HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-02-07 M. Lahilahi Heen TestimonyFrom:M. Lahilahi Heen
To:WPCtestimony
Subject:GP Opposition
Date:Friday, February 7, 2025 9:02:36 AM
URGENT
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. Theplan lacks feasibility, overestimates resource availability, and places undue burdens on taxpayers andrural communities.1. Unrealistic Transportation Goals
The plan prioritizes multi-modal transit and emerging technologies while neglecting practicalinfrastructure 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 AffordabilityThe 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 ImpracticalThe 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, Hawaiʻi struggles to retain talent due to the high cost of living.
● Tourism Mismanagement: Reducing tourism’s footprint is economically dangerous, as it
remains Hawaiʻi’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 balancedapproach should:
1. Focus on essential infrastructure first, ensuring roads, utilities, and housing affordability beforeinvesting in speculative technology.
2. Encourage private-sector solutions rather than increasing government intervention in housing andeconomic 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