HB19 would substantially reorganize Hawaii’s state tourism governance structure by abolishing the Hawaii Tourism Authority and replacing it with a new nonprofit entity, the Corporation for the Stewardship of Hawaii Tourism. The bill frames this change as implementing recommendations from a 2024 governance study and shifts the state’s tourism policy emphasis from destination marketing and visitor growth toward destination stewardship and regenerative tourism. Under the bill, the new corporation would serve as the official destination stewardship organization and official representative for Hawaii tourism, with authority to develop long-range and annual strategic plans focused on balancing economic benefits with community, cultural, and environmental outcomes.
The bill creates a layered governance system. It establishes a state destination stewardship council and four island destination stewardship councils for Kauai, Maui Nui, Hawaii Island, and Oahu, with membership drawn from industry, county government, cultural practitioners, environmental and social nonprofits, and state agencies. These bodies would guide planning, approve action plans, and oversee the corporation’s leadership. The corporation would have the powers of a private nonprofit, but would remain tied to state oversight through gubernatorial approval, legislative reporting, public meetings, and statutory funding mechanisms.
HB19 also makes a series of conforming and structural changes throughout state law. It repeals chapter 201B, transfers the Hawaii Tourism Authority’s rights, duties, assets, records, and employees to the new corporation, and updates references in other statutes to reflect the new entity. The bill revises provisions related to legal representation, special fund assessments, retirement rules, the cultural public market, and the coastal zone management commission. It also preserves and redirects tourism-related special funds, including the convention center enterprise special fund and tourism emergency special fund, and continues transient accommodations tax allocations for convention center operations, emergency reserves, and land and development purposes.
The overall sentiment reflected in the bill text is strongly supportive of reforming tourism governance, with the legislation presenting the change as a response to study findings and a need for more community-centered management of tourism. Because there are no committee transcripts or recorded votes in the provided material, there is no direct evidence of debate or formal opposition in the record supplied. Still, the bill itself suggests an intent to preserve tourism’s economic role while addressing concerns about overcrowding, resource strain, cultural impacts, and the need for more local and stakeholder-driven decision-making.
The main points of contention likely concern the scale of the restructuring and the shift away from a traditional marketing-focused tourism authority. The bill would remove the Hawaii Tourism Authority as a state entity and replace it with a nonprofit corporation that is not considered a state agency or public corporation, which could raise questions about accountability, labor status, procurement, and control over public funds. Other likely issues include the composition of the new councils, the role of industry versus community interests, the use of transient accommodations tax revenues, and whether the new stewardship model would improve tourism outcomes without weakening the state’s ability to market Hawaii as a destination.
HB19 would repeal chapter 201B and replace the Hawaii Tourism Authority with a new nonprofit corporation and associated state and island councils, requiring extensive conforming amendments across Hawaii Revised Statutes. It would alter the legal framework for tourism governance, funding, reporting, procurement, and emergency response, while transferring existing authority assets, employees, contracts, and functions to the new corporation. The bill also changes several statutes that reference the Hawaii Tourism Authority, substituting the new corporation in related planning and advisory roles, and preserves key tourism special funds under the new structure.
The bill appears generally favorable toward major tourism governance reform and is framed as implementing a study-backed recommendation to move Hawaii toward destination stewardship and regenerative tourism. The text emphasizes collaboration, cultural preservation, community benefit, and environmental protection alongside economic goals. No committee transcripts or votes were provided, so there is no recorded public debate in the supplied materials, but the bill’s structure suggests an effort to present the change as a comprehensive modernization rather than a narrow policy adjustment.
The likely areas of contention are the abolition of the Hawaii Tourism Authority, the creation of a nonprofit corporation outside the state agency structure, and the transfer of control over tourism policy and funding to a new governance model. Stakeholders may disagree over whether tourism should be managed primarily as a marketing/economic development function or as a stewardship function balancing community and environmental concerns. Additional friction points include the composition and appointment process for the new councils, the handling of transient accommodations tax revenues and special funds, the treatment of employees and retirement rules, and the degree of state oversight versus nonprofit independence.