Hawaii County Council fails to override mayor's veto of herbicide ban after hours of testimony

The Hawaii County Council on Jan. 8 failed to override Mayor Harry Kim's veto of Bill 101, a proposed ordinance that would have barred a list of herbicides from use on county parks, roadsides, trails and other public property and created a four-year transition committee. The motion to override the mayor fell 5'to'4 in a roll-call vote after a day of nearly continuous public testimony for and against the measure.

Chair Chung called the meeting to order at 9 a.m. and opened the public-comment period, drawing speakers from Pahoa, Kona, Kohala, Waimea and Hilo. Supporters urged the council to override the veto for public-health and ecological reasons. John Olsen of Pahoa said the county had been trying to address Hilo Bay water quality for decades and added of Bill 101: "We need to get beyond this and find other solutions." Anna Nawahene Kahaupi, a beekeeper from Waimea, told the council the bill would protect pollinators and asked members to "think about the future and the next 50 years." Mark Leroy, who said he is a rat-lungworm survivor, said testimony from global scientists convinced him to support the override.

Opponents included flower-industry representatives, farmers and weed scientists who testified that modern herbicides are different, that alternatives can be more costly and that some county tasks (roadside management, control of invasive weeds) rely on selective chemical tools. Eric Tanaway, president of the Hawaii Floriculture and Nursery Association, said the association supports the mayor's veto and noted the county's need to work with the private sector. Lucas Cambic, a molecular biologist, said modern herbicides break down faster than legacy pollutants and questioned whether the limited science supports a blanket ban.

Rebecca Villegas, who moved both the procedural reconsideration and the subsequent motion to pass Bill 101 and override the veto, framed the vote as protection for children, county workers and pollinators. "The time is now to reduce exposures in our parks and on our roadsides," she said on the floor. Mayor Harry Kim, who delivered a written veto message and spoke to the chamber, said his office supported the objective of reducing herbicide use but objected to specific language and certain implementation requirements in the ordinance; he proposed a collaborative transition committee and warned that some wording in the bill overstated risks as measured by federal and international agencies.

Council debate was intense and lengthy. Supporters cited letters from medical groups and testimony from pediatricians and beekeepers; opponents pressed for more operational analysis and warned of fiscal and worker-safety tradeoffs. The clerk explained the charter rules: a motion to reconsider required five votes (it passed) and overriding a mayoral veto requires a supermajority of six. The final roll call produced five "aye" votes (David, Eoff, Kleinfelder, Poindexter, Villegas) and four "no" votes (Kirkowitz, Leroy, Richards, Chair Chung), so the mayor's veto stood.

Next steps: the mayor told the council his office would form a committee to work with departments and community stakeholders on best practices to reduce herbicide use; several council members asked administration staff for a short briefing paper and comparative cost/timing estimates for alternative implementation approaches before any further ordinance action. The council moved on to a separate package of budgets and resolutions, including authorization of a Corps of Engineers Hilo Bay watershed study and first reading of a bill that would fund acquisition of a proposed Pahoa transit hub property.

Action: The council failed to override Mayor Kim's veto of Bill 101. The veto remains effective; the administration has pledged to convene a transition/technical committee and to work with the council on implementation ideas.

Votes on override (roll call): David: yes; Eoff: yes; Connelly Kleinfelder: yes; Kirkowitz: no; Leroy: no; Poindexter: yes; Richards: no; Villegas: yes; Chair Chung: no. Outcome: motion failed (required 6 votes).

What to watch: staff follow-ups from the administration on (1) a short white paper comparing candidate hub sites and the timeline/costs for making alternative locations operational, and (2) the makeup, budget and timetable for the administration's proposed vegetation-management transition committee.