Twenty-nine testifiers weighed on the Maui Island Plan Implementation Program at Wednesday night’s public hearing, with most expressing gratitude for work done by County officials and volunteers, but only one expressing unequivocal support.
Maui residents expressed concerns about various elements of the proposed implementation program reflected in Bill 29 (2014), which passed first reading on May 6. Testifiers said provisions purportedly recommended by the Maui Island General Plan Advisory Committee are not in the bill.
The GPAC is a 25-member voluntary body that was appointed by Mayor Alan Arakawa during his first term and confirmed by the Council in 2005. The body has provided advice to the Council and Planning Director on the Countywide Policy Plan and Maui Island Plan.
Planning Committee Report 14-55, which recommended passage of Bill 29, stated:
Your Committee notes no changes were made to the programmatic actions themselves; however, your Committee noted a desire to further discuss actions as follows: (1) for multiple actions calling for a development of a plan, adding requirements for implementation and monitoring as follow-on activities; (2) for an action in the natural hazards section, revising wording for the identification and development of required shelter capacity; (3) for an action in the solid waste section, revising wording on materials recovery facilities and cost-recovery fees; and (4) minor changes to wording for several actions.
The Planning Committee, chaired by Councilmember Donald G. Couch, Jr., had extensive discussions prior to making its recommendation to the Council. Recorded meetings are available for viewing:
Some testifiers at the public hearing requested to restore wording that would require the County to not accept certain land use applications if they include reference documents more than five years old. The use of “may” instead of “shall” regarding funding commitments was also a concern raised by some.
Testifiers said community plan citizen advisory committees should be established and made permanent. Some claimed that only the residents of a community plan area fully understand the common interests of the area.
One testifier said that without the implementation plan, the County will be imposing “taxation without representation,” after asserting the need for road infrastructure improvements. Another cited what he said were missing provisions regarding the Hana bike plan.
The implementation program is the final element of the Maui Island Plan, which was otherwise adopted Dec. 28, 2012. The Council has until May 29, 2014 to adopt an implementation program.
The second and final reading of Bill 29 is expected to be scheduled for the May 27 Council meeting. Testimony may be submitted to firstname.lastname@example.org.
# # #