A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

Supporters tell Senate panel Kalakehe regional park could spur Big Island tourism and community growth; committee adopts resolutions with edits

March 17, 2026 | Senate, Legislative , Hawaii


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Supporters tell Senate panel Kalakehe regional park could spur Big Island tourism and community growth; committee adopts resolutions with edits
Speakers told the Senate Committee on Energy and Intergovernmental Affairs on March 17 that a proposed regional park near Kalakehe would meet growing community needs and drive visitation and revenue.

Craig Bo Kahui, representing West Hawaii Parks and Athletic Corporation, told the committee his organization has worked with the county since 2009 on a regional park plan and provided a support packet. He said the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands has "somewhere about 500 more homes" in the pipeline and cited an existing 300 homes in the area; he also said water was secured that could support roughly 800 additional housing units, arguing a park would be needed to serve that growth. "We applaud this committee for recognizing the needs of our community for a comprehensive regional park," he said.

Jeffrey Kimoto, senior softball USA director for the state, said he recently ran a senior softball event that drew more than 700 players from Hawaii and the mainland and estimated the six‑day event produced "close to $800,000" in economic activity. He told committee members a facility like the Patsy Mink Sports Complex would help the Big Island host similar tournaments and community events.

Committee members noted there was no Hawaii County representative present to comment at the hearing. In response to Department of Land and Natural Resources input recorded in testimony, the committee amended SCR20 and SR17 to change language from a state set‑aside to county ownership and made technical, non‑substantive edits before adopting the resolutions.

The committee's action advances the resolutions to the next step in the legislative process; testimony included economic and housing claims that were presented by proponents and were not subjected to independent verification during the hearing.

View the Full Meeting & All Its Details

This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.

Watch full, unedited meeting videos
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
Permanent access to expanding government content
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee