Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMIN PCPLUED 2026/08/04 (2024-2026) Policy Committee on Planning, Land Use, and Economic Development 28th Session West Hawai`i Civic Center 74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Highway, Building A Kailua-Kona, Hawai`i August 4, 2026 CALL TO The regular meeting of the Policy Committee on Planning, Land Use, and ORDER: Economic Development was called to order at 1:33 p.m., in the Council Chambers, Kailua-Kona, by Ms. Ashley L. Kierkiewicz, Chair. ROLL CALL: Present: Ms. Ashley L. Kierkiewicz, Chair Ms. Michelle M. Galimba, Vice Chair Mr. James E. Hustace, Member Mr. Holeka Goro Inaba, Member Ms. Jenn Kagiwada, Member Mr. Matt Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Member Ms. Heather L. Kimball, Member Ms. Rebecca Villegas, Member Absent& Excused: Mr. Dennis "Fresh" Onishi, Member STATEMENTS The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of business, FROM THE Statements from the Public on Agenda Items. PUBLIC ON AGENDA ITEMS: (There were none.) CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Mr. Clerk,please proceed, thank you. BILLS FOR The Chair directed the Committee to proceed to the next order of ORDINANCES: business. Bills for Ordinances. PCPLUED-28 August 4,2026 Bill 176: AMENDS CHAPTER 16, ARTICLE 1, OF THE HAWAI`I COUNTY CODE 1983 (2016 EDITION, AS AMENDED), RELATING TO THE GENERAL PLAN Establishes amendment procedures for the General Plan, including a comprehensive review every ten years and interim amendments; describes powers and duties of the planning director and planning commissions. Reference: Comm. 968 Intr. by: Council Members Inaba and Kierkiewicz Postponed: July 22, 2026 (Note: There is a motion by Council Member Inaba, seconded by Council Member Onishi, to recommend passage of Bill 176 on first reading.) (Note: Comm. 968.3 from Council Members Ashley L. Kierkiewicz and Holeka Goro Inaba dated July 22, 2026 transmitting General Plan Flow Charts, and Comm. 968.5 from Council Members Holeka Goro Inaba and Ashley L. Kierkiewicz dated July 30, 2026 transmitting proposed amendments to Bill 176, were circulated.) CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Chair Inaba. Motion to Amend: Mr. Inaba moved to amend Bill 176, with the contents of Comm. 968.5. Seconded by Ms. Villegas. MR. INABA: Thank you. Based on the feedback provided by this body at our first committee meeting to hear Bill 176,the amendment; Communication 968.5, clarifies that the Council can adopt the Director's recommendations, as is, adopt with amendments, or reject the recommendations. So that's Section 16-C, and then, we move on to Section 16-D of the bill. Again, clarifying that we can adopt with or without amendments, so that language is mirrored. Then in Section 16-E, clarifies regarding the Planning Director's concerns about minutes not existing for public workshops. But that the Director and the Planning Department submit to Council a complete legislative history report providing a summary of each of the public workshops, any of the topics presented; public comments and recommendations received; and any associated records or materials maintained by the department. Then, clarifying that the pertinent minutes and associated records of any of our committee or official Council meetings be included. So, again,that's to allow one comprehensive document that tracks the whole process once it is complete and adopted or rejected by the Council. Page 2 PCPLUED-28 August 4,2026 Then, the last part,the Director had requested that the Planning Director be granted 60 days to review prior to sending things on to the Planning Commissions. And we have included that. So, changing it from 30 in the bill to 60 days, which was the current process based on the last comprehensive review. So, what is not included in this amendment that the Director had discussed last time, was not requiring the department to come with either the recommendations or a draft report prior to the initiation. Again,that's something that this body discussed, and that's a policy that Council Member Kierkiewicz and I felt should remain as it currently is drafted in the bill. And that allows us some type of direction. When the Director puts out the public notice for initiation of the General Plan, we know what that process is going to look like. It's either the recommendations for slight amendments to the current plan provided, or the draft of the new plan. Again, all of the process for receiving public commentary on those recommendations or that new draft plan or things that may not be included in there can be received through the public workshop period as well as allowing for the creation of that final draft prior to transmittal to the Planning Commissions. So, we did have a conversation, Council Member Kierkiewicz and I. But felt that it's best for us to have a good starting point. And again,this is a Planning Department initiated process. So, we felt it was important to have a good starting point and really give the idea to the public of where we're heading when we initiate a comprehensive review. So,happy to take any questions on this amendment,but do ask for your support. Mahalo. CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you for taking care of those amendments for us. Any questions or comments on the amendment? Okay, seeing none, all those in favor please say "aye." Any opposed? Vote on Motion The motion to amend Bill 176 with the contents of to Amend: Comm. 968.5 was carried by the following voice vote: (Approved) Ayes: Committee Members Galimba, Hustace, Inaba, Kagiwada, Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder, Kimball, Villegas, and Chair Kierkiewicz— 8. Noes: None. Absent: Committee Member Onishi— 1. Excused: None. Page 3 PCPLUED-28 August 4,2026 CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Bill 176 is amended with the contents of Communication 968.5. Thank you. Back to the main motion. Any questions or comments on the bill, globally. Council Member Kimball. MS. KIMBALL: Just since the department is here,I'd like to invite them to weigh in on the changes that we've just adopted; and whether or not they're comfortable with the amendment based on the feedback provided in the last hearing. (Note: At this time, Planning Director Jeffrey Darrow came forward to address the members of the Committee.) MR. DARROW: Aloha, Chair,Vice Chair, and members of the Hawai`i County Council. Jeff Darrow with the Planning Department. Thank you for the opportunity. We really appreciate the amendments. We've been in quite a detailed dialogue about all the different aspects of this process, and we're still requesting a change to Section 16-A,Number 1 and 2. And again, we wanted to talk a little bit about why it's a little difficult for us. When we initiated the General Plan, Planning is not the overall department that has all the input to the plan. We don't just say., well, we're going to create this plan and put all this information in and present a plan. We initiate the plan and we go out for input to all the State and County agencies. We meet with them; we request resolutions from the County Council. And we start to get a detailed direction of which way the plan goes as far as the County direction,not the Planning Department direction. So, it's very important that we have that input so we know what we need to include in that plan. I mean, it would be difficult for us if we end up creating this plan and then we find out that's not the direction that everyone that we're meeting with wants to go with that plan. And again,we wouldn't have any change. But the other thing is,typically, Planning does not create the plan. We end up hiring consultants that we work with to initiate all of the public hearings;the meetings. They assist us on all the input and taking all this information. We do scenario planning. We've taken a look at all the maps. So, this is a tremendous amount of input that goes into this document, and we just feel that it would be very difficult to create a plan right from the get-go without all of this coming in and being part of that original plan that is presented. So, I hope that's clear and you understand what we're trying to get across. It would be a tough thing to do from the Planning Department to create this plan and then go out for everything. CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Council Member Kimball,you still have the floor. Page 4 PCPLUED-28 August 4,2026 MS. KIMBALL: Thank you. I can understand why there might be a hesitation to do it at that point in the proposed timeline in this bill. Because I can see where, depending on the feedback that you got from other folks that you've reached out to, it could go either way. However, I do think it is important for the department to make it clear at some point which way it's going to go before the public outreach starts to happen around the draft. So, I'm not sure exactly where the timing of it is. I can see the point here. I think it's also important to clarify that if it's going to be an amendment to the existing plan rather than an entirely new plan,that there has to be a Ramseyer. That was one of the big debates,right? Between what happened between the old plan and this one. Is it a real clear distinction that this is an amendment rather than a replacement? So, I don't have the solution right now. But I think based on what they're saying, I think they're looking at between now and the next conversation about where that identification of which route they're going to go. I can see where it might be a little difficult to do right at that beginning stage. Thanks. CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. Council Member Hustace. MR. HUSTACE: Thanks Chair. Thanks Director. So, in Section 16-A, (a) 1 and 2. Your interpretation here is that you need to have a plan built before the initiation. That's how you read it, correct? MR. DARROW: At our last hearing, I was trying to get that clarity, whether it's recommendations or whether it was actually a draft plan. It could be recommended amendments to the current plan, or it could be a draft plan that is recommended as a new plan. But yes,my understanding, and correct me if I'm wrong, is that you have to have a plan in place before we go out for a hearing MR. HUSTACE: But in terms of this we would have the past plan in place,right? MR. DARROW: That's if you went with Section 16-A, (a)1-A. MR. HUSTACE: Okay,just stick with A there, because those are recommendations. That's what your concern was about, Section 16-A, 1 and 2. These are recommendations off a plan that already exists ten years prior or around that timeline. How I'm seeing this here, is that you're not creating a plan to initiate the plan; it's that you're taking these recommendations based off the work and engagement with other departments, Council Members, and Administration. Page 5 PCPLUED-28 August 4,2026 I see that's kind of an initial step to then building those recommendations. I don't see it as establishing a whole new document. Because your department is the keeper of the General Plan,right? So, it is housed with you and your team. So, it's really just building off of what past work has been done by staff through the years. So, building recommendations for a new plan, engaging other departments in that collaborative sort of sense. I mean,that's how I read this here in terms of, do we begin the next step and what recommendations have come up through our internal dialogues and discussion with legislators and so forth. And I think that's how at least I'm interpreting it here. So, I'll just leave it at that. Thank you. CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Yeah, and I'll just say,this is why I emphasized during this last General Plan review process, implementation and how we're going to track all of the actions and policies. Because if that is being tracked, you'll have the data being compiled over time that would give you the ability to decide what the next General Plan draft would look like. If it's new, completely new, or if there are amendments because certain actions were achieved in the previous plan. I'm convinced that we need to keep this as is and insure that there is a draft that the community can sink it's teeth into when you're doing initial outreach. I think that's very important. I think you folks can do it. If I can do a draft with LRB (Legislative Research Branch) in like six months,your department with all of its resources can come up with something to socialize with community. Council Member Inaba. MR. INABA: Thank you. Director, I hear where you're coming from. I do want to emphasize that the outreach that we do to other agencies whether within the County or with the State can be done prior to Section 16-A(a)taking place, right? I mean,that's the goal here, is that you also had almost ten years to see how the current plan is played out. So as we head into that ten-year mark, we can do consultation; we can get feedback from other agencies. And if it's your man`o as the Planning Director, based on the feedback provided,that we need a new plan, well, we can do our best to come up with that new plan to share. Nothing is to say that the workshops and the feedback that's provided doesn't significantly alter that before you transmit that draft to the commissions. But again, it gives the public and the Council a solid idea from the beginning what we're working with,rather than opening up and initiating a comprehensive review and having people just come and share whatever they think. But we don't even know if it's going to be a new draft plan or just recommendations. So, I'm not deaf to what the concerns are, but I do want to point out that none of the outreach that you're concerned can't be done prior to the ten-year mark. Page 6 PCPLUED-28 August 4,2026 So, I think, as Council Member Kierkiewicz pointed out, we need to keep it as is. So, with that, I'll yield and ask for our colleagues' support moving this bill forward as was amended today. Thank you. CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Any other comments or questions. Council Member Galimba. MS. GALIMBA: My comment is,perhaps a little bit of wordsmithing on that particular section might be useful. Because I think it could be stated in a way that's a little more clear, because I hear that maybe either in the form of amendments or a draft. And I think what you're trying to get at is a direction, not the entire document. And so,I think some wording to make that a little more clear might be something that could be helpful. So,just wanted to throw that out there. CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Thank you. That's very valuable. Thank you. Council Member Inaba. MR. INABA: I want to restate for the record. I stated it at our last committee meeting, but I'll restate it now. The intention of this specific section, is that we do have the actual language there. So, it's the recommended changes to the current plan which is Section 16-A, subsection(a) 1. A or a draft new plan subsection (a) 1. B. CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Like we just had. MR. INABA: Yeah, and so, I just want to clarify that. It's not recommendations, it's the actual things. The public and everyone gets one of two things, either the recommended changes to the current plan or the new draft plan. And again,that draft plan could change significantly. So, put those recommended amendments to the current General Plan. But I need to say that very clearly on the record, so that in ten years when people come back to look at these minutes, I stated it two weeks ago and I stated it today; what we mean by what's provided as part of that section. CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Crystal clear. Thank you. Any other comments? Seeing none, all those in favor of forwarding Bill 176, as amended, to the Council with a favorable recommendation, please say "aye." Any opposed? Page 7 r PCPLUED-28 August 4,2026 Vote on Bill 176: The motion to recommend passage of Bill 176, as amended to (Draft 2) Draft 2, was carried with the following roll call vote: (Approved) Ayes: Committee Members Hustace, Inaba, Kagiwada, Kimball,Villegas, and Chair Kierkiewicz—6. Noes: Committee Member Galimba—1. Absent: Committee Members Kaneali`i-Kleinfelder and Onishi—2. Excused: None. CHR. KIERKIEWICZ: Okay, we are at the end of the agenda. Meeting is adjourned at 1:53 p.m. Thank you. ADJOURN- There being no further business Chair Kierkiewicz adjourned the meeting MENT: at 1:53 p.m. Approved: 0 a:14 20),b Ms. shley L. Kierkiewicz, Chair (Date) Policy Committee on Planning, Land Use, and Economic Development AK/dt Page 8