Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Island Burial Councils topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Debate sharpens as committee advances bill to alter island burial council membership
Summary
The committee advanced SB268 after lengthy public testimony for and against removing large landowner/developer voting seats on island burial councils; supporters said councils should be dominated by lineal descendants and cultural practitioners, while opponents argued landowner engagement has been essential to practical problem solving.
The House Committee on Water & Land voted to advance SB268, a bill that would change island burial council membership by removing designated seats for large landowners and developers. The issue drew prolonged public testimony and floor discussion in which Hawaiian‑community organizations, former burial‑council members and developers’ representatives clashed over whether landowner seats help or hinder burial protection.
Supporters, including the Office of Hawaiian Affairs and several kūpuna and lineal descendants testifying in person, urged the committee to restore the councils’ original focus on Kanaka ‘ōiwi lineal descendants and cultural practitioners. Stacy Ferreira of OHA said the bill aimed “to go back to what the original intent is,” arguing that landowners should not have voting control in decisions about iwi kūpuna, and that OHA would provide technical assistance to councils if the membership was altered.
Opponents including long‑time burial‑program advocates and consultants testified that landowner and developer participation has been a practical element of successful consultations and that removing them could undermine cooperative problem solving. Edward Ayau, who said he was a co‑author of the original legislation establishing island burial councils in 1990, testified that landowner participation was part of a negotiated balance and that the councils have historically worked with landowners in constructive ways.
Committee members asked OHA and other witnesses whether removing landowner seats would preclude developers from participating in public discussions; witnesses said landowners would not be prevented from attending or testifying but would no longer have voting seats. OHA testified it would provide training and legal/technical support to burial councils and named an OHA compliance specialist who has worked with councils.
Committee debate also raised operational concerns: meeting quorums, past failures by SHPD to provide resources and training, and whether councils have adequate staff support. Several council members and long‑time consultants said the program had been chronically underresourced and that structural fixes beyond membership were needed.
The committee adopted the chair’s recommendation to pass SB268 with technical amendments. The chair noted several members recorded reservations; Representative Shimizu recorded a “no” vote. The committee left the bill without large‑landowner representation as drafted; supporters said landowners and developers could still appear and testify at council meetings.
Why it matters: Island burial councils make decisions about the treatment of iwi kūpuna and lineal‑descent recognition; membership affects who votes on burial treatment plans and may shape outcomes for development projects across the islands.
What’s next: The bill proceeds with committee amendments; implementation details (training and AG engagement) will be matters for rulemaking and agency coordination if the bill becomes law.
