Hawaii County General Plan Substitute Draws Sharp Criticism, Decision Delayed to May

A Hawaii County policy committee heard hours of charged testimony on April 7 before voting unanimously to postpone action on the proposed General Plan 2045, after Puna Councilwoman Ashley Kierkiewicz introduced a 71-page substitute that drew sharp rebukes from roughly two dozen testifiers, including a former planning director.

The original Bill 66, drafted by the county Planning Department through years of public comment periods, runs 310 pages and sets a 20-year framework for land use, agricultural protection, flood and coastal adaptation, transportation, climate resilience, and renewable energy goals across the entire island. Kierkiewicz's substitute, which she called the "2026 Plan," compresses that framework to 71 pages.

Planning Director Jeff Darrow did not soften his assessment, calling the substitute "a complete rewrite." Former Planning Director Chris Yuen, who also authored an op-ed opposing the abridged approach, testified that the condensed version discards years of public participation and technical work. Supporters of the longer draft argued that the 71-page version strips out maps, land-use provisions, and technical specifications they consider essential for legal enforceability and clarity.

Kierkiewicz defended her approach in a March 19 letter to council members, arguing the 2045 draft had become "a catch-all for every worthy goal the county might pursue." "If every concept is treated as a priority, nothing is," she wrote.

The Policy Committee on Planning, Land Use and Economic Development unanimously delayed any vote until its May 4 meeting, a signal that neither version currently has the momentum to advance without broader consensus.

The stakes reach beyond procedural disagreement. The General Plan shapes decisions on housing, agricultural zoning, coastal management, and infrastructure investment across Hilo, Puna, Kona, and North Kohala. With the island still working to rebuild roads, schools, and farms damaged by recent storms, access to state and federal resilience funding is increasingly tied to formal, adopted planning documents. A prolonged impasse could complicate the county's ability to compete for that funding.

The May 4 hearing is expected to surface proposed amendments and potential restoration of the maps and technical provisions stripped from the substitute.