SB6 clarifies the division of authority over Mauna Kea lands, especially lands within the state conservation district, after the transition period established under Act 255 (2022) for the Mauna Kea Stewardship and Oversight Authority. The bill states that, even after the five-year transition period, the Board of Land and Natural Resources and the Department of Land and Natural Resources retain their powers and duties under chapters 171 and 183C for conservation-district areas on Mauna Kea lands, rather than transferring those responsibilities to the new authority.
The bill also specifies that natural resource management enforcement and emergency response on Mauna Kea lands remain with the Department of Land and Natural Resources’ Division of Conservation and Resources Enforcement (DOCARE) beyond the transition period. It amends the Mauna Kea governance statutes to preserve the authority’s role as the principal manager of state-managed lands on Mauna Kea generally, while carving out conservation-district management, enforcement, and emergency response functions for BLNR, DLNR, and DOCARE. The measure takes effect July 1, 2026.
Impact
SB6 would amend chapters 183C and 195H of the Hawaii Revised Statutes to narrow the scope of powers transferred to the Mauna Kea Stewardship and Oversight Authority. It preserves BLNR and DLNR jurisdiction over conservation district lands on Mauna Kea and keeps DOCARE responsible for enforcement and emergency response, while leaving the authority in place for other Mauna Kea land-management functions. The bill would therefore affect the allocation of permitting, land-use, conservation, and enforcement responsibilities among state agencies and the authority.
Sentiment
The available context suggests the bill is framed positively as a clarification measure intended to protect natural resources and resolve jurisdictional uncertainty. There are no committee transcripts or recorded votes in the provided materials, so no formal support or opposition can be measured from hearings or floor action. The bill’s language emphasizes conservation, constitutional duties, and protection of Native Hawaiian rights, indicating a policy rationale likely intended to appeal to resource-management and governance concerns.
Contention
The main point of contention is the division of authority between the Mauna Kea Stewardship and Oversight Authority and the traditional state agencies, especially whether the authority should inherit conservation-district powers after the transition period. SB6 also preserves BLNR’s non-transferable duty to protect traditional and customary Native Hawaiian rights, which may be significant to stakeholders concerned about cultural protections and governance. Another potential issue is the continued role of DOCARE in enforcement and emergency response, which limits the authority’s control over on-the-ground management.