House committee advances measure to allow commercial ocean operators to run during environmental review with two-year limit

The House Committee on Judiciary & Hawaiian Affairs advanced Senate Bill 1074 (SD2 HD1) on March 27, 2025, adopting amendments that narrow the bill to activities governed by HRS chapter 200 (commercial ocean and recreational permits), place the measure in session law rather than the permanent Hawaii Revised Statutes and add a two-year sunset while state agencies conduct environmental reviews.

The bill was filed in response to litigation in West Maui — including a judge's remand following the Umberger decision — that found some commercial-use permits require environmental assessment under the Hawaii Environmental Policy Act (HRS Chapter 343). Proponents said the amendment would let validly permitted operators continue running while state agencies complete HEPA reviews; opponents said it would weaken long-standing environmental protections and urged the department to use existing exemption rules or negotiate a settlement.

Department of Land and Natural Resources representative Don Chang told the committee the department supports the bill's intent but stressed that the department is not seeking to "exempt itself from chapter 343. We intend to comply whether it's either through an exemption, through an environmental assessment or an environmental impact statement or even a grama environmental review document." Chang also warned that the court decision's logic could affect many existing permits and said the department needed time and staff resources to assess compliance.

Commercial operators and hospitality groups said the ruling left many employees and small businesses in limbo. "These operations are heavily regulated," Denver (last name on file) of the Ocean Tourism Coalition said in support. "This will allow . . . employees who depend on them to continue while DLNR completes all its compliance reviews." Several West Maui operators and members of the Maui hotel and lodging community described lost income, difficulty obtaining financing and the need to maintain jobs for families rebuilding after the August 2023 wildfires.

Environmental organizations, community plaintiffs from Lahaina and Native Hawaiian advocates urged the committee to reject the bill or narrow its application. Community plaintiff Tiare Lawrence said, "All we ask for is basic safety measures to protect residents and visitors alike," and opposed using the legislature to bypass environmental review. Attorneys and advocacy groups—including Earthjustice, Sierra Club, and community witnesses—said the department already has exemption categories and procedures and that broad statutory carve-outs would set a dangerous precedent for the state's environmental law.

Multiple speakers proposed a settlement approach or a set of interim safety conditions for Kaanapali during the review. The plaintiffs detailed six items they said could be implemented as interim protections: designated ingress/egress and buoy demarcation for vessels, temporary on-beach signage and trained safety attendants during vessel loading and unloading, waste-disposal and pump-out arrangements, parking agreements or controls for operators' employees and customers, interim protocols tied to weather and safety developed with NOAA and county lifeguards, and regular spot checks by DLNR enforcement staff. DLNR acknowledged some of these items but said others were outside its authority or raised capacity and funding issues.

Committee Chair Mike Tarnas offered amendments during decision-making that narrowed the bill to HRS chapter 200, moved the bill's operative language into session law for a two-year period, and deleted a redundant statutory definition. With those changes the committee voted to advance the bill for further consideration; several members registered reservations or opposition on principle.

What happens next: The measure will move forward with the committee's recommended HD2 language. DLNR told the committee it will continue to pursue administrative exemption analyses and may request additional resources to complete the environmental reviews and monitoring the judge's decision requires.

Votes: The committee recorded the bill as advanced with the chair's amendments. Several members spoke publicly before the vote: Representative Mark Mizuho (statement recorded earlier) and Representative Russo stated opposition; Representative Shimizu and Representative Kahaloa signaled support with reservations. The committee directed DLNR to pursue the exemption analysis and encouraged negotiation toward interim safety measures where feasible.

Why this matters: The bill addresses immediate economic concerns for operators and workers in West Maui while raising constitutional and public-trust questions about how the state balances resource protection with established commercial uses. The committee's two-year limit signals an intent to let the department complete environmental assessments and (if appropriate) adopt exemptions or mitigation measures rather than create a permanent statutory carve-out.