Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026-08-12 Cultural Resources Commission MeetingCULTURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION COUNTY OF HAWAI‘I MINUTES August 12, 2026 MEETING LOCATION: Hybrid in-person and interactive video conference through Zoom with live observation through YouTube. The in-person location was held at the Hilo Planning Department Conference Room, 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3, Hilo, HI 96720. The full YouTube video of this hearing can be found here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGfEw6I1kZ8 COMMISSIONERS PRESENT: Via Zoom: Matthew Clark (Chair), Desmon Haumea (Vice Chair), Darde Gamayo (Joined at 10:52 a.m., Kealohanuiopuna Kinney and Janet Six In Person: Aaron Spielman Also Present: Jean Campbell, Deputy Corporation Counsel; Bethany Morrison, Planning Program Manager; Kim Tanaka, Planner IV, Jeff Darrow Planning Director, Michelle Ahn, Planning Deputy Director, Jeffrey Deason, Planner VI and Jessica Andrews, Planner V. Chair Clark called the Cultural Resources Commission (CRC) meeting to order at 10:09 a.m. A quorum was established with five members in attendance. It was announced that pursuant to Act 220, Session Laws of Hawaiʻi 2021, which amended the Sunshine Law to allow meetings to be remotely conducted online, effective January 1, 2022, the Cultural Resources Commission meetings will be held online, with an in-person location for the public to provide testimony. The meeting can be viewed live online, and a link to YouTube can be located on the County website, as well as links to reports and surveys reviewed at this hearing. Commissioners were reminded that only one person may speak at a time and were asked to raise their hands to be recognized before speaking. Commissioners introduced themselves and staff introductions were made. All members reported being alone at their location except for Commissioner Haumea, who identified one individual. There were no addendums or supplemental agenda items. STATEMENT(S) FROM THE PUBLIC Staff reported that no written public testimony had been received. Chair Clark opened the floor to receive testimony. There were no testifiers at this time. Cultural Resources Commission August 12, 2026 Minutes Page 2 of 14 Public testimony closed at 10:15 a.m. OLD BUSINESS OF THE COMMISSION 1. Hale Nanea Proposed Amendment to Condition L of Ordinance 15-104 (PL-CRC- 2026-000044) Request by the Planning Director for the Commission’s review and recommendation on matters of cultural significance relating to Condition L of Ordinance 15-104. Condition L requires identification of an entity responsible for the management and care of archaeological and cultural features on Parcel 54 and conveyance of Parcel 54 to the identified entity. Location: Auhaukeae 1st, North Kona, Hawaiʻi TMKs: (3) 7-5-009:067 & 7-5-009:054 [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 7:13] Chair Clark called this agenda item to order at 10:16 a.m. Also present via Zoom: George Baker, landowner and manager of Kukui Development; Betty Paluzzi, CFO; Jim Medeiros, Protect Keopuka ʻOhana; Wayne Duarte and Curtis Tyler Chair Clark called for a five-minute recess to ensure all participants were able to join the meeting. The meeting resumed at 10:35 a.m. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 19:53] Chair Clark acknowledged the presence of lineal and cultural descendants, Mr. Tyler and Mr. Medeiros and stated that they would be permitted to participate in the agenda item as participants and may respond to questions from the Commission. Chair Clark then asked whether the applicant would be providing a presentation. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 20:26] Mr. Baker stated that there would be no presentation and recapped the discussion from the previous meeting regarding the potential conveyance of the property. He emphasized the importance of ensuring that any descendant or entity to whom the property may be conveyed has the financial resources necessary to maintain and care for the property, particularly in light of ongoing issues involving homeless individuals and trash on the property. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 21:12] Ms. Andrews recapped the discussion from the previous meeting in May, explaining that the ordinance had been submitted to the Planning Division for an amendment and would ultimately be presented to the Planning Commission. She stated that, as part of the amendment process, staff reviewed the conditions of the most recent rezoning ordinance from 2015, including Condition L. The Planning Director requested that the Cultural Resources Commission review Condition L to ensure proper compliance regarding archaeological resources. Following completion of the CRC review process, the matter would return to the Planning Cultural Resources Commission August 12, 2026 Minutes Page 3 of 14 Commission for review and ultimately be forwarded to the County Council for consideration of the ordinance amendment. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 22:46] Chair Clark recapped the May meeting, noting that Mr. Baker, the landowner, had sought the Commission’s assistance in identifying an appropriate organization to steward Parcel 54, an approximately three-acre parcel required to be conveyed as a condition of the proposed development of Parcel 67. He also noted that Mr. Tyler was familiar with the property and had served on the County Council when the ordinance was considered. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 24:08] Mr. Tyler noted that the rezoning ordinance he had been referencing was from 2005. Ms. Andrews clarified that the original ordinance was adopted in 2005, when Condition L was established, and was subsequently amended in 2015. Mr. Tyler reviewed the documents submitted by the developer and clarified a discrepancy in the date of a March 27, 2026, letter. He also noted that he did not have a copy of the 2015 amended ordinance. Chair Clark explained that the Commission was seeking input regarding potential stewardship of the parcels. Mr. Tyler requested that Mr. Medeiros, also a descendant and relative, provide his comments first. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 28:28] Mr. Medeiros requested a site visit to both parcels and expressed concern that descendants had not previously been notified or involved in the process. He stated that, as a descendant connected to the burials and cultural features on the properties, he would need to review the available archaeological studies and site information as part of his due diligence before agreeing to any proposed action. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 29:29] Chair Clark explained that the matter was still in the initial stages and that Mr. Baker had reached out to the County for assistance. He stated that the Commission was currently working to identify potential groups and that a site visit and review of additional information could be considered as the process moved forward. Commissioner Kinney asked Mr. Medeiros to provide background on his organization and describe its cultural preservation efforts and accomplishments, including his work with the Hokulia Cultural and Parks Association. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 30:25] Mr. Medeiros explained that his organization, Protect Keopuka ʻOhana, is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit in good standing that advocates for the protection of iwi kūpuna, sacred sites, and cultural resources throughout Hawaiʻi. He described the organization’s experience with cultural consultation and the physical care and management of properties and cultural sites. He reiterated his request to review the available information regarding the project before forming a position and Cultural Resources Commission August 12, 2026 Minutes Page 4 of 14 expressed interest in meeting with Mr. Baker to further discuss the project and potential involvement. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 33:50] Chair Clark recalled that, at the May meeting, the Commission was not comfortable recommending a community organization for stewardship without first consulting descendants and asked Mr. Baker to discuss the homeowners association as a possible option. Mr. Baker explained that one option would be co-ownership of Parcel 54 between a qualified nonprofit cultural organization and the homeowners association, with the association providing financial support for maintenance under the guidance of the cultural organization. Alternatively, the parcel could be conveyed solely to a qualified nonprofit organization, which would then assume responsibility for its care and maintenance. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 36:23] Planning Director Darrow provided background information on Condition L, explaining that the original 2005 rezoning required the applicant to identify an entity responsible for the management and care of archaeological and cultural features on Parcel 54. He noted that the condition was amended in 2015 to add that the applicant must satisfy the condition within one year of the effective date of the amendment, and that the applicant is now requesting additional time. Mr. Darrow expressed concern, stating that the entity selected to care for the cultural resources should not be responsible for addressing trash, unauthorized activity, and other ongoing maintenance issues on the property, and suggested that shared responsibility with another organization may be appropriate. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 39:38] Mr. Baker agreed that ongoing issues involving homeless and transient activity, trash, and other unauthorized activity on the property have created a financial burden. He explained that the proposed co-ownership arrangement could allow the condominium association to address those maintenance and security concerns while the cultural organization oversees preservation of the archaeological sites. Mr. Baker also clarified that he purchased the property in 2013 and amended the entitlement in 2015 and therefore has owned the property for ten [sic] years. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 41:37] Mr. Darrow added that Condition K requires Parcel 54 to be rezoned from Agricultural-1 acre (A-1a) to Open zoning through a Council-initiated rezoning. He stated that staff would work with the County Council to pursue the rezoning in conjunction with the applicant’s request to further support the protection and preservation of the property. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 42:43] Mr. Duarte stated that he has cared for and monitored the property for more than ten years and is aware of the iwi kūpuna, Hawaiian rock walls, and other culturally significant areas on the property. He explained that he conducts regular walkthroughs, maintains limited areas for fire prevention, and has installed protective fencing to help prevent disturbance. He also monitors the property for trespassing, illegal dumping, and unauthorized camping. Mr. Duarte emphasized Cultural Resources Commission August 12, 2026 Minutes Page 5 of 14 that his intention has always been to mālama, protect, and preserve the land, iwi kūpuna, and cultural resources. Mr. Baker added that Mr. Duarte has worked for him for approximately 12 to 13 years, helping maintain this property and two other parcels in the Palisades Estates area. He stated that Mr. Duarte has worked with law enforcement, kept the property cleared, and helped protect identified archaeological sites. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 46:42] Commissioner Six asked when the Archaeological Inventory Survey (AIS) was completed. Chair Clark stated that an original survey was conducted in the 1980s, documenting several burials, followed by a supplemental AIS around 2004 or 2005 and subsequent data recovery, burial treatment, and preservation planning. Commissioner Six noted that the supplemental AIS was approximately 21 years old and that she was unable to locate the SHPD numbers or related records in Hawaii Cultural Resource Information System (HICRIS). Chair Clark offered to provide the available documentation. Mr. Tyler questioned Mr. Duarte about the location and land name of the subject property. Mr. Duarte asked for clarification on the correct land name. Ms. Campbell interrupted Mr. Tyler and clarified that the Commission was currently receiving public testimony and requested that discussion remain focused on identifying appropriate potential caretakers for the property. She encouraged testimony that would be relevant and helpful to the Commission’s consideration. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 50:21] Mr. Tyler provided a brief history of the location to emphasize its cultural and historical significance. He expressed his commitment to its protection and preservation as a recognized descendant. He requested the opportunity to review the burial treatment and preservation documents, participate in a site inspection, and remain involved in future discussions regarding the property. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 55:19] Vice Chair Haumea expressed that this area is a wahi pana (legendary place). It holds great significance for both Hawaiian culture and Polynesian culture He emphasized the importance of protecting the area and suggested involving the homeowners association in caring for and maintaining the property. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 57:46] Commissioner Six stated that she obtained the 1979, 1980, and 2004 burial treatment documents and offered to provide them to Mr. Tyler. She acknowledged the historical and cultural significance of the property and emphasized the importance of selecting an appropriate caretaker and ensuring the property is treated properly and with respect. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 58:53] Commissioner Kinney refocused the discussion on identifying potential caretakers for the property. He noted that a lineal descendant Cultural Resources Commission August 12, 2026 Minutes Page 6 of 14 representing a qualified nonprofit organization was present and encouraged the Commission to use the opportunity to ask questions and determine whether the individual and organization would be appropriate caretakers. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 1:00:19] Chair Clark agreed that the discussion should focus on potential stewardship of the property. He suggested considering the involvement of the homeowners association in maintaining the property and asked whether other individuals or organizations should be included in the discussion. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 1:00:46] Mr. Baker requested direction from the Commission on how to move forward with the stewardship of the property. He also noted that law enforcement has worked with Mr. Duarte for several years regarding issues on the property and could provide additional information if needed. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 1:01:54] Commissioner Six asked whether the potential caretaker had sufficient funding and resources to maintain the property. Mr. Medeiros stated that funding is an ongoing consideration and that they would explore available options. Commissioner Six suggested exploring grants and possible financial assistance from the homeowners association and offered to assist in identifying funding opportunities. Mr. Medeiros welcomed her assistance and further discussion. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 1:04:02] Commissioner Kinney suggested considering a model in which homeowners’ association fees help fund the organization responsible for maintaining and protecting the property. Commissioner Six agreed, noting that homeowners association support could provide resources for Mr. Medeiros’s organization while benefiting the surrounding community. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 1:05:47] Mr. Baker stated that the homeowners association could provide funding toward the property’s maintenance but would need to have an ownership interest in the property in order to contribute funds. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 1:06:30] Chair Clark asked Mr. Tyler and Mr. Medeiros whether any additional individuals or groups should be included in the discussion or whether the current participants provided an appropriate starting point. Mr. Tyler supported continued collaboration and stated that he and Mr. Medeiros should consult with other family members before moving forward, emphasizing the importance of careful consideration due to the cultural significance of the property. Mr. Medeiros agreed and stated that additional family consultation and due diligence would be necessary. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 1:10:30] Vice Chair Haumea expressed concern about the length of time it has taken to address the protection of the culturally significant property. He emphasized that it is the responsibility of property owners to care for the land and encouraged collaboration among those involved. He also suggested using the Cultural Resources Commission August 12, 2026 Minutes Page 7 of 14 property as an educational resource for future generations and involving students in its care and preservation. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 1:14:41] Chair Clark asked for a summary of the comments provided and a motion directing staff to prepare a letter reflecting the Commission’s recommendations. He noted that the letter could either be reviewed by the full Commission for approval at the next meeting or be reviewed by the Chair before its distribution. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 1:15:39] Commissioner Kinney emphasized the importance of providing Mr. Medeiros and Mr. Tyler with the information, access, and support needed to evaluate the property and determine appropriate next steps. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 1:17:23] Mr. Baker reiterated that he has owned the property for approximately 13 years and stated that he relocated the development to Parcel 67, leaving approximately 2.6 acres of Parcel 54 as open space to protect the burial sites. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP 1:18:17] Commissioner Six offered to provide Mr. Medeiros and Mr. Tyler with relevant documentation and other resources that may assist them moving forward. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 1:18:47] Chair Clark summarized the Commission’s recommendation that Kukui Development LLC work with Mr. Tyler, Protect Keopuka ʻOhana, and the homeowners association to satisfy Condition L, with the homeowners association considered as a potential funding source. He also noted that the Commission would remain available to provide support as needed. Ms. Campbell suggested that the Commission, based on the sentiments expressed during this meeting, identify Protect Keopuka ʻOhana as the organization involved, allowing it to engage additional appropriate individuals in the process. Commissioner Kinney agreed with the proposed recommendation and thanked Mr. Baker for his efforts toward preserving the property. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 1:22:16] Vice Chair Haumea moved to direct staff to draft a letter recommending that the landowner work with Mr. Tyler, Mr. Medeiros of Protect Keopuka ʻOhana, and the homeowners association to satisfy Condition L and provide stewardship of the property. The letter would also note the Commission’s willingness to provide future assistance and would be reviewed by Chair Clark prior to distribution. Commissioner Six seconded the motion. A roll call vote was taken and passed unanimously with six ayes (Clark, Gamayo, Haumea, Kinney, Six and Spielman). This matter concluded at 11:31 a.m. Cultural Resources Commission August 12, 2026 Minutes Page 8 of 14 NEW BUSINESS OF THE COMMISSION: 2. Historic Place Marker Program – Review of Draft Amendment to Hawaiʻi County Code Chapter 14 (PL-CRC-2026-000047) Request by County Council Member Ashley Kierkiewicz to review a draft proposal to amend Chapter 14 of the Hawaiʻi County Code 1983 (2016 Edition, as amended) relating to the Historic Place Marker Program for the purpose of establishing a County program to identify and recognize the traditional moku and ahupuaʻa of Hawaiʻi Island through the installation of boundary markers and the development of a Historic Place Marker Inventory which includes historical, cultural, and geographic information associated with each place. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 1:24:43] This agenda item was called to order at 11:32 a.m. Also in attendance: Council Member Ashley Kierkiewicz There were five members of the public via Zoom and one individual provided testimony. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 1:25:53] Mr. Tyler expressed strong support for the concept, emphasizing the importance of the ʻāina and the need for appropriate markers. He also clarified that Kona is a moku rather than a town and encouraged the County to recognize this distinction. He commended the Council Member for bringing the matter forward and expressed hope for strong support from the Council. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 1:26:51] Council Member Ashley Kierkiewicz, who was present in the conference room, was invited by Chair Clark to introduce her agenda item. Council Member Ashley Kierkiewicz introduced the proposed legislation, explaining that it was developed through community input and coordination with various County departments. She discussed the importance of recognizing the historical and cultural significance of places and described the proposed islandwide boundary marker program. The program would identify appropriate locations for signage, coordinate with the State and private property owners, and provide for a coordinated islandwide installation. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 1:30:54] Chair Clark thanked Council Member Kierkiewicz for bringing the proposed legislation forward and clarified that the Commission would first discuss the Historic Boundary Marker Program. He noted that the Commission was asked to provide input on its potential role, cultural consultation and community engagement, and recommendations for the program’s long-term success. Cultural Resources Commission August 12, 2026 Minutes Page 9 of 14 [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 1:31:43] Chair Clark opened the floor for Commissioner questions and discussion. Chair Clark suggested that the Commission assist with reviewing proposed maps and sign locations to ensure that historically documented land divisions and boundaries are accurately represented. He also suggested that the Commission provide historical maps and guidance to County departments as needed. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 1:33:00] Commissioner Six supported the proposed program and agreed that multiple historical maps should be reviewed to ensure accuracy. She also recommended consulting with lineal and cultural descendants who may have knowledge not reflected in written records. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 1:33:50] Chair Clark asked for clarification about the Commission’s role. Council Member Kierkiewicz would like to see the Commission’s involvement throughout the process, particularly in reviewing historical maps and working with County departments and educational institutions to ensure accuracy. Chair Clark also asked about the design of the signs. Council Member Kierkiewicz stated that the design had not yet been determined and noted that using the State’s existing sign template could provide consistency while considering cost and potential theft. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 1:35:45] Commissioner Six suggested providing information on the meaning and significance of the place names. Council Member Kierkiewicz explained that additional information on the roadway signs could be distracting but has considered developing a GIS map that could provide pronunciation, meanings, history, and other information associated with each location. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 1:36:34] Chair Clark emphasized the importance of including proper diacritical marks and pronunciation information. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 1:36:49] Commissioner Kinney expressed support for the proposed legislation and agreed that the Commission’s archaeological expertise could assist with the mapping process. He asked whether markers could also be placed in remote areas, trails, or other locations not accessible by County or State roadways. Council Member Kierkiewicz agreed and stated that marker locations should reflect the original land divisions, which may require coordination with private property owners. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 1:39:12] Vice Chair Haumea supported the proposal but expressed concern that signage alone may not be sufficient to encourage respectful behavior. He emphasized the importance of education and suggested incorporating the program into schools and visitor education. Cultural Resources Commission August 12, 2026 Minutes Page 10 of 14 [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 1:41:56] Council Member Kierkiewicz agreed that signage would not address every issue but viewed it as an important first step. She noted that the markers could be supported by an online educational resource, public outreach, and educational opportunities for schools and visitors. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 1:43:20] Commissioner Six expressed support for the program and suggested developing an online GIS-based resource where users could access historical and cultural information associated with each location. She also recommended public outreach through radio and other visitor resources to increase awareness and provide additional educational information. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 1:44:32] Council Member Kierkiewicz noted that the State Department of Transportation was supportive of providing educational signage at the Hilo and Kona airports. Commissioner Six supported the idea, and Chair Clark suggested using QR codes to provide access to additional information. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 1:44:59] Commissioner Kinney suggested eventually incorporating traditional place names and boundary information into digital navigation systems. Commissioner Six supported the idea and emphasized the importance of accurate pronunciation. Council Member Kierkiewicz encouraged the Commission to continue advancing the program and expressed her support for incorporating traditional place names and cultural information into future navigation tools. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 1:1:46:57] Commissioner Gamayo expressed support for the program and offered assistance with radio outreach and community service announcements. Council Member Kierkiewicz explained that existing State signs are installed through a community-driven process and that the proposed program would coordinate with the State to provide consistent islandwide signage. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 1:49:11] Chair Clark summarized the Commission’s strong support for the proposed program and suggested that staff draft a letter reflecting the Commission’s comments and offering the Commission’s continued assistance throughout the process. He then called for a motion. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 1:49:57] Commissioner Gamayo moved to direct staff to prepare a letter expressing the Commission’s strong support for the Historic Place Marker Program, summarizing the Commission’s discussion, and offering its continued assistance. The letter will be reviewed by and signed by Chair Clark. Vice Chair Haumea seconded the motion. A roll call vote was taken and passed unanimously with six ayes (Clark, Gamayo, Haumea, Kinney, Six and Spielman). This matter concluded at 11:58 a.m. Cultural Resources Commission August 12, 2026 Minutes Page 11 of 14 3. Moʻolelo Interpretation Program – Review of Draft Amendment to Hawaiʻi County Code Chapter 14 (PL-CRC-2026-000048) Request by County Council Member Ashley Kierkiewicz to review a draft proposal to amend Chapter 14 of the Hawaiʻi County Code 1983 (2016 Edition, as amended) relating to the Moʻolelo Interpretation Program. Amendments to Chapter 14 would provide a coordinated County process for the planning, review, approval, installation, maintenance, and documentation of interpretive signs, murals, and other place-based educational installations on County property. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 1:51:17] This agenda item was called to order at 11:58 a.m. There was one member of the public present on Zoom and no public testimony was provided. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 1:30:18] Council Member Kierkiewicz presented the proposed history and mural program, explaining that it would establish a public process for community members to propose artwork, murals, and interpretive signage for County facilities. She noted that the program would provide County departments with a consistent process for reviewing proposals and verifying information prior to installation. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 1:52:14] Chair Clark asked about the proposed review process for community murals, artwork, and signage at County facilities. Council Member Kierkiewicz explained that the program would establish a clear and consistent application and review process across County departments. Proposals involving historical or cultural information would require verified sources and could be referred to the Commission for review and comment. Chair Clark emphasized the importance of obtaining input from the community where the proposed artwork or signage would be located. Council Member Kierkiewicz confirmed that the proposed legislation requires community involvement as part of the process. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 1:56:33] Commissioner Kinney emphasized the importance of incorporating both the natural and cultural heritage of each area into proposed murals and signage. He suggested that the Commission could assist in ensuring these connections are accurately represented. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 1:57:57] Chair Clark asked about potential funding opportunities for murals and other art installations. Councilmember Kierkiewicz stated that County funding would depend on budget priorities but noted that outside grants may be available. She added that County funding may be available for interpretive signage, while murals would likely require community fundraising or grant support. Cultural Resources Commission August 12, 2026 Minutes Page 12 of 14 [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 1:59:34] Commissioner Six emphasized the importance of keeping the program community-driven and ensuring that murals accurately represent the history and culture of each area. She recommended that proposed murals receive cultural review before approval. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 2:00:06] Councilmember Kierkiewicz asked whether the program should prioritize local artists while also providing the technical expertise needed for large-scale murals. Commissioner Six supported prioritizing local artists and emphasized that the artwork should accurately reflect the history and culture of the area without outside interests influencing the message. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 2:01:58] Chair Clark recommended prioritizing artists from the local communities first, followed by artists from Hawaiʻi Island and then elsewhere, if possible. Commissioner Six suggested that muralists work collaboratively with lineal and cultural descendants to determine the stories to be conveyed through the artwork, combining the artists’ technical expertise with the descendants’ cultural knowledge and having the resulting concepts appropriately reviewed and vetted. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 2:02:52] Commissioner Spielman moved to direct staff to prepare a letter expressing the Commission’s strong support for the proposed program, summarizing the Commission’s discussion, and recommending that the Commission be included in the review process for interpretive signage and murals involving cultural or historical content. The letter will be reviewed and signed by Chair Clark. Commissioner Six seconded the motion. A roll call vote was taken and passed unanimously with six ayes (Clark, Gamayo, Haumea, Kinney, Six and Spielman). [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 2:05:04] Council Member Kierkiewicz thanked the Commission and Planning Department for reviewing the proposed legislation. She stated that the measure would be filed by the August 27 deadline and heard on September 15. She offered to provide hearing information should the Commission wish to submit testimony or participate in the hearing. This matter concluded at 12:12 p.m. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS 1. Approval of minutes of the meeting held on May 13, 2026. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 2:05:58] A motion was made by Vice Chair Haumea and seconded by Commissioner Kinney to approve the May 13, 2026, meeting minutes as circulated. No discussion occurred. The minutes were approved without opposition with a unanimous aye voice vote. Cultural Resources Commission August 12, 2026 Minutes Page 13 of 14 2. Planning Department Staff Updates [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 2:06:24] Ms. Morrison reported on potential revisions to the Section 106 consultation process discussed at the National Alliance of Preservation Commissions Forum 2026. She noted that the proposed changes could significantly affect historic preservation and cultural resource protections and that a 30- day public comment period is anticipated. She advised that a special meeting may be necessary to allow the Commission to provide timely comments. Ms. Morrison also announced that Shawna Kaulukukui would be joining the Cultural Resources Commission and was in the process of completing onboarding. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 2:09:54] Vice Chair Haumea asked whether the proposed Section 106 changes had already been approved. Ms. Morrison clarified that the previous vote only advanced the proposal and that it had not yet been finalized. Commissioner Six and Chair Clark expressed concern that the proposed changes could significantly weaken protections for historic and cultural resources. They encouraged Commissioners to submit comments during the public comment period, either individually or through an organization. Chair Clark offered to provide staff with information for distribution to the Commission. [SEE YOUTUBE TIMESTAMP – 2:14:20] Chair Clark and Vice Chair Haumea reported on their attendance at the National Alliance of Preservation Commissions Forum 2026 in Minneapolis. Chair Clark noted that much of the conference focused on historic buildings and districts, while some sessions addressed indigenous communities, land stewardship, and the involvement of descendants in caring for culturally significant lands. Vice Chair Haumea shared his observations regarding differences in historic preservation practices and emphasized the importance of recognizing indigenous perspectives and cultural resources beyond traditional buildings and structures. Both expressed appreciation for the opportunity to attend and learn from other preservation commissions and communities. Chair Clark noted that one of his key takeaways from the conference was that, as part of a Certified Local Government, the Commission can become involved in preservation issues and advocate for changes when appropriate. There was no further discussion. Next meeting tentatively scheduled for Wednesday, September 9, 2026. There were no additional announcements. Cultural Resources Commission August 12, 2026 Minutes Page 14 of 14 ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, a motion to adjourn was made by Commissioner Six and seconded by Chair Clark. The meeting was adjourned at 12:27 p.m. with a unanimous aye vote. Respectfully Submitted, Shantel Miller Board Secretary A T T E S T : Matthew Clark, Chairman Cultural Resources Commission