Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Plan Framework topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Staff proposes updated Hawaii Water Plan framework framed by He Mele No Kane and new planning requirements
Summary
Commission staff outlined a proposed revision to the 1999 Hawaii Water Plan framework to improve usability, require climate‑scenario planning, add a cultural framing (He Mele No Kane), provide checklists and clearer requirements for component plans, and set a public process to adopt the updated framework by fall 2025.
Commission staff presented a draft update to the Hawaii Water Plan framework on Feb. 18, proposing a reorganization and new requirements intended to make the plan more usable to agencies and the public and to integrate climate, cultural and public‑trust considerations.
Katie Roth (planning program manager) told commissioners the existing framework dates to 2000 and has not been substantially revised; staff will propose a more user‑friendly document with graphics, a checklist for plan preparers, explicit requirements (rather than optional “recommendations”), and a chapter summarizing the history and case law that guides water‑resource decision‑making in Hawaii.
A central conceptual change would frame the plan under a Hawaiian cultural lens using He Mele No Kane to emphasize water’s connected cycle and the “one‑water” concept. Staff proposed requiring plan preparers to perform climate‑scenario planning (using publicly available tools and USGS projections), to better account for public‑trust uses including Department of Hawaiian Home Lands and traditional and customary practices, and to improve stakeholder engagement and data sharing (including private water purveyor data where available).
Staff said the update would also identify post‑adoption steps (rule updates, possible statutory amendments) where the framework introduces requirements not currently reflected in law or administrative rules. A professional graphic designer will be hired to create a more readable document, and staff intends to reconvene original focus groups and hold public hearings before bringing a final draft to the commission for adoption; the staff target is Sept.–Oct. 2025.
Commissioners recommended adding a rubric or scored checklist (not only a yes/no list), closer coordination with the Department of Health on water quality planning, regular briefings to the commission on progress, and identifying dedicated funding so plan updates are not delayed by lack of resources. Staff said it will circulate drafts to plan‑preparing agencies for feedback and may propose partial updates for specific plan elements (for example, sustainable‑yield updates informed by recent USGS recharge estimates) rather than waiting for full plan rewrites.
The briefing was non‑action; staff will continue stakeholder outreach and return with draft language and materials for public review and formal adoption.
