The bill impacts Hawaii's land classification and management statutes by mandating the DLNR to revise its land classifications to include agricultural multi-use lands, which are recognized for their agricultural value along with their significance for conservation and public recreation. In doing so, it promotes a more integrated approach to land stewardship and natural resource management. Funding is also allocated for the creation of an agricultural multi-use lands specialist position, which is intended to foster collaboration among various stakeholders including government agencies and agricultural land lessees.
House Bill 1660 is designed to address the governance and management of agricultural multi-use lands in Hawaii. The bill arose from findings by the Act 90 working group which aimed to evaluate the transfer of non-agricultural park lands to the Department of Agriculture. It was determined that many agricultural lands have diverse management needs that align better with the mission of the Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR). Consequently, the bill specifies that these multi-use agricultural lands will remain under the stewardship of DLNR and not be transferred to the Department of Agriculture.
The general sentiment regarding HB 1660 appears to be supportive among those who believe in the importance of maintaining local control over agricultural lands and ensuring that they are managed according to their specific potential and ecological needs. The bill reflects a growing recognition of the multifaceted value of agricultural lands, extending beyond mere agricultural use to environmental conservation and community engagement. However, some concerns might arise around resource allocation and potential bureaucratic delays in its implementation.
Notable points of contention associated with this bill include the discussion around whether agricultural lands should be managed solely by DLNR or if there should be a shared governance approach with the agriculture department. Critics may argue that maintaining higher levels of state control over local agricultural resources could hinder innovations and bespoke approaches to land management that are often best executed at local levels. The centralized management structure proposed may be viewed as an overreach by some stakeholders who advocate for more localized decision-making autonomy.