Requesting The Office Of Hawaiian Affairs To Convene A Working Group To Examine And Consider The Transfer Of Native Hawaiian Burial Site Management Under Chapter 6e, Hawaii Revised Statutes, From The State Historic Preservation Division To The Office Of Hawaiian Affairs.
H.R. 186 is a House Resolution that asks the Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA) to convene a working group to study whether responsibility for Native Hawaiian burial site management under chapter 6E, Hawaii Revised Statutes, should be transferred from the State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) to OHA. The resolution is grounded in constitutional and statutory references to the State’s duty to protect iwi kūpuna, the public-trust status of burial sites, Native Hawaiian self-governance, and international indigenous rights principles. It also cites prior work by an OHA-convened Burial Sites Working Group and argues that recurring problems, resource limitations, and possible conflicts of interest justify reexamining the current structure.
The working group would be tasked with identifying which SHPD duties could be shared or assumed by OHA, assessing OHA’s staffing, funding, legal, and technology needs, and developing an implementation plan and timeline for any transfer. It would also consider whether recommendations from the 2023 Burial Sites Working Group could improve burial site protection and would be expected to propose statutory or administrative changes if needed. The group would include representatives from SHPD, OHA, each Island Burial Council, and community members with expertise and experience in burial site protection, including lineal and cultural descendants.
The bill’s practical impact is limited because it is a resolution rather than a law; it does not itself change chapter 6E or transfer any authority. Instead, it initiates a formal study and recommendation process that could lead to future legislation or administrative restructuring affecting burial site oversight, the Island Burial Councils, and the division of responsibilities between DLNR’s historic preservation system and OHA. If acted upon later, the proposal could shift how Native Hawaiian burial sites are reviewed, protected, and managed statewide.
The general sentiment reflected in the resolution is supportive of greater Native Hawaiian control and improved stewardship of burial sites. The measure frames the current system as under-resourced and, in some respects, ineffective, and it presents OHA as a more appropriate lead agency for Native Hawaiian burial matters. There is no recorded committee testimony or vote history in the provided materials, so the available context does not show formal opposition or support beyond the resolution’s own findings.
The main points of contention are institutional responsibility, capacity, and potential conflicts of interest. Supporters of the study appear to believe SHPD’s dual role in historic preservation reviews and burial site decisions can create real or perceived conflicts, while critics or skeptics may question whether OHA has the resources, legal authority, or technical infrastructure to take on these duties. The resolution does not resolve those disputes; it directs the working group to examine them and report back with recommendations.
Because H.R. 186 is a House Resolution, it does not amend statutes or directly alter the legal duties in chapter 6E, Hawaii Revised Statutes. Its immediate effect is to request that OHA convene a multi-stakeholder working group to evaluate whether some or all Native Hawaiian burial site management functions, including aspects of the Island Burial Councils’ work, should be transferred from SHPD to OHA. Any actual change to state law would require later legislation or administrative action based on the working group’s findings.
The resolution reflects a generally favorable sentiment toward reforming burial site governance in a way that increases Native Hawaiian self-determination and improves protection of iwi kūpuna. The bill’s findings are critical of the current state system, describing recurring management failures, inadequate resources, and possible conflicts of interest at SHPD. No vote totals or committee transcripts were provided, so there is no documented formal opposition or amendment debate in the available record.
The central contention is whether Native Hawaiian burial site management should remain with SHPD or be shifted, in whole or in part, to OHA. Supporters of the resolution emphasize OHA’s role as the principal agency for Native Hawaiian affairs and argue that SHPD’s structure can create conflicts of interest and administrative shortcomings. The main countervailing concerns are whether OHA has sufficient staffing, funding, legal authority, and technical capacity to assume these responsibilities, and how any transfer would affect existing Island Burial Councils and burial site procedures.