Requesting The Director Of Transportation To Establish The Makakilo Drive Extension Task Force To Address Issues Delaying The Construction Of The Makakilo Drive Extension Project.
H.R. 9 is a House Resolution requesting the Director of Transportation to create the Makakilo Drive Extension Task Force. The resolution is aimed at addressing the long-delayed Makakilo Drive Extension Project, which supporters describe as a long-promised second access route for Makakilo. The findings in the resolution emphasize that Makakilo currently has only one way in and out, creating safety concerns, especially in light of the Maui wildfires and the need for reliable evacuation routes.
The task force would be chaired by the Director of Transportation or a designee and include representatives from the City and County of Honolulu, the Honolulu City Council, the Legislature, local business interests, and Makakilo residents. Its charge is to identify the causes of delay, develop an action plan to move the project forward, identify possible funding sources from federal, state, and private sources, and incorporate community input. The task force must also submit a report with findings, recommendations, and any proposed legislation to the Legislature before the 2026 Regular Session.
Because this is a resolution rather than a bill, it does not directly amend state law or create a new statutory mandate. Its practical effect is to direct attention and coordination toward a transportation project that has been stalled for years, and to encourage intergovernmental and community collaboration around planning, funding, land acquisition, and environmental issues. The resolution also signals legislative interest in possible future legislation if the task force identifies needed changes.
The general sentiment reflected in the resolution is strongly supportive of the project and of taking action to overcome barriers to construction. The language frames the extension as important for public safety, traffic relief, emergency access, connectivity, and economic growth. No opposing testimony or recorded votes are provided in the materials, so there is no documented formal opposition in the available record.
The main points of contention identified in the resolution are the underlying obstacles to construction: funding constraints, land acquisition, and environmental considerations. These issues appear to be the central reasons the project has not advanced, and the task force is intended to help reconcile those competing concerns while keeping residents and local stakeholders involved in the process.
HR 9 does not change the Hawaii Revised Statutes directly, but it would create an advisory task force within the Department of Transportation’s sphere of coordination. The resolution affects the Department of Transportation, the City and County of Honolulu, the Honolulu City Council, and legislative appointees by asking them to participate in a formal review of the Makakilo Drive Extension Project. Its practical impact is to generate a report and potential legislative recommendations that could influence future transportation, land use, funding, and infrastructure decisions related to the project.
The available text reflects a broadly favorable and urgent sentiment toward the Makakilo Drive extension. The resolution presents the project as a long-overdue public safety and mobility improvement, especially because Makakilo currently has only one access point. The framing suggests strong support for accelerating the project and for convening stakeholders to solve the barriers that have delayed it. No committee transcripts or votes were provided, so there is no recorded dissent or formal opposition in the available materials.
The resolution identifies the main areas of contention as practical rather than ideological: how to fund the project, how to resolve land acquisition issues, and how to address environmental concerns. These are the obstacles described as having delayed construction for years. The task force is designed to bring together state, county, business, and community representatives to work through those issues, suggesting that the likely disagreements involve project implementation details, not the need for the extension itself.