Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Adaptation Pathways topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senators advance adaptation‑pathways bill after contested testimony over 'managed retreat'
Summary
Lawmakers advanced SB 237 with amendments after testimony from DLNR, local community groups, and OPSD who debated whether the bill presumes managed retreat and whether a broader toolbox of shoreline protections should be specified.
The joint committees advanced SB 237 on Feb. 18 after substantial testimony from state agencies and local community groups about how the state should plan for sea‑level rise and coastal erosion.
Michael Caine, testifying for the Department of Land and Natural Resources, said DLNR supports regional planning that prioritizes public trust resources. Mihoko Ito of the Kahana Bay Steering Committee and Bernie Bays of the Shoreline Preservation Coalition opposed the bill’s current language, arguing it presumes managed retreat and urged inclusion of intermediary measures such as sand nourishment and groins. Mary Alice Evans from the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development said the office prefers a broader definition of regional shoreline management so adaptive pathways can include different tools at different times.
Senator Rhodes pressed witnesses on concrete alternatives beyond retreat and received answers that included hard and soft protections (groins, rock revetments, dune restoration) and the need for site‑specific analysis. Committee members said they would pass SB 237 with amendments removing an immediate appropriation and adding a defective date so that regional planning language can be broadened and technical concerns addressed.
The committee directed agencies to provide follow‑up information about costs, recommended toolkit items for different shorelines and examples where non‑retreat tools have been effective.
