Relating To Historic Preservation.
The bill proposes significant changes to the existing framework under Section 6E-42 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes. By allowing counties to take charge of historic preservation project reviews, HB821 attempts to streamline the process, potentially leading to a quicker turnaround in project approvals while still ensuring the protection of historic places, burial sites, and aviation artifacts. However, the legislation does safeguard certain sensitive aspects; for instance, counties are not permitted to review projects pertaining to properties listed in national or state historic registers, preserving a level of oversight from the state for critical sites.
House Bill 821, also known as the act relating to historic preservation, addresses the inefficiencies tied to the review of projects affecting historic sites in Hawaii. The bill seeks to delegate the responsibility for conducting reviews from the state historic preservation division to individual county governments, thereby tackling the existing backlog of project approvals that delay construction and affordable housing. This measure aims to enhance the efficiency of the review process and mitigate costly delays by empowering counties with the authority to conduct necessary assessments.
The reception of HB821 has been largely measured, reflecting a mix of appreciation for its potential to reduce backlogs, coupled with concerns about ensuring that counties are equipped with the necessary expertise and resources to handle these responsibilities competently. While proponents laud the bill as a proactive approach to facilitating development and addressing housing shortages, critics worry about the implications of shifting such significant responsibilities to local governments, particularly in terms of maintaining objective and thorough assessments of historical impacts.
A point of contention among lawmakers and stakeholders surrounding the bill has been the delegation of responsibilities to the counties, as this raises concerns regarding the adequacy of local capacity to conduct thorough reviews without oversights or conflicts of interest. Moreover, while the bill promises efficiency, there are debates on whether transferring these powers might lead to inconsistencies in how historic preservation laws are applied across different counties. Further discussions center around the effectiveness and impartiality of third-party reviewers, who will be certified to streamline preliminary document assessments before they reach the state level.