Relating To The Transfer Of Non-agricultural Park Lands.
Summary
HB1323 revises Hawaii law governing the transfer of certain public lands used for agricultural purposes, with a focus on lands previously addressed by Act 90 (2003) and reviewed by the Act 139 (2021) working group. The bill states that lands under the Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) that are used primarily and substantially for agricultural production should be transferred to the Department of Agriculture (DOA) so they can be managed for long-term productive agricultural use. It also updates legislative findings in chapter 166E to reinforce the constitutional policy that public lands should support farm development and home ownership where possible.
The bill changes section 166E-3 to make the DOA’s acceptance and management of qualifying non-agricultural park lands mandatory rather than discretionary, subject to approval by the Board of Agriculture and a suitability determination for agricultural use. It also provides for the transfer of related assets and position counts needed to manage the lands and facilities, while preserving DLNR jurisdiction over designated conservation lands that are not currently in agricultural use. The bill includes a standard savings clause for existing rights and proceedings and sets an effective date of July 1, 3000.
Impact
HB1323 would amend Hawaii Revised Statutes chapter 166E to streamline and strengthen the transfer process for qualifying public lands from DLNR to DOA, reducing the role of mutual agreement language and clarifying that the DOA shall accept qualifying transfers upon board approval. In practical terms, it would shift management responsibility, associated personnel, and related assets for eligible lands into the agricultural agency framework, while leaving non-agricultural conservation lands with DLNR. The bill affects state land management policy, agency authority, and the statutory implementation of agricultural land transfer programs.
Sentiment
The available bill text and context suggest a generally supportive policy direction centered on advancing agricultural land use and implementing prior legislative findings. The measure appears designed to carry out recommendations from a working group and to resolve delays or ambiguity in the transfer process. No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of opposition or formal debate in the supplied materials.
Contention
The main point of potential contention is the shift from permissive, agreement-based transfers to a mandatory transfer framework, which may be viewed as reducing discretion for DLNR and changing the balance of authority between DLNR and the Board of Land and Natural Resources. Another possible issue is the requirement that the Board of Agriculture approve acceptance and determine suitability, which could raise questions about implementation, land classification, and whether particular parcels truly qualify for agricultural use. The bill also preserves conservation lands outside current agricultural use under DLNR, indicating an effort to limit the scope of transfers and address concerns about non-agricultural or protected lands.