Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Governance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committees hear Mauna Kea stewardship bill amid liability and permit concerns; management plan timeline discussed
Summary
Joint committees heard HB2592 on Mauna Kea stewardship; agency witnesses flagged complex questions about whether conservation permits should 'run with the land,' liability waivers, governance and transition timelines, and a management-plan deliverable slated for October 2026.
Lawmakers on March 25 took testimony on House Bill 2592, which concerns the Mauna Kea Stewardship and Oversight Authority. The bill drew prepared testimony from the Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR), the Mauna Kea Stewardship and Oversight Authority (MKSOA), the attorney general’s office, and the University of Hawaii, and prompted detailed legal and operational questions from the committees.
DLNR and authority witnesses described technical issues that may require Conservation District Use Permit (CDUP) amendments if conditions attached to permits are intended to apply beyond telescope operations. The attorney general’s office said it submitted testimony raising three concerns and later clarified points about the proposed liability waiver language. Committee members asked whether CDUPs "run with the land" and what the consequences would be if permit conditions were not met.
John DeVries, executive director of MKSOA, and other witnesses described active transition work: a contracted management-plan deliverable is scheduled for completion in October 2026 (testimony referenced an October 2026 final deliverable), with additional vetting months to follow. Witnesses said asset and contract analyses are near completion and staff-transfer planning is underway with a target for staff transfer by July 1, 2027 or within 12 months of the measure’s effective date.
Committee members raised concerns about potential automatic 10-year lease extensions included in other bills this session and whether a blanket extension would undermine community and university efforts; MKSOA witnesses said case‑by‑case, authority‑granted extensions made more sense. The attorney general’s office recommended limiting broad liability waivers and said some waiver language might be broader than intended.
Committee chairs said follow-up would be required to sort through the complex legal and liability issues, and that additional review and drafting would happen before subsequent committee action.
