Requesting The Department Of Business, Economic Development, And Tourism To Review And Evaluate The Cost-benefit And Return On Investment Of A Possible Sponsorship Of A Michelin Guide For Restaurants Across The State.
Summary
SR46 is a Senate Resolution requesting the Department of Business, Economic Development, and Tourism (DBEDT) to review and evaluate the cost-benefit and return on investment of sponsoring a Michelin Guide for restaurants in Hawaii. The resolution frames the Michelin Guide as a globally recognized restaurant rating system and notes that Hawaii’s culinary scene has grown significantly, with the state attracting notable chefs and restaurants and becoming a destination for food tourism.
The resolution also cites workforce and industry-development considerations, including a Hawaii Tourism Authority assessment that identified culinary staff as among the most in-demand and hardest-to-fill jobs in the state. It suggests that Michelin recognition could increase publicity, draw diners, support restaurant standards, and potentially help attract culinary workers, while also requiring the state to assess whether the benefits justify the cost of sponsorship.
Impact
SR46 does not change substantive state law or create regulatory requirements; instead, it directs DBEDT to study a possible sponsorship arrangement and report on its economic value. Its practical impact is to place the issue of Michelin Guide sponsorship within the state’s tourism and economic development policy discussions, potentially influencing future appropriations, partnerships, or promotional strategy for Hawaii’s restaurant industry and visitor economy.
Sentiment
The overall sentiment reflected in the resolution and its committee action is favorable toward exploring a Michelin Guide sponsorship. The bill passed the Senate Economic Development and Technology Committee 3-0 with amendments, indicating bipartisan or at least unanimous support at that stage for further evaluation. The language is promotional and optimistic about the potential benefits to Hawaii’s culinary reputation, tourism appeal, and restaurant quality.
Contention
The main point of contention is not whether Hawaii’s culinary scene is worthy of recognition, but whether sponsoring a Michelin Guide would be a worthwhile public investment. The resolution itself signals caution by asking for a cost-benefit and return-on-investment review, implying concern about the expense and whether the state should pay to attract Michelin inspectors. Any debate is likely to center on tourism and economic development benefits versus the use of public funds, though no direct opposition is reflected in the available committee vote or transcripts.
Same As
Requesting The Department Of Business, Economic Development, And Tourism To Review And Evaluate The Cost-benefit And Return On Investment Of A Possible Sponsorship Of A Michelin Guide For Restaurants Across The State.