Jkt 076305 PO 00000 Frm 00095 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\76305.TXT JACK
92

ownership Act funds to Native Hawaiians beyond those that qualify for Department 

of Hawaiian Homelands products. 

OHA supports S.65, The Hawaiian Homeownership Act of 2011, and its reaffirmation of the continuing trust relationship between the United States of America and 

Native Hawaiians. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF PAUL P. RICHARDS, PRESIDENT OF THE WAIMA ̃ NALO

HAWAIIAN HOMES ASSOCIATION (WHHA) 

Honorable Senators Daniel K. Akaka, Sr. and Committee Member Daniel K. 

Inouye and Members of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, Aloha kakou! 

Mahalo nui loa for the opportunity to submit written testimony regarding S.65 

Hawaiian Homeownership Act of 2011 as a follow up to the previous legislative field 

hearing held here on O’ahu, Hawai‘i. 

My name is Paul P. Richards, President of the Waima ̃nalo Hawaiian Homes Association (WHHA) a Native Hawaiian Organization (NHO) and a federally recognized 

IRS 501c–3 non-profit entity representing 644 homestead household lessees and 81 

na kupuna residing at Kulana Kauhale Maluhia O Na Kupuna located in 

Waima ̃nalo. 

The residents of the Waima ̃nalo Hawaiian Homes Association (WHHA) sincerely 

appreciate your thoughtfulness and determination in amending the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act (NAHASDA) as identified in S. 

65 which authorizes the appropriations for housing assistance, loan guarantees for 

Native Hawaiian housing and eligibility of the Department of Hawaiian Home 

Lands (DHHL) for Title VI Loan Guarantees. These amendments will certainly open 

the opportunity for our Native Hawaiian population in preparing for homeownership 

and by taking advantage of programs offered through the Department of Housing 

and Urban Development (HUD). 

Our Association has taken positive steps towards financial literacy and ‘‘practices’’ 

within out homestead ‘ohana to ensure preparedness for homeownership begins 

within the ‘‘four walls of their existing homes.’’ Furthermore, ‘‘education’’ is the focal 

and primary pursuit we have instilled within our membership and residents ensuring the future successes are and have been measured by the increase and level of 

skills, techniques and critical thinking progression. For this reason, we have seen 

an increasing multitude of our recent generation prepared for homeownership 

through the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands and others through private 

venues. 

We strongly support S. 65, the intent and purposes proposed and hopefully the 

extension of these programs will continue beyond fiscal year 2015 or at minimum 

reauthorized for every five or ten fiscal years. 

We may not agree with some of the testimonies given during the field hearing and 

was confused with respect to those which did not or were not familiar with the intent of this U.S. Congressional legislation. 

However, we do believe there are independent, fully credentialed organizations 

and individuals besides those who were invited to testify that morning. Within our 

great state of Hawai‘i, WHHA has continued to partnership and collaborate with 

these exceptional entities which have provided the highest quality of financial literacy, homeownership, individual and organization capacity building, debt and financial management services such organizations as HANO, HACBED, Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA)—Hiilei Aloha, NeighborWorks America and Hawaii Homeownership Center offering their programs and services, including independent contractors like Ms. Helen Wai, and Ms. Christine Vallez. We have included services 

provided by Alu Like, Inc. and Hawaii Technology Institute (HTI) whose community 

outreach and instructions helped to improve the level of employability of our homestead residents while increasing their potential towards homeownership. 

Please ensure within the legislation of S. 65 an inclusion and support for such 

organizations and businesses such as these are readily accessible and given equal 

opportunity to extend and continue its outreach in the Native Hawaiian communities. Their records within our community has blessed multitudes of young progressive and education Native Hawaiians the occasion to pre-qualify for homeownership 

loans and the elimination or control of debt accumulation. 

We ‘‘strongly support’’ S. 65 and extend our appreciation and ‘‘mahalo nui’’ to our 

Senators Akaka and Inouye for the thoughtfulness, inclusion and forethought for 

our Native Hawaiian population. 

Our blessings and always best wishes for good fortune, health and prosperity be 

with you both along with your ‘ohana, and fellow Senators of the Senate Committee 

on Indian Affairs (SCIA), staff and supporters. 

93

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SAMSON L. BROWN, PRESIDENT, AUPUNI O HAWAI’I

Aloha Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to offer testimony on the subject matter on S. 65 and/or its predecessor S. 

710 for the betterment of the native Hawaiians. I am a indigenous man, National 

Hawaiian, and a native Hawaiian. I am please to share our understanding in this 

litigation and exploration in the role of Congress in resolving this subject matter 

for the native Hawaiians. We are Aupuni O Hawai’i, a native Hawaiian organization 

whose narrative is for the betterment of native Hawaiians as ascribed in Public no. 

34—67th congress, 42 STAT 108, Hawaiian Home Commission Act 1920, a statue 

at large of the United States of America, hence the law of the land under Admiralty 

Jurisdiction (HHCA). 

The Homeownership Act of 2011 (S. 65) purports funding from the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Act (NAHASDA) under 25 U.S.C. 

4191 et seq. to include the insertion of ‘‘or Department’’ after ‘‘tribe’’ for the taking 

of benefits from the tribes of Native Americans with the misclassification of a set 

mandate for the native Hawaiians Title 2, sec. 202 (7), HHCA to include in this bill. 

I am testifying before this committe on behalf of native Hawaiians whom receive 

unceasing marginalization for the basic fundamental subsistence by the State and 

U.S. Congressional Senators for the representation of the state of Hawai’i. 

My testimony today makes a number of points: (1) A classification of tribe for the 

native Hawaiians and with the intention of ‘‘department’’ leaves one to believe that 

we are American Indians and we are a non-governmental institute with a compact 

trust (P.L. 86–3, Hawaii state admission act, sec. 4) that is operating in disarray. 

(2) The inability to constitute finances by this measure is inaccurate and incongruous in the marginalization of said compact. (3) The define classification of native 

Hawaiians and Native Hawaiians is an ongoing distinction for the state of Hawaii 

to articulate its purpose in the state of Hawaii and I will discuss these points in 

more detail. 

1. A Classification of Tribe for the Native Hawaiians 

The treaty of the Hawaiian Kingdom and the United States is still in existence 

in the HHCA for this committee to ignore is to be blatantly arrogate and capricious 

in its ongoing managerial duty, furthermore to be noted as a tribe is to change an 

established distinct cultural recognized by an international compact for the conditions of our indigenous culture, I object with the intent/insertion of ‘‘or Department’’ 

after ‘‘tribe’’ in this bill to change our compact (HHCA) in the marginalization of 

our benefits to coffers vs the native Hawaiians. Furthermore the deception of 

2. The financial Marginalization of Our Compact 

HHCA, Title 2, sec. 204 and 207, in conjunction with section 4 of the admission 

act and article 12 of the Hawaii State Constitution, we the native Hawaiians continue to see the benefits disseminated by coffers like (CHNA) for the exclusion of 

receiving the full amount versus paltry amounts of funding. We conclude that sec. 

4 of the admission act (P.L. 86–3) on proceeds received by this section should be 

given to the native Hawaiians funds under the Hawaiian Home Commission ACT 

as ascribed in sec. 4 of the admission act (P.L. 86–3) 

3. To Define a Class 

HHCA, Title 2, sec. 201 (7) defines the term ‘‘Native Hawaiian’’ means any descendant of not less than one-half part of the blood of the races inhabiting the Hawaiian islands previous to 1778, whereas sec. 206 restricts the ability of the state’s 

governor to manage and/or operate authority in respect to Hawaiian home lands. 

We also assert that within HHCA that holds Title 3, the Nationals of the Kingdom 

of Hawai’i is placated without Title 2, sec. 201 (7) in HHCA, therefore we are not 

apples in a grove orchard of oranges for we are the soil, minerals, and the bloodline 

to life for this quasi-state (oranges). 

Conclusion 

This measure will cause an increase in poverty for the dissemination of our race 

by means of filtered our sovereign rights and to input egregious mandates to circumvent the betterment of the condition of native Hawaiians on our land by an open 

door policy to all non-Native Hawaiians onto our federal compact with the continuation of filtering monies from NAHASDA to coffers of the state of Hawai’i to services 

away for the native Hawaiians. We can only conclude that a remedy of sort is by 

the court of your peers and on the reelection circuit should the true native voices 

is not heeded by this committee and congress. And like Wounded Knee, we will prevail by means of intersession with the organizations of communities (not S. 2212) 

and the U.S. Congress for the betterment of native Hawaiians. Thank you for the 

94

opportunity to submit this testimony on behalf of all native Hawaiians-at-large before this Committee. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SCOTTINA MALIA RUIS, RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

SPECIALIST, DEPARTMENT OF HAWAIIAN HOME LANDS

Aloha mai kakou, 

My name is Scottina Malia Ruis. I’ve spent the last 15 years serving Native Hawaiians through two Native Hawaiian Trusts: the Queen Lili’uokalani Children’s 

Center and the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands. My expertise and comments 

below come from this service to my people and my continued commitment to the 

betterment of Native Hawaiians’ socio-economic status, educational attainment and 

other elements of well being, to include improved living conditions, which will ultimately strengthen the Native Hawaiian people as a whole. 

Prince Jonah Kuhio never intended to divide the Native Hawaiian people into the 

‘‘haves’’ and ‘‘have-nots’’ when he initiated and ultimately got the Hawaiian Homes 

Commission Act (HHCA) passed through Congress in 1920. Yet, this critical piece 

of legislation does just that. In addition, the HHCA is the foundation upon which 

Native Hawaiians of a specified blood quantum, as defined by Congress and not by 

the Hawaiian people, are allotted/awarded homeownership opportunities through 

the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands (DHHL)—a State governed entity whose 

leadership changes far too frequently for any long term impacts to reach but a few 

Native Hawaiians. This further divides the ‘‘haves’’ from the ‘‘have-nots’’ with under 

8,000 actual homes on Hawaiian Home Lands as of December 2010 and over 20,000 

eligible Native Hawaiians (as defined by the HHCA) on the DHHL wait list as of 

the same period. At this rate, in 100 years (by 2020) only a mere 30 percent or less 

of eligible Native Hawaiians will have been provided with said homeownership opportunities. Needless to say there are another 50,000 DHHL eligible Native Hawaiians that are NOT on the DHHL wait list and at least another 100,000 Native Hawaiians who are not ‘‘Hawaiian enough’’ to be served by DHHL and who some purport to be served by the Office Of Hawaiian Affairs—another State entity that has 

historically leaned toward advocacy vs. programs. Clearly, the need for adequate, affordable, homeownership opportunities for all Native Hawaiians is far from being 

met. 

With specific regard to NAHASDA, as authorized by Congress in 1996 and 

amended in 2000 to include Native Hawaiians—all I can say is—’’Its about time’’. 

However, the fact that NAHASDA Title VIII (with specific regard to Native Hawaiians) has yet to be reauthorized since the original is a poor reflection on the original 

intent of the legislation. All other thoughts aside, I strongly urge the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs to do what ever is necessary to reauthorize Title VIII of 

NAHASDA and ensure a federal funding commitment to those eligible Native Hawaiians as defined by NAHASDA. 

With specific regard to the reauthorization of 184A—the most critical elements 

that need to be considered are as follows:

• The use of the 184A for Refinancing of existing eligible homes, and 

• The use of the 184A for Construction financing with NO interest due and NO 

payment required until the home is completed—realistically, it is impossible for 

a LOW–INCOME family to pay for rent AND mortgage simultaneously.

While there are elements of NAHASDA, HCCA, and services provided by DHHL 

and/or OHA that could be improved to better reach more Native Hawaiians and afford more Native Hawaiians the opportunity of homeownership, the most important 

thing at this juncture is the reauthorization of funding for NAHASDA Title VIII and 

the aforementioned inclusions to the language of 184A. 

Thank you for the opportunity to submit this testimony. I am available for further 

discussion should the need arise. 

O wau me ka ha’aha’a, 

95

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. DANIEL K. AKAKA TO

RODGER J. BOYD

Æ


413b14.eps