HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-02-05 Adele Henkel Testimony From: Adele Henkel
To: WPCtestimonv; LPCtestimonv;Council Testimony; Kimball. Heather; Kaaiwada.Jennifer;Onishi. Dennis;
Kierkiewicz.Ashley; Kanealii-Kleinfelder. Matt;Villeaas. Rebecca;Galimba. Michelle M.; Inaba. Holeka;Hustace.
James;cohmavor(d)hawaiicounty.aov
Subject: Do NOT recommend GP2045 go through
Date: Wednesday,February 5,2025 11:31:49 AM
To all concerned,
At the January 16,Planning Commission meeting,a testifier said there was a"mistake" in the designation of a
particular parcel of land.The new map showed it was set to be"Conservation"when it was designated"Urban"
Land use.This is significant since Conservation will only allow a park--no living,farming,or building!
The Planning Director acknowledged the mistake and said it would be fixed but how many"mistakes" are in the
map we don't know about?This alone should have the Planning Commissioners recommend the Hawaii GP NOT go
through!
Read the testimony below from a prominent business owner on Big Island sharing more insights why this plan
should not be recommended!
Here's a position opposed to the General Plan 2045,challenging its feasibility,priorities,and potential
consequences.
Opposition Position to the General Plan 2045
"While the General Plan 2045 sets ambitious goals for sustainability,economic growth,and infrastructure
development,there are critical flaws in its approach that could hinder its success.The plan lacks feasibility,
overestimates resource availability,and places undue burdens on taxpayers and rural communities.
1.Unrealistic Transportation Goals
The plan prioritizes multi-modal transit and emerging technologies while neglecting practical infrastructure needs:
•Mass Transit Limitations:Expanding public transportation is idealistic,but given the low population density,mass
transit will remain underutilized and costly.
•Neglect of Rural Needs:Vision Zero and Complete Streets focus on urban centers,but rural roads remain
deteriorating without sufficient funding.
•Autonomous Vehicles&Smart Roads: Investing in future technology is premature when basic road maintenance
remains underfunded.
2.Housing Policies Worsen Affordability
The plan's zoning changes and affordable housing policies may exacerbate the housing crisis rather than solve it:
•Urban Growth Boundaries Increase Prices:Restricting land use in rural areas artificially inflates property values,
making housing even less affordable.
•Overcrowding Solutions Overlook Economic Realities:Policies ignore that overcrowding results from low wages
and high living costs,not just housing shortages.
•Regulatory Burdens on Developers: Strict zoning and sustainability mandates deter private investment,reducing
housing supply and increasing costs.
3.Infrastructure and Utility Investments Are Unfunded and Impractical
The plan assumes major infrastructure expansions without realistic funding mechanisms:
•Green Infrastructure&Energy Transition:Renewable energy projects are costly,and residents will bear the
financial burden of transitioning away from fossil fuels.
•Broadband Expansion: While beneficial,the cost of rural broadband investment is unsustainable without private
sector buy-in.
•Water Conservation Mandates:Restrictions and green infrastructure initiatives may increase costs for consumers
without clear efficiency benefits.
4.Economic Development Overlooks Local Challenges
The plan assumes economic diversification will reduce reliance on tourism but fails to address key barriers:
•Workforce Shortages in Tech&Healthcare: While the plan emphasizes education and business services,Hawaii
struggles to retain talent due to the high cost of living.
•Tourism Mismanagement:Reducing tourism's footprint is economically dangerous,as it remains Hawai`i's
largest industry.Balancing conservation and tourism is unrealistic without clear incentives.
•Agricultural Growth Is Not Feasible at Scale:Farming expansion requires land,water,and workforce,all of which
are limited.Dependence on imports will persist.
5.Climate Resilience Efforts Are Costly and Overreaching
Climate change policies in the plan impose expensive regulations without clear economic benefits:
• Sea Level Rise Restrictions Hurt Property Owners: Over-regulating coastal development diminishes property
rights and land values.
•Renewable Energy Transition Increases Costs: Shifting rapidly to renewables raises electricity prices and risks
reliability issues.
•Disaster Preparedness Funding Is Unclear:Climate adaptation measures require significant public spending
without clearly defined funding sources.
Conclusion:A More Balanced Approach Needed
The General Plan 2045 prioritizes idealistic goals over practical solutions.A more balanced approach should:
1.Focus on essential infrastructure first,ensuring roads,utilities,and housing affordability before investing in
speculative technology.
2.Encourage private-sector solutions rather than increasing government intervention in housing and economic
development.
3.Make climate policies cost-effective,ensuring that taxpayers are not burdened by aggressive renewable energy
mandates.
While the plan's vision is commendable,its execution threatens affordability,economic stability,and individual
property rights.A more pragmatic approach is necessary to ensure growth without overregulation and excessive
public spending."