Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Transparency County Land Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee defers Bill 81 (2025) to refine enforcement and reporting provisions for county land funding disclosures
Summary
The committee deferred Bill 81, a proposed amendment to Maui County Code chapter 3.04 that would require disclosure of funding sources for county-acquired land and quarterly reporting. Staff and Department of Finance asked for further work on enforcement language; public testimony urged return of ancestral/royal patented lands.
The Budget, Finance & Economic Development Committee deferred Bill 81 (2025) — an ordinance proposal to amend Maui County Code chapter 3.04 — for further work with county departments on enforcement provisions and reporting requirements.
The ordinance under consideration would require disclosure of the source of funding when the county seeks appropriations for development of county-acquired land, ensure proposed uses conform with restrictions tied to specific funds, and add quarterly reporting through the county’s budget implementation process. Committee Chair Yuki Lei Sugimura said she will work with the Department of Finance to add enforcement detail after Department of Finance staff flagged enforcement as an area needing greater clarity.
Staff comments and public testimony: Guy Hironaka (identified in the meeting as a Department of Finance real-property management specialist) told the committee the bill “probably needs to have some attention to enforcement.” Legislative staff also reviewed the measure; Chair Sugimura asked the county attorney’s office to assist with revisions. The committee accepted written testimony and heard 1 in-person comment from a speaker identifying as Royal House of Hawaii, who urged the county to contact descendants of royal-patent lands and to prioritize returning lands to native Hawaiian descendants. The public testifier’s remarks included assertions about royal-patent title lands and related historical and legal claims; committee members did not adopt any of those claims as factual action items and noted public comment was received.
Outcome: The committee took no vote to adopt an ordinance and instead postponed the item for revision and further departmental review. Chair Sugimura said the bill will be brought back after the county’s Department of Finance and the legislative attorney have prepared suggested language addressing enforcement and quarterly reporting.
Why it matters: If enacted, the measure would add transparency requirements for county requests to develop land the county has acquired, and it would seek to ensure proposed development uses align with any fund-specific restrictions attached to the acquisition. Committee members expressed interest in clarifying enforcement mechanisms and how quarterly reporting would be integrated into existing budget reports.
Ending: The committee deferred the measure for further drafting; no formal vote occurred. The chair said she will schedule the item again after department review and added that the committee will continue to accept written testimony on the proposal.
