Relating To Historic Preservation.
SB1301 makes a series of changes to Hawaii’s historic preservation laws in Chapter 6E. It creates new requirements for archaeological inventory surveys and reconnaissance-style review before certain projects can proceed, especially in sandy soils where ground disturbance will occur and on parcels where significant historic sites or burials have already been identified on the same or adjacent parcel. For other projects, the bill requires a literature review and full field inspection of the project area, and it sets a 90-day review period for the department to request additional survey work before the submitted report is deemed accepted.
The bill also tightens rules for archaeological permits and professional accountability. Archaeological permits would remain discretionary with the department, and the department could suspend or revoke permits if a principal investigator fails to follow department rules. Violations could also lead to fines and a temporary loss of the right to practice archaeology for up to five years. In addition, the bill broadens the definition of “historic property” to include sites with cultural significance to Native Hawaiians or other ethnic groups, even where the property’s importance is tied to cultural practices, traditional beliefs, events, or oral accounts rather than age alone.
A major portion of the bill revises the island burial council system and the procedures for handling native Hawaiian burial sites. It restructures council membership, shifts appointment authority to lists submitted by the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, and changes the balance of representation toward the Hawaiian community. The bill also adds deadlines for councils and the Office of Hawaiian Affairs to act on burial treatment plans and descendant recognition requests, with default approvals if those deadlines are missed. It further updates rules for confidential records, closed meetings on burial matters, and the role of lineal and cultural descendants in burial-site decisions.
The bill further amends the process for inadvertent discovery of human remains. It requires immediate cessation of damaging activity, prompt reporting to state and law-enforcement authorities, notice to burial councils and the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, and faster timelines for examining remains and determining jurisdiction. It also clarifies who is responsible for mitigation plans and relocation of remains in development and nondevelopment contexts, and it requires project activities to remain halted until written approval is given to resume. These changes would affect developers, landowners, archaeologists, the Department of Land and Natural Resources, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, burial councils, and descendants connected to burial sites.
Overall, the bill appears aimed at strengthening historic preservation protections and giving greater weight to Native Hawaiian cultural interests in burial and archaeological decision-making. The available record shows no committee transcripts or votes, so there is no documented public debate in the provided materials. Based on the bill text itself, likely points of contention include the added compliance burden and potential project delays for developers and property owners, the expanded authority and deadlines imposed on state agencies and burial councils, and the stronger role given to Hawaiian community representatives and descendants in preservation decisions.
SB1301 would amend Chapter 6E of the Hawaii Revised Statutes by adding new survey requirements, expanding the definition of historic property, revising archaeological permit enforcement, and substantially rewriting the structure and procedures of island burial councils and inadvertent burial discovery rules. It would affect project proponents, developers, landowners, archaeologists, the Department of Land and Natural Resources, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, burial councils, and descendants with interests in burial sites and historic properties. The bill also creates new default timelines and acceptance rules that could change how historic preservation reviews are completed and when projects may proceed.
No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no documented legislative sentiment in the supplied history. From the bill text, the measure appears generally preservation-oriented and supportive of Native Hawaiian cultural protections, with an emphasis on stronger review requirements, more structured burial-site procedures, and greater involvement by the Office of Hawaiian Affairs and descendants. The likely support base would be historic preservation and Native Hawaiian interests, while likely concerns would come from development and property-owner interests affected by added review steps and delays.
The main points of contention are likely to be the bill’s expanded archaeological survey requirements, the stricter permit enforcement provisions, and the new deadlines and default approvals for burial council and Office of Hawaiian Affairs action. Developers and property owners may object to increased costs, project delays, and broader triggers for surveys and burial review, while Native Hawaiian organizations and descendant communities may support the bill’s stronger protections, expanded cultural definitions, and greater deference to lineal and cultural descendants. Another possible issue is the shift in council composition and appointment procedures, which reduces the role of the department and increases the role of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs.