House committee advances regional shoreline mitigation bill after debate over exemptions and definitions

Chair Mark Hasch said the committee would move quickly to complete business before the noon session and opened hearings on SB2401 SD1, a proposal to create regional shoreline mitigation (adaptation) districts.

Attorney General Lisonbee Kato told the committee the bill uses the terms 'mitigation' and 'adaptation' inconsistently, which could create title/subject concerns; the AG provided written comments and offered to answer questions. Michael Kane of the Department of Land and Natural Resources said DLNR was neutral on terminology and more focused on substantive protections, and emphasized that the amended language prioritizes public‑trust resources while preserving project-level environmental review and permitting.

Lealoha Mapuanai of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs said OHA appreciates steps toward structured regional planning but urged that the bill explicitly require assessments of impacts on Native Hawaiian traditional and customary practices and preserve environmental review at the project level. Chris Della Mae, representing a Kana Bay condominium steering committee, supported the measure with an HD1 amendment that preserves full regulatory authority for state and county agencies and asked that the bill clarify ownership and maintenance responsibilities for adaptation infrastructure.

Opponents raised precedent and environmental concerns. Dr. Mark Decos, chief scientist for the Hawaii Association for Marine Education and Research, argued that ‘‘compassion does not require bypassing Hawaii coastal protections’’ and warned that site‑specific exemptions could open the door to future projects seeking similar carve-outs. Other witnesses, including community resiliency groups and attorneys, urged the committee to remove exemptions that would bypass established environmental review, historic‑preservation review and coastal‑zone management protections.

Committee members pressed DLNR and OHA over whether the bill would effectively allow shoreline hardening under an 'adaptation' label. DLNR staff said the current, amended version requires environmental review and permitting and prioritizes public‑trust and cultural resources; members asked the agency to work with the committee to tighten definitions and guardrails. Representative Chaney asked whether existing land trusts or university programs could be leveraged rather than creating a new entity; DLNR replied that private landowner safe‑harbor agreements and land trusts already do some endangered‑species work but that the proposed sanctuary model is different.

On the committee recommendation, Chair Hasch moved SB2401 SD1 forward with an HD1 including DLNR technical edits and Sanhi’s proposed amendments to align terminology and provide a limited pathway for temporary shoreline protection measures. The committee adopted the recommendation to pass with amendments and will include technical edits and the revised preamble in the committee report.

What happens next: The committee's recommendation advances SB2401 to the next committee with an HD1. The measure's final language will be monitored for how it defines adaptation versus mitigation and for any retained or removed exemptions to existing environmental and historic‑preservation review.