The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCOM 0372.082 2024-2026August 14, 2025 County of Hawaii General Plan 2045 S a = n RE: DRAFT 2 i z: - Hearing August 20, 2025 �r c; He Mele komo a he mele aloha no na kupuna o ke au i hala Aloha mai kakou.� Aloha, v = My name is Cindy Freitas and I'm a Native Hawaiian descended of the native inhabitants of Hawai'i prior to 1778 and born and raised in Hawai'i. I am also a practitioner who still practice the cultural traditional customary practices that was instill in me by my grandparents at a young age from mauka (MOUNTAIN TO SEA) to makai in many areas. Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony. I respectfully submit this statement in opposition to Bill 66, which seeks to impose a 60-day deadline on permitting agencies to issue permits for certain single-family and multi -family housing projects, with automatic approval provisions should that deadline not be met. While we fully recognize the urgent need to streamline housing development and reduce delays that hinder the construction of much -needed homes across our islands, this bill raises significant concerns regarding public safety, environmental oversight, and community accountability: 1. Undermines Due Diligence in Permitting Automatically deeming permits approved if a deadline is missed risks undermining the core responsibility of permitting agencies to ensure that projects meet safety codes, environmental regulations, and community standards. Rushing the permitting process may result in oversight errors, defective construction, or environmental harm —problems that are often irreversible and costly to correct after the fact. 2. Insufficient Staffing and Resources Many county and state permitting departments are already strained due to staffing shortages, outdated systems, and high volumes of applications. Imposing a rigid 60-day clock without simultaneously addressing these resource constraints is unrealistic and places agencies in a precarious position. Rather than encouraging efficiency, the bill may incentivize hasty approvals or lead to a backlog of improperly reviewed permits. 3. Erodes Public Trust and Transparency Permitting processes are designed to include transparency and community input, particularly for projects that may significantly affect a neighborhood's character, infrastructure, or environment. A permit being deemed approved simply due to a missed deadline eliminates public participation and transparency, which are essential for balanced and respoiej& elopment.G-Z.gL itef. To: Ref. Date AUG 2 0 202; 4. Unrealistic Effective Date and Confusing Sunset Clause The bill's effective date of July 1, 3000, appears to be a drafting error or placeholder that creates confusion and suggests the measure is not ready for enactment. Moreover, the sunset clause of June 30, 2030, further complicates the timeline and raises concerns about the bill's overall clarity and intent. In conclusion, while we share the goal of creating more housing and improving efficiency in the permitting process, Bill 66 takes an overly broad and potentially hazardous approach. We urge lawmakers to instead pursue comprehensive permitting reform that includes modernization of systems, increased staffing, and improved interagency coordination —measures that enhance both efficiency and accountability without sacrificing public safety and environmental integrity. Mahalo, /s/ Cindy Freitas