HomeMy WebLinkAbout2026-09-21 Cristina Holt Testimony
From: Tina Holt
To: Planning LPC Testimony
Subject: Bill 170, Leeward Planning Comission Written Testimony for September 24, 2026.
Date: Monday, September 21, 2026 9:05:51 AM
Commissioners,
My name is Cristina Holt. I am a resident of Hilo, and I have been following the issue of data centers across the country as well as in other places in the world, such as Singapore.
I am in support of the intent of Bill 170 (Section 1) and urge this Commission to take a serious look at the actual definition that has been put forward. It is concerning how vague some of the
language is when describing data centers, so vague that I am sure a well-paid attorney working for these developers could easily run it through a shredder, leaving us with even fewer
protections than before we started this process. Though there is much research and continued learning to be done, especially for citizens and volunteers such as the members of this
commission and myself, I ask this Commission to put forward a definition of data centers that relies on clear infrastructure parameters and resource use, not on terms such as "industrial" or
"incidental or typical."
I also ask that this Commission reject the Planning Department's apparent proposal to create a
permitting pathway with no guardrails for any facility using 10,000 square feet or less, and only discretionary review for facilities over that size.
This is one of the few issues in our day and age where the vast majority of people agree, across political and ideological lines, that we do not want data centers anywhere near our
communities: a Gallup poll conducted March 2 to 18, 2026, found that 71% of Americans oppose AI data centers being built in their local area, including 63% of Republicans, 74% of
Independents, and 75% of Democrats. Against that backdrop, the 10,000 square foot measurement itself would be laughable if it weren't so embarrassing coming from an office
full of people being paid, with our tax dollars, to work on exactly this kind of thing. And to find out that this number came from a consulting company based on the continent is
unacceptable.
We must first work together as a community to define exactly what we are talking about when
we say "data center," which I believe is the intent and the limit of Bill 170.
The Planning Department has jumped the gun and proposed the most lax, useless regulatory
limit imaginable. A quick calculation, using the maximum height allowed in an industrial zone (45 feet) and the Department's own suggested maximum floor area (10,000 square feet), shows
that a data center built to those limits could draw anywhere from roughly 3 to 18-plus megawatts of continuous power. I am genuinely offended that they were allowed to hand this
off to our Planning Commissions when it was designed by an outside consultant with seemingly so little critical thought of their own.
So again, I am asking you all to support the intent of Bill 170, which is to keep data centers from becoming a permitted use on County of Hawaii jurisdiction land, by creating a clear and
legally sound definition of what we mean when we say "data center," and to reject the Planning Department's premature and foolish suggestion that we bypass this process altogether
and allow data centers to be built with little or no review.
Here is a working definition of "data center" that myself and others have put together, based
on research from across the country and the world:
"'Data center' means a facility, or two or more facilities on contiguous or adjacent parcels
under common ownership or control, whose primary purpose is housing, operating, or co-locating computer servers and associated cooling, power, and support infrastructure, and
whose combined electrical demand at full build-out meets or exceeds 5 megawatts."
Though I would love to see water use and protection explicitly added into this definition, the
pieces in here explicitly name the functional components of data centers, make it clear that no umbrella or nesting-doll of LLCs or corporations will slip through, and that no campus
workaround will be allowed to get through this definition. Again, it is just a start, and I hope you all are able to use it and add water use to further strengthen this definition.
Thank you for your careful consideration and your commitment to protecting our limited resources.
Cristina Holt