HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026-09-08 KCDP Meeting Packet
County of Hawai‘i
KONA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN ACTION COMMITTEE
Aupuni Center • 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 • Hilo, Hawaiʻi 96720 (808) 961-8288 • Fax (808) 961-8742
C. Kimo Alameda, Ph.D.
Mayor
John Pelletier, Chair Raymond Kirchner
Vacant Shane Palacat-Nelsen Charles Young Nancy Pisicchio, Vice Chair Charla Thompson Vacant Roselyn Molina
NOTICE OF PUBLIC MEETING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN of the following matters to be considered by the Kona Community Development Plan (CDP) Action Committee (AC) in accordance with the provisions of Sections 92-3.7 and 92-7, Hawaiʻi Revised Statutes (HRS). This meeting will be held in person at the location listed in this notice and by Interactive Conference
Technology (ICT) through Zoom.
DATE: Tuesday, September 8, 2026
TIME: 12:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m.
LOCATION: West Hawaiʻi Civic Center, B2 Conference Room 74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Highway
Kailua-Kona, HI 96740
ZOOM: https://www.zoomgov.com/meeting/register/v2QZv267SAOLYOBfYvlKIA
INTERACTIVE CONFERENCE TECHNOLOGY (ICT): A meeting held by ICT shall be automatically recessed for up to 30 minutes to restore communication when audiovisual
communication cannot be maintained with all members participating in the meeting or with
the in-person location identified in this notice. The meeting may reconvene when either audiovisual communication is restored, or audio-only communication is established after an unsuccessful attempt to restore audiovisual communication. If it is not possible to reconvene the meeting as provided in this subsection within 30 minutes after an interruption to
communication, the meeting will be automatically terminated.
PUBLIC TESTIMONY: The public may provide oral testimony at the meeting by joining Zoom or attending in-person at the physical location listed above. Although not required, to register in advance for oral testimony please contact staff at CDP@hawaiicounty.gov or (808) 961-8288. Interested persons who want to provide oral testimony may do so either at the time the committee takes public statements on the agenda, or at the time the specific
agenda item is called. Please note that public testimony may be limited to three (3) minutes in length per agenda item. Although not required, to ensure timely delivery of written testimony to committee members, it is requested that written testimony be submitted by 4:30 p.m. at least two business days prior to the meeting via email to CDP@hawaiicounty.gov. Please specify the agenda item for which written testimony is being submitted. All written
testimony will be a part of the public record and may be submitted by email or hard copy. Hard copy submissions should include one original and nine copies.
2
AGENDA
I. CALL TO ORDER & ROLL CALL
II. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES: The AC will consider approving the draft minutes from the July 14, 2026 meeting.
III. PUBLIC TESTIMONY ON AGENDA ITEMS: Pursuant to Section 92-3, HRS, interested persons may provide oral testimony either at this time or when the applicable agenda item is called.
IV. THIRD-PARTY REPORTS; GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS: The AC may receive and
discuss information from third-party reports by any government official not included in a publicly noticed agenda. The AC may only make decisions on matters originally raised by third-party reports from any government official at a later meeting, where the agenda provides notice of decision-making on the matter.
V. BUSINESS
1. Kona Community Development Plan Review and Evaluation: Discussion and possible action regarding the AC’s duties under Chapter 16 of the Hawaiʻi County Code to monitor the progress and effectiveness of the Kona CDP and consider the need for amendments. The AC will discuss undertaking a chapter-by-chapter review
of the CDP as a framework for fulfilling these responsibilities, utilizing the Implementation Matrix included in Chapter 5 (Action Plan). Discussion may include evaluating implementation of the Action Plan, reviewing progress toward achieving the Kona CDP’s Guiding Principles and objectives, identifying changing conditions or emerging issues affecting the Plan, and establishing a process for identifying
recommendations.
2. Formal Request to the Department of Environmental Management on the Kealakehe Wastewater Treatment Plant: Discussion regarding the status of the Kealakehe Wastewater Treatment Plant, including its ability to serve existing and future development. The AC may consider potential action, including requesting that
the Director of the Department of Environmental Management provide an update at a future meeting on the facility’s treatment capacity, planned expansion efforts, and considerations for serving nearby projects, including the proposed new medical facility in Kona.
3. Community Development Plan References for Committee Recommendations:
Discussion and possible action regarding a proposal to reference applicable goals, policies, actions, or implementation measures from the Kona CDP when developing AC recommendations, correspondence, and testimony related to matters within the AC’s advisory responsibilities.
4. Committee Testimony Regarding Bill 147: Discussion and possible action
regarding Bill 147, including an update on the bill’s status, consideration of AC
testimony, and authorization for a designated AC member to present testimony on behalf of the Committee at future Hawaiʻi County Council or Council Committee meetings, consistent with any position adopted by the AC.
VI. PUBLIC TESTIMONY ON MATTERS NOT ON AGENDA
3
VII. PROPOSED NEW BUSINESS: The AC will discuss potential agenda items for future meetings.
VIII. ANNOUNCEMENTS
• Arborist Advisory Committee August meeting summary
• Deputy Corporation Counsel guidance on AC meeting procedures (Communication
No. 2026-13)
• Apply for the Kona CDP Action Committee through the Mayor’s office website at: https://www.hawaiicounty.gov/our-county/boards-and-commissions
• The next meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, October 13, 2026
IX. ADJOURNMENT
NOTICE: This agenda and all related documents are available in the Planning Department’s Kona Community Development Plan Action Committee folder via the County of Hawaiʻi Public Documents Repository:
https://records.hawaiicounty.gov/Weblink/1/fol/9059/Row1.aspx.
These documents may also be requested from the Planning Department by calling (808) 961-8288 or emailing CDP@hawaiicounty.gov. The recorded video of this meeting will be uploaded to the Planning Department’s YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/@cohplanningdepartment
A person desiring to submit oral or written testimony shall indicate their name and whether the testimony is on their behalf or as a representative of an organization or individual. Anyone who requires an auxiliary aid or service, other reasonable modification, or language interpretation to access this meeting please contact the Planning Department at (808) 961-8288 or CDP@hawaiicounty.gov as soon as possible, to arrange for accommodations. If a
response is received after the five-business days deadline, we will try to obtain the auxiliary aid/service or accommodation, but we cannot guarantee that the request will be fulfilled. “Other reasonable modification” refers to communication methods or devices for people with disabilities who are mentally and/or physically challenged. Upon request, this notice is available in alternate formats such as large print, Braille, or electronic copy.
If you are a lobbyist, you must register with the Hawai‘i County Clerk within five days of
becoming a lobbyist. (Article 15, Section 2-91.3(b), Hawai‘i County Code). A lobbyist means, “any individual engaged for pay or other consideration who spends more than five hours in any month or $275 in any six-month period for the purpose of attempting to influence legislative or administrative action by communicating or urging others to communicate with
public officials.” (Article 15, Section 2-91.3(a)(6), Hawai‘i County Code). Registration forms
and expenditure report documents are available at the Office of the County Clerk-Council, 25 Aupuni Street, Hilo, Hawai‘i 96720.
Meeting Packet QR Code: KONA CDP ACTION COMMITTEE JOHN PELLETIER, Chair
KONA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN 1
ACTION COMMITTEE 2
COUNTY OF HAWAIʻI 3
DRAFT MINUTES 4
July 14, 2026 5
Call to Order 6
Chair John Pelletier called the meeting of the Kona Community Development Plan (CDP) 7
Action Committee (AC) to order at 12:02 p.m. The meeting was held in person at the West 8
Hawaiʻi Civic Center – Building G and online via the Zoom platform. 9
The full YouTube video of this meeting can be found here: 10
https://youtu.be/FtYHXx46KPo?si=eWtufvasWjk6N3VS 11
Roll Call 12
Members Present (in person): 13
• John Pelletier, Chair 14
• Nancy Pisicchio, Vice Chair 15
• Charles Young 16
• Raymond “RJ” Kirchner 17
Members Present (via Zoom): Shane Palacat-Nelsen and Charla Thompson 18
Members Absent: Roselyn Molina 19
Planning Department Staff Present: 20
• Janice Hata 21
• Kawelo Kalili 22
• Maryam Palma (via Zoom) 23
• Jessica Lahip (via Zoom) 24
There were approximately six members of the public in attendance (two in person and 25
four via Zoom). 26
Approval of Minutes 27
Chair Pelletier requested approval of the June 9, 2026 draft meeting minutes at 28
approximately 12:05 p.m. Committee Member Young moved to approve the minutes, and 29
Committee Member Kirchner seconded the motion. There being no discussion or 30
corrections, the Committee voted unanimously to approve the June 9, 2026 draft meeting 31
minutes. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 03:51] 32
KONA CDP ACTION COMMITTEE
Minutes of July 14, 2026
2
Public Testimony on Agenda Items 33
Chair Pelletier called for public testimony on agenda items at approximately 12:06 p.m. 34
[SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 04:36] 35
Janice Palma Glennie testified regarding Hawaiʻi County Council Bill 147, Relating to 36
Transient Accommodations. She expressed continued concern with the latest draft of the 37
bill, stating that it did not adequately address the impacts of short-term vacation rentals 38
on neighborhood character and housing affordability. She urged the County to limit 39
unhosted short-term vacation rentals to resort areas and restrict hosted rentals to owner-40
hosted operations. She stated that stronger regulations similar to those adopted by other 41
counties would better protect local residents while still allowing homeowners to 42
supplement their income. She thanked the AC for continuing to advocate for community 43
interests. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 05:05] 44
Vice Chair Pisicchio encouraged Ms. Glennie to provide the same testimony before the 45
Leeward Planning Commission during its upcoming meeting, noting that the Commission 46
would also be considering Bill 147. 47
No additional public testimony was provided at that time. 48
Third-Party Reports; Government Officials 49
Pursuant to Hawaiʻi Senate Bill 405 (2025), signed into law as Act 72, the AC may receive 50
and discuss information from third-party reports by any government official not included 51
in the publicly noticed agenda, but may not make decisions on matters raised through 52
such reports until a later meeting with proper notice. 53
Chair Pelletier called for third-party reports from government officials. No third-party 54
reports were presented. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 08:02] 55
Business 56
1. Coconut Rhinoceros Beetle Update: Presentation by Franny Brewer regarding the 57
status of the Coconut Rhinoceros Beetle (CRB) in Kona, including an overview of 58
Interim Rule 26-1 issued by the Hawaiʻi Department of Agriculture and Biosecurity, 59
current detection and response efforts, and opportunities for community involvement 60
in CRB detection and removal. The AC may ask questions, discuss the presentation, 61
and consider potential action, including providing recommendations or authorizing 62
correspondence related to CRB response efforts. 63
This item was called to order at approximately 12:10 p.m. No public testimony was 64
provided. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 08:23] 65
Franny Brewer, Program Manager for the Big Island Invasive Species Committee 66
(BIISC), provided an update on the status of the CRB on Hawaiʻi Island. She explained 67
that the beetle is among the world’s most destructive invasive species and has caused 68
KONA CDP ACTION COMMITTEE
Minutes of July 14, 2026
3
significant damage to coconut palms and other palm species throughout Hawaiʻi. She 69
reviewed the history of detections, noting that an earlier Waikoloa infestation had been 70
successfully eradicated in 2024, while a separate infestation detected near Kona 71
International Airport in March 2025 had expanded substantially, with approximately 72
1,200 beetles detected in the Kona area. She also reported a recent detection in Hilo. 73
[SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 09:32] 74
Ms. Brewer described BIISC’s monitoring and response efforts, including islandwide 75
trapping, public reporting, surveys of palm damage, detection dogs trained to locate 76
breeding sites, and outreach to residents and businesses. She emphasized that 77
breeding sites in decomposing green waste present the greatest opportunity for beetle 78
reproduction and encouraged residents to properly dispose of green waste and report 79
suspected larvae or adult beetles rather than destroying them before identification. 80
[SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 13:18] 81
Ms. Brewer also reviewed Interim Rule 26-1, adopted by the Hawaiʻi Department of 82
Agriculture and Biosecurity, which requires businesses within affected areas that 83
commercially move or handle palm material or decomposing green waste to complete 84
compliance training and follow best management practices. She stated that business 85
compliance remained low and described a County Council resolution seeking stronger 86
State enforcement of the rule. She encouraged affected businesses to obtain training 87
and encouraged public support for improved enforcement. [SEE YOUTUBE 88
TIMESTAMP 24:45] 89
Committee members discussed available CRB control methods, including proper 90
management of mulch and compost piles to achieve temperatures sufficient to kill 91
larvae and eggs. Members also discussed limited green waste disposal opportunities 92
in West Hawaiʻi and the relationship between inadequate disposal access, 93
unauthorized dumping, and potential CRB breeding sites. [SEE YOUTUBE 94
TIMESTAMP 28:52] 95
Janice Palma Glennie raised concern about large unauthorized green waste dumping 96
sites in Kona, including along Hualālai Road. Ms. Brewer stated that BIISC shares those 97
concerns and explained that reports involving apparent commercial-scale dumping 98
are referred to the Hawaiʻi Department of Health, while BIISC continues coordinating 99
with County agencies regarding green waste disposal access. [SEE YOUTUBE 100
TIMESTAMP 31:02] 101
Chair Pelletier asked that the resolution number and text referenced by Ms. Brewer be 102
identified so the AC could consider whether to provide supporting testimony at a future 103
meeting. No motion was made and no formal action was taken. [SEE YOUTUBE 104
TIMESTAMP 34:18] 105
This item concluded at approximately 12:36 p.m. 106
KONA CDP ACTION COMMITTEE
Minutes of July 14, 2026
4
2. Road Priorities: Discussion regarding transportation priorities identified in the Kona 107
CDP, including the Kahului-Keauhou Parkway and Lako Street Extension. The AC may 108
consider potential action, including requesting that the Director of the Department of 109
Public Works provide an update at a future meeting on the status, planned 110
implementation, and anticipated timeline for these transportation projects. 111
This item was called to order at approximately 12:37 p.m. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 112
34:57] 113
Josephine Keliʻipio testified that the Kahului-Keauhou Parkway had been identified as 114
a priority many years ago when federal funding was contemplated but questioned 115
whether it remained a current priority. She stated that the existing bypass has reduced 116
congestion in portions of South Kona and expressed concern about impacts of 117
extending the parkway through residential areas. She raised concerns regarding 118
unsafe driver behavior and stated that strong traffic-calming measures should be 119
considered if additional roadway construction proceeds. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 120
35:30] 121
Committee Member Kirchner stated that both the Kahului-Keauhou Parkway and Lako 122
Street Extension remain important transportation corridors identified in the Kona CDP. 123
He emphasized the need for additional mauka-makai evacuation routes from the Aliʻi 124
Drive area and additional north-south capacity to address congestion. He proposed 125
inviting the Director of the Department of Public Works to provide an update on the 126
status of the two projects and any alternative transportation planning under 127
consideration. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 37:46] 128
Committee members generally supported obtaining a focused agency update. 129
Discussion included the need to understand prior environmental and cultural review, 130
community impacts, current congestion and evacuation needs, and whether the 131
County still intends to advance the projects. Members also noted that transportation 132
issues are connected to housing patterns, employment locations, and broader growth 133
throughout West Hawaiʻi. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 42:30] 134
Committee Member Kirchner moved to invite the Director of Public Works, or a 135
representative, to attend a future AC meeting and provide an update regarding current 136
planning for the Kahului-Keauhou Parkway and Lako Street Extension, including 137
alternatives for addressing traffic if the projects are not advanced. Vice Chair Pisicchio 138
seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously. The Committee agreed that 139
staff would place the request on letterhead for Chair Pelletier to sign and transmit to 140
the Department of Public Works. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 42:01] 141
This item concluded at approximately 12:57 p.m. 142
3. Water Resources: Discussion regarding water resource planning and infrastructure 143
considerations affecting the Kona CDP area. The AC may consider potential action, 144
KONA CDP ACTION COMMITTEE
Minutes of July 14, 2026
5
including requesting that the Manager-Chief Engineer of the Department of Water 145
Supply attend a future meeting to provide an overview of Kona’s water resources, 146
current planning efforts, and available public information resources. 147
This item was called to order at approximately 12:57 p.m. No public testimony was 148
provided. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 55:34] 149
Committee Member Kirchner raised concerns regarding recent well outages, the 150
development of additional public and private wells, and the lack of clear public 151
information regarding how new water resources are permitted, allocated, and 152
prioritized. He proposed inviting Keith Okamoto, Manager-Chief Engineer of the 153
Department of Water Supply, to address questions outlined in a proposed letter 154
regarding system reliability, additional wells, coordination with the State Commission 155
on Water Resource Management, allocation of future water supply, and priorities for 156
serving community needs and planned development areas. [SEE YOUTUBE 157
TIMESTAMP 56:25] 158
Vice Chair Pisicchio noted that the existing Kona CDP contains limited guidance on 159
water infrastructure and stated that a Department of Water Supply presentation would 160
help the AC better understand how water availability affects transit-oriented 161
development, housing, and other CDP priorities. Committee members discussed the 162
respective roles of County and State agencies, the public trust nature of water 163
resources, the need for greater transparency in allocation decisions, and the 164
importance of aligning water infrastructure with community priorities. [SEE YOUTUBE 165
TIMESTAMP 58:43] 166
Committee Member Young also described ongoing regional water-resource planning 167
and emerging desalination concepts as examples of issues that may affect future water 168
supply and infrastructure decisions. Members agreed that a broader discussion with 169
the Department of Water Supply would be useful. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 170
01:00:19] 171
Committee Member Kirchner moved to invite Keith Okamoto, or a representative of 172
the Department of Water Supply, to a future meeting to discuss the questions outlined 173
in his proposed letter. Committee Member Young seconded the motion. The motion 174
passed unanimously. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:10:57] 175
This item concluded at approximately 1:13 p.m. 176
4. Kona CDP Refresher and Future Comprehensive Review Process: Discussion 177
regarding a refresher on the Kona CDP, including its purpose, priorities, and role in 178
guiding AC work. The AC may also discuss and brainstorm preliminary considerations 179
for a future comprehensive review process. 180
This item was called to order at approximately 1:14 p.m. No public testimony was 181
provided. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:12:05] 182
KONA CDP ACTION COMMITTEE
Minutes of July 14, 2026
6
Committee Member Kirchner proposed reviewing the Kona CDP section by section 183
over future meetings to identify future amendments. Members agreed that the plan is 184
now many years old and that a structured refresher could help the AC better 185
understand existing priorities, identify provisions that have not been implemented, and 186
prepare for a future formal update process. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:12:40] 187
Vice Chair Pisicchio and other members cautioned against describing the effort as a 188
“comprehensive review,” noting that the term could imply a formal legal process 189
requiring broader public participation, consultant support, and coordination with the 190
General Plan. Members emphasized that the immediate purpose should be to refresh 191
the Committee and community on the existing plan rather than to undertake formal 192
amendments. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:13:24] 193
Discussion included the value of reviewing the CDP in manageable sections, setting 194
aside limited time on future agendas, identifying overlooked implementation 195
opportunities, comparing relevant provisions with the adopted General Plan when 196
useful, and seeking substantial public involvement before recommending significant 197
changes. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:21:33] 198
The Committee reached general agreement to continue refining the scope and 199
terminology and to return to the matter at a future meeting before beginning a 200
recurring refresher process. No motion was made and no formal action was taken. 201
[SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:44:36] 202
This item concluded at approximately 1:55 p.m. 203
5. Bill 147 Update: Update on recent Planning Commission hearings regarding Bill 147, 204
relating to transient accommodations, followed by discussion and deliberation 205
regarding the Kona CDP AC’s prior position on Bill 147. The AC may review related 206
testimony included in the meeting packet and may consider authorizing the Chair, or 207
another designated Committee member, to provide oral testimony at the upcoming 208
Leeward Planning Commission meeting to clarify the AC’s position and respond to 209
prior testimony. 210
This item was called to order at approximately 1:55 p.m. No public testimony was 211
provided. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:53:23] 212
Chair Pelletier summarized the prior Leeward Planning Commission hearing and 213
stated that Council Member Kimball had provided proposed language addressing 214
unhosted transient accommodations in Multiple-Family Residential (RM) districts. He 215
stated that the proposed language was generally consistent with the AC’s earlier 216
position and that Council Member Kimball had encouraged the Planning Commission 217
to directly address the issue raised by the AC. Chair Pelletier and Vice Chair Pisicchio 218
prepared supplemental testimony intended to clarify the AC’s position and support the 219
proposed approach for RM districts, while also addressing Neighborhood Commercial 220
KONA CDP ACTION COMMITTEE
Minutes of July 14, 2026
7
(CN) and Downtown Hilo Commercial District (CDH) zoning considerations. [SEE 221
YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:54:02] 222
Committee members discussed the effect of grandfathered short-term vacation rental 223
uses, whether permits transfer upon sale, and the broader inflationary effect of short-224
term vacation rental investment on housing prices. Vice Chair Pisicchio also noted that 225
a separate enforcement ordinance addressing advertising of unregistered units was 226
expected to take effect later in the year. 227
Chair Pelletier moved to submit the supplemental testimony to the Leeward Planning 228
Commission and to present the testimony orally at the Commission’s Thursday 229
meeting. Vice Chair Pisicchio seconded the motion. The motion carried unanimously. 230
[SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 01:57:55] 231
This item concluded at approximately 2:05 p.m. 232
6. Holomua Marine Initiative – Request for Presentation: Discussion regarding the 233
Holomua Marine Initiative and whether the Kona CDP AC should request a future 234
informational presentation from the State of Hawaiʻi Division of Aquatic Resources 235
(DAR). The presentation would help Committee members better understand the 236
initiative, its potential relationship to Kona CDP goals and priorities, and whether the 237
Committee may wish to consider future recommendations or other appropriate action 238
at a later meeting. 239
This item was called to order at approximately 2:05 p.m. No public testimony was 240
provided. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 02:03:25] 241
Committee Member Palacat-Nelsen stated that an informational presentation from the 242
Division of Aquatic Resources would allow the AC to better understand the Holomua 243
Marine Initiative, how it may relate to CDP priorities, and how community input is being 244
incorporated into marine-resource management. Committee members expressed 245
support for receiving information directly from DAR before considering any future 246
recommendations. 247
Committee Member Palacat-Nelsen moved to request a presentation from DAR. 248
Committee Member Young seconded the motion. Members identified Chris Teague, 249
the West Hawaiʻi regional representative, as an appropriate contact, and Committee 250
Members Palacat-Nelsen and Young offered to reach out directly. The motion passed 251
unanimously. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 02:05:13] 252
This item concluded at approximately 2:10 p.m. 253
Public Testimony on Matters Not on the Agenda 254
Chair Pelletier called for public testimony on matters not on the agenda at approximately 255
2:10 p.m. No public testimony was provided. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 02:09:03] 256
KONA CDP ACTION COMMITTEE
Minutes of July 14, 2026
8
Proposed New Business 257
This item was called to order at approximately 2:10 p.m. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 258
02:09:18] 259
Committee Member Kirchner proposed a future agenda item regarding wastewater 260
infrastructure serving the planned West Hawaiʻi hospital site. He stated that the hospital 261
project may need a private wastewater treatment facility despite being located across from 262
the County wastewater treatment plant and requested that the Director of the Department 263
of Environmental Management be invited to explain the status and capacity of the public 264
system. Vice Chair Pisicchio suggested that Committee Member Kirchner prepare a draft 265
letter for consideration at the next meeting. 266
Committee Member Kirchner also proposed discussion of a tree-planting plan for major 267
highway corridors in Kona. Vice Chair Pisicchio expressed concern that selecting specific 268
planting locations or species would be premature before completion of broader Tree City 269
and community tree-planning efforts. 270
Chair Pelletier also noted that Bill 147 would continue to return as needed. Members were 271
reminded that additional agenda items may be submitted to the Chair, Vice Chair, and 272
Planning Department staff. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 02:15:42] 273
Announcements 274
Chair Pelletier invited Jeff Zimpfer to share an announcement regarding a U.S. Geological 275
Survey community meeting regarding a hydrologic modeling project for the Kaloko-276
Honokōhau area. The meeting was scheduled for August 3, 2026, from 5:00 p.m. to 7:00 277
p.m. at the West Hawaiʻi Civic Center, Building B, second-floor conference room. The 278
project team planned to provide an overview of prior work, explain the proposed modeling 279
effort, and receive community input. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 02:16:00] 280
The Planning Department announced that it continues to seek applicants for the Kona 281
CDP Action Committee. Applications are available through the Mayor’s Office Boards and 282
Commissions webpage: 283
https://www.hawaiicounty.gov/our-county/boards-and-commissions 284
The next Kona CDP Action Committee meeting was scheduled for Tuesday, August 11, 285
2026. 286
Committee Member Thompson stated that the Tree City item did not need to return at the 287
next meeting because additional work was still underway and she would advise the Chair 288
when there was more to report. 289
Adjournment 290
Chair Pelletier adjourned the meeting at approximately 2:21 p.m. [SEE YOUTUBE 291
TIMESTAMP 02:19:40] 292
KONA CDP ACTION COMMITTEE
Minutes of July 14, 2026
9
These minutes and all related documents are available in the Planning Department’s Kona 293
Community Development Plan Action Committee folder via the County of Hawaiʻi Public 294
Documents Repository. These documents may also be requested from the Planning 295
Department by calling (808) 961-8288 or emailing CDP@hawaiicounty.gov. 296
1
COMMUNICATION REGARDING PUBLIC TESTIMONY AND MEETING PROCEDURES
FOR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN ACTION COMMITTEES
The following guidance was provided by Deputy Corporation Counsel regarding meeting
procedures and the acceptance of public testimony by Community Development Plan
Action Committees (“ACs”).
Meeting Procedures
AC meetings are conducted using a modified version of Robert’s Rules of Order,
consistent with the practice of most other County boards and commissions and the
County Council. Each body determines the level of formality and efficiency that is
applicable to its own purpose and operation, with some following Robert’s Rules more
strictly than others.
Public Testimony Requirements
Hawaiʻi Revised Statutes (“HRS”) Section 92-3 requires boards to afford all interested
persons an opportunity to present oral testimony on agenda items. The statute provides,
in relevant part:
“The boards shall also afford all interested persons an opportunity to present oral
testimony on any agenda item; provided that the oral testimonies of interested
persons shall not be limited to the beginning of a board’s agenda or meeting. The
boards may provide for reasonable administration of oral testimony by rule.”
The State Office of Information Practices (“OIP”) has advised that this section of Chapter
92 prohibits a public body from requiring that a public testifier identify themselves. A
board may request a testifier’s name and place of residence, as is done by the Planning
Commissions; however, a person who declines to provide that information must be
permitted to testify anyway.
The ACs have not adopted rules regarding the acceptance of public testimony.
Timing of Public Testimony
Regarding when testimony should be received, OIP has advised that public testimony be
accepted, at a minimum, at the start of the meeting and at the initiation of the agenda
matter that testimony concerns.
Communication No. 2026-13
2
To what extent can a board decide when to take oral testimony during its meeting?
Within certain limits, a board can choose when to hear oral testimony on agenda items.
However, a board cannot hear all the oral testimony only at the beginning of the meeting,
and it must hear the testimony on a given agenda item prior to its consideration of that
agenda item. Beyond those restrictions, a board can choose when to hear testimony. For
instance, a board could allow a limited testimony period at the beginning of the meeting
to accommodate members of the public who prefer not to wait and then continue to
hear testimony immediately before each agenda item from those who have not testified
earlier on that item. A board could also choose to hear testimony on several agenda
items together (in which case it should still allow people testifying on multiple items a full
opportunity to testify on each of those items).
This guidance establishes minimum requirements rather than a restriction on a board’s
ability to receive additional public testimony. An AC therefore has discretion to provide
opportunities for testimony beyond the statutory minimum.
As one example, the State Land Use Commission provides opportunities for testimony
at three different times during its proceedings: 1) at the start of the meeting; 2) when an
agenda item is called; and 3) after the parties to that agenda item have presented and
responded to questions by the commission but before commission deliberation. The
Land Use Commission also allows the same testifier to provide testimony more than
once.
Additional guidance is available in the OIP Open Meetings Guide (August 2025) and
related Sunshine Law training materials at:
https://ags.hawaii.gov/oip/sunshine-law-training/
Balancing Public Participation and Orderly Meetings
The duties and responsibilities of the CDP Action Committees are set forth in Hawaiʻi
County Code Chapter 16-6. In carrying out those responsibilities, the AC must balance
its role as a conduit of information between the community and the County, which
requires free flowing information, including careful listening to the community, and
the running of an efficient and effective meeting, which requires sticking to the
matters on the agenda and running a relatively orderly meeting.
HRS Section 92-3 does allow that disruptive people can be removed from meetings
(“the removal of any person or persons who willfully disrupts a meeting to prevent and
compromise the conduct of the meeting shall not be prohibited”). Thankfully, we rarely
3
experience truly disruptive behavior requiring removal of anyone. The AC, through its
chair, should find the balance between enough organization to effectuate an efficient
meeting and enough openness to allow full public input.
Chapter 92, commonly referred to as the Sunshine Law, was recently amended to allow
groups like the ACs to have more flexibility to receive public input and third-party
reports from any government official in recognition of their role in facilitating
communication with their communities. See HRS Section 92-81.
Accordingly, the AC, acting through its Chair, should accept public testimony in a
manner that supports both orderly and efficient meetings and the AC’s broader
responsibility to receive and consider community input.
Attachment: OIP Opinion Letter 04-09 Anonymous Testimony and Liability for
Disclosure of Records Containing Defamatory Statements
Op. Ltr. 04-09 Anonymous Testimony and Liability for Disclosure of Records Containing Defamatory Statements This opinion was partially overruled by OIP Opinion Letter Number 06-04.
OIP Op. Ltr. No. 04-09
May 3, 2004 The Honorable Brian T. Moto Corporation Counsel, County of Maui Department of the Corporation Counsel 200 South High Street Wailuku, Hawaii 96793 Re: Anonymous Testimony and Liability for Disclosure of Records Containing Defamatory Statements Dear Mr. Moto: This is in response to then Deputy Corporation Counsel Richard K. Minatoya’s request to the Office of Information Practices (“OIP”) for an opinion on certain issues regarding anonymous testimony before the Maui County Council (“Council”) and on whether an agency or agency employee is immune from liability under the Uniform Information Practices Act (Modified), chapter 92F, Hawaii Revised Statutes (“HRS”) (“UIPA”), for disclosing records containing defamatory statements. ISSUES PRESENTED I. Whether the Council and its committees may require that individuals identify themselves in written and oral testimony, and may refuse to accept anonymous testimony.
OIP Op. Ltr. No. 04-09
II. Whether the good faith defense to liability in section 92F-16, HRS, applies to disclosure of anonymous testimony that may be defamatory. BRIEF ANSWER I. No. The “Sunshine Law” at part I of chapter 92, HRS, requires that “all interested persons” be given the opportunity to provide written and oral testimony on agenda items. Haw. Rev. Stat. § 92-3 (1993). Because “all interested persons” are allowed to submit testimony under the Sunshine Law, in keeping with the Sunshine Law’s policy of liberally construing its provisions in favor of openness, it is not appropriate to condition submission of testimony on whether a potential testifier identifies himself or herself. Because boards “shall” allow interested persons the opportunity to submit testimony, they do not have authority to refuse anonymous testimony. II. Yes. The UIPA requires that government records be public, unless access is closed by law. Haw. Rev. Stat. § 92F-11(a) (1993). Written testimony received by a board at a public meeting is public, and copies of such testimony should be made available upon request. Because we are of the opinion that the UIPA requires agencies to disclose public testimony upon request, we believe that section 92F-16, HRS, provides agency employees with immunity from criminal or civil liability for such disclosures. We note, however, that section 92F-16, HRS, has never been tested in court. DISCUSSION I. PERSONS NEED NOT IDENTIFY THEMSELVES WHEN TESTIFYING, AND BOARDS AND THEIR COMMITTEES MAY NOT REFUSE TO ACCEPT TESTIMONY FROM PERSONS WHO DO NOT IDENTIFY THEMSELVES The Sunshine Law requires that boards allow oral and written testimony on all agenda items: The boards shall afford all interested persons an opportunity to submit data, views, or arguments, in writing, on any agenda item. The boards shall also afford all interested persons an opportunity to present oral testimony on any agenda item.
OIP Op. Ltr. No. 04-09
Haw. Rev. Stat. § 92-3 (1993) (emphasis added). The Sunshine Law does not, however, provide more detailed instruction regarding testimony, other than allowing boards to “provide for reasonable administration of oral testimony by rule.” Id. The legislature has declared that the provisions of the Sunshine Law requiring open meetings shall be liberally construed. Haw. Rev. Stat. § 92-1(2) (1993). Based on this legislative intent, we liberally construe section 92-3, HRS, and decline to read into the statute a requirement that a person identify himself or herself before being allowed to testify. Moreover, a contrary interpretation may deter some interested persons from testifying at all. Because section 92-3, HRS, clearly requires that all interested persons be given the opportunity to testify, to prohibit persons who do not identify themselves from testifying goes against both the legislature’s declaration and the intent of the Sunshine Law. We therefore opine that boards may not require potential testifiers to identify themselves prior to submitting oral or written testimony and cannot refuse to accept written or oral testimony from a member of the public who chooses not to identify himself or herself. II. IMMUNITY FROM LIABILITY You also raise the question whether the good faith provision in section 92F-16, HRS, protects the Council, the County, and County employees from liability for defamation arising from the disclosure of testimony submitted to the Council by a member of the public. To answer your question, the OIP must first consider whether the defamatory statements contained in written testimony received by the Council are subject to disclosure under the UIPA. The UIPA governs public access to State and county government agency1 records2. The UIPA operates on the presumption that records maintained by a State or county agency are public. Haw. Rev. Stat. § 92F-11(a) (1993). The statute contains five exceptions to disclosure, two of which may be applicable to the present issue. For board meetings that are open to the public3, anyone in attendance at the meeting will be able to hear oral testimony. Accordingly, the OIP finds no basis for boards to withhold public access to written testimony that was read at a public meeting on the basis that disclosure would be a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal
1 “Agency” is defined to include County Councils. Haw. Rev. Stat. § 92F-3 (1993). 2 “Government record” means “information maintained by an agency in written, auditory, visual, electronic, or other physical form.” Haw. Rev. Stat. § 92F-3 (1993). 3 Most meetings of boards are required to be open to the public. If certain conditions are met, boards may hold meetings closed to the public. See Haw. Rev. Stat. §§ 92-3.1, 92-4, 92-5 (Supp. 2003, and 1993).
OIP Op. Ltr. No. 04-09
privacy, because the testimony has been put into the public domain by the testifier. The testifier thus has no reasonable expectation of privacy. Haw. Rev. Stat. § 92F-13(1) (1993). There may be instances when a board receives written testimony that is not read aloud by the testifier at a public meeting. We find that individuals submitting testimony to a board for an open meeting agenda item do not have a cognizable privacy interest in their testimony because it is not reasonable to assume that their testimony will not be considered in a meeting open to the public. We therefore find that, in ordinary circumstances, written testimony submitted to a board on an agenda item of an open meeting does not implicate the testifier’s privacy interest and is not protected from disclosure under section 92F-13(1), HRS.4 Section 92F-13(3), HRS, allows agencies to withhold records if disclosure would cause the frustration of a government function. Because boards conduct business in open meetings, the OIP finds that testimony on public meeting agenda items must, under normal circumstances, be considered at an open meeting. Because individuals submitting testimony cannot reasonably expect otherwise, their access to and participation in open meetings are not “chilled” by disclosure. Boards, therefore, cannot invoke the frustration exception for testimony submitted on a public agenda item. The UIPA states that “anyone participating in good faith in the disclosure or nondisclosure of a government record shall be immune from any liability, civil or criminal, that might otherwise be incurred, imposed or result from such acts or omissions.” Haw. Rev. Stat. § 92F-16 (1993). Because we are of the opinion that the UIPA requires generally that written testimony received by the Council is public, we believe that agencies must disclose such testimony upon request. We therefore believe that section 92F-16, HRS, provides the Council, the County, and the County employees with immunity from liability for such disclosures. Further, because the OIP is charged with administering the UIPA, we are of the opinion that it is an act of good faith under section 92F-16, HRS, to consult with the OIP when an agency is uncertain whether disclosure of a government record is appropriate.
4 It may be appropriate to segregate home addresses, home telephone numbers, and personal email addresses from written testimony that is not read aloud at an open meeting.
OIP Op. Ltr. No. 04-09
CONCLUSION The Sunshine Law requires that “all interested persons” be given the opportunity to provide written and oral testimony on agenda items. Haw. Rev. Stat. § 92-3 (1993). The Council and its committees, therefore, may not require that individuals identify themselves in written and oral testimony, nor may they refuse to accept anonymous written or oral testimony. Written testimony received by a board at a public meeting is public, and copies of such testimony should be made available upon request. Because the UIPA requires generally that written testimony received pursuant to public meetings is public, agencies must disclose such testimony upon request. The good faith defense to liability in section 92F-16, HRS, applies to disclosure of anonymous testimony that may be defamatory. We note, however, that section 92F-16, HRS, has never been tested in court. Very truly yours, Carlotta Dias Staff Attorney APPROVED: Leslie H. Kondo Director CMD:ankd cc: Ken R. Fukuoka Director of Council Services, County of Maui