HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0110.212 2024-2026June 18, 2025
Hawaii County Council
25 Aupuni St.
Hilo, HI 96720
COUNTY CLERK
COUNTY OF HAWAII
2025 JUN 16 PH 2: 11
Subject: Wireless Infrastructure Association Comments on Bill 24 (Draft 6)
Aloha Chair Inaba, Vice Chair Onishi, and Members of the Hawaii County Council,
P / Count l
bill 2q
004.110
On behalf of the Wireless Infrastructure Association and our members, I would like to begin by
sincerely thanking this Council for the thoughtful and deliberate process you have undertaken
on Bill 24. It is clear that you have worked diligently to listen to the concerns of a wide range of
stakeholders — from residents to public safety officials to industry representatives — and have
sought to reflect those perspectives in the evolving drafts of this legislation.
We appreciate where the Bill stands today and the progress that has been made in balancing
the desire for community character with the very real need for resilient, reliable wireless
infrastructure across Hawaii Island. However, we would like to respectfully raise a few
remaining concerns on behalf of the industry.
Chief among these is the need for a mechanism within the Bill that provides the Planning
Director with the discretion to allow necessary infrastructure improvements that may not
fully align with the prescribed standards, but that are essential for ensuring the safety,
wellbeing, and connectivity of our communities. We know that in certain situations, strict
application of setbacks and other requirements could inadvertently prevent critical upgrades or
placements that improve emergency communications or address service gaps, particularly in
rural and underserved areas. We ask the Council to consider adding such flexibility to empower
the Planning Director to make common-sense decisions in these instances.
We also want to gently reiterate that federal law — specifically FCC regulations — preempts
local governments from basing wireless siting decisions on perceived health effects of
radiofrequency emissions, so long as those emissions comply with federal standards. While
we understand and appreciate the desire to create thoughtful setbacks, it is important that such
setbacks not be established solely on health concerns, particularly within the urban core where
dense and reliable wireless coverage is crucial for residents who increasingly rely on mobile
connectivity for everyday life.
Consider the following:
• Nearly 1 in 4 lower income and minority adults rely exclusively on their smartphones —
not computers — to access vital online services.
45% of Americans who opt out of home internet do so because their smartphone meets
their connectivity needs.
Comm. N 102.1-11
Ref. To: I(RULA V
Ref. gate - UN 18. 2025
• 68% of adults and 79% of children now live in wireless -only households.
A National Association of Realtors article recently reported that 69% of realtors say
prospective buyers now prioritize home connectivity — including wireless — when
choosing where to live.
This reality underscores why achieving the right balance on setbacks is so important. WIA
continues to believe that a standard setback of 120% of tower height represents a fair,
reasonable, and legally defensible standard that will serve both the needs of the community and
the practical realities of providing service.
Again, mahalo for your time, your efforts, and your willingness to engage thoughtfully on this
important matter. We remain committed to being a constructive partner as this process
moves forward and as we work together to ensure that Hawaii Island remains safe,
connected, and prepared for the future.
Me ka ha`aha`a; humbly,
Cyrus Johnasen
Representative, Wireless Infrastructure Association