SB602 amends Hawaii law governing the Hawaii Public Housing Authority (HPHA) to expand and clarify when HPHA-controlled property may be closed to the public. The bill states that any area within a housing project or on a parcel owned by the authority, except public streets, roads, highways, sidewalks, and county or state bus stops, may be designated closed to the public if posted with signs reading “Closed to the Public No Trespassing” or substantially similar language. It also provides that HPHA offices and facilities may be closed to the public during non-business hours when properly posted and when the signs include hours of operation.
The bill is aimed at reducing vandalism, litter, trash, excessive noise, and other nuisance activity in public housing parking areas and vacant parcels, particularly where the conduct is attributed to nonresidents. By making these areas legally closed to the public under specified conditions, the measure is intended to allow trespass violations to be prosecuted as criminal trespass in the second degree. The bill also defines “housing project” for this section to include public housing projects, elder or elderly housing, and state low-income housing projects.
Impact
SB602 would amend section 356D-6.7 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes to broaden HPHA’s authority to restrict public access to its parcels, not just traditional housing project areas, and to establish signage requirements that trigger trespass enforcement. The practical effect is to strengthen HPHA’s ability to control access to its property and to support criminal enforcement against unauthorized entry after proper notice is posted. The bill would affect HPHA, residents of public and low-income housing, visitors, and law enforcement officers responsible for enforcing trespass laws.
Sentiment
The available voting history shows strong support and no recorded opposition in committee, with the Senate Housing Committee and Senate Judiciary Committee each passing the bill unanimously, 4-0, and without amendment. The bill’s framing suggests a public-safety and quality-of-life rationale, focusing on protecting residents from nuisance activity and property damage. No committee transcripts were provided, so there is no recorded debate reflecting opposition or concerns beyond the bill text itself.
Contention
The main policy issue is the balance between improving safety and order in public housing areas and limiting public access to HPHA-controlled property. Supporters appear to favor giving HPHA and law enforcement clearer authority to exclude nonresidents from problem areas through posted closure notices. Potential concerns, though not documented in the available transcripts, could include whether the closure authority is too broad, how it affects access to facilities and common areas, and whether signage and notice requirements are sufficient to protect the public from inadvertent trespass violations.