Lawmakers advance narrower vehicle on HEPA reforms after hours of testimony from fishers and tour operators

The House committees on Water & Land and on Energy & Environmental Protection advanced House Bill 661 with amendments to continue legislative work on how Hawaii Environmental Policy Act (HEPA, HRS Chapter 343) reviews apply to ongoing commercial activities in state waters. The committee adopted the bill as a vehicle for further conversation and made targeted language edits; it deferred House Bill 123, which would have broadly exempted fisheries from environmental review requirements.

The HB661 debate drew lengthy in-person and Zoom testimony from tourism operators, commercial boat operators and fishermen who warned that prolonged environmental-review processes had already shut down or threatened operations in West Maui and elsewhere. Those business witnesses urged the committee to adopt measures that would allow long-standing, regulated operations to continue while environmental reviews proceed. Opponents — including Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Earthjustice, Sierra Club and several conservation groups — argued the bill would erode the public’s long-standing environmental-review protections and could have broad, long-term consequences for waters, native cultural practices and fisheries.

Mahesh Cleveland of Earthjustice told the committee, “We strongly oppose 661 as written, for first of all, because it's formulated on false premises,” and urged lawmakers to preserve HEPA's tools for long-term environmental protection. Wayne Tanaka of Sierra Club told members he opposed the measure and said repeated agency noncompliance with the law had driven the need for careful enforcement, not statutory rollbacks.

Business witnesses described economic and family hardship tied to stopped permits. Denver (last name redacted), appearing for the Ocean Tourism Coalition and owners of decade-long operations, said the way HRS §343 has been applied has “no mechanism for these operations to continue” and called for protections to avoid immediate shutdowns. Daniel Hazen of Holoholo Charters said HB661 “ensures that businesses can continue until facts and evidence can be gathered to prove harm or no harm to the environment.” Other charter operators from Kauai, Maui and the Big Island described employees, multigenerational families and supply-chain vendors who would be affected if permits were suspended.

Committee chairs made several targeted edits during decision making: they removed the word “inadvertently” from the purpose clause, narrowed phrasing around public hunting areas to “public hunting areas,” and clarified references to ‘‘applicable agency or applicant’’ in several places to make the bill’s scope clearer. The committee also directed staff to consider more scalpel-like carve-outs — for example, narrowly targeted, time-limited exemptions or programmatic environmental reviews under HRS Chapter 343 — and noted significant unresolved issues remain.

The committee recorded that it would move HB661 forward “as the vehicle to continue discussion” and deferred companion measures for additional drafting. HB123, the broader fisheries exemption bill, was deferred.

Why it matters: the debate juxtaposed competing public priorities — environmental protection, native rights and long-term resource stewardship on the one hand, and near-term economic stability for island businesses and workers on the other. Committee chairs signaled they want to continue negotiating narrower, targeted solutions rather than adopt a sweeping statutory exemption.

What’s next: HB661 will advance from committee with amendments and further negotiations; staff will refine language seeking narrower, targeted measures and potential programmatic review approaches. HB123 was deferred.

Votes and formal action: the committee voted to pass HB661 with amendments; the committee deferred HB123.