HB1990 would create a new state-law framework for enforcing county zoning violations on residential real property. If a homeowner fails to remediate a zoning violation within the county agency’s deadline, the bill requires a minimum fine of $1,000 per day. Once unpaid fines exceed $20,000, the violation notice becomes a lien on the property. If the owner does not satisfy the notice and begin diligent remediation within 30 days, the county planning or permitting agency must record the notice with the Bureau of Conveyances, which then must refer the matter to county corporation counsel for possible foreclosure.
Impact
The bill would amend Chapter 46, Hawaii Revised Statutes, by adding a new section governing penalties for unaddressed residential zoning violations. It would give county planning or permitting agencies stronger enforcement tools, including daily fines, lien creation, recording of violation notices, and a foreclosure pathway under Chapter 667. It also provides for sale of the property at no less than market value and refund of any surplus proceeds to the owner, and it allows affected owners to seek de novo judicial review in district or circuit court.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have received generally favorable committee treatment, as reflected by multiple committee approvals with amendments and no recorded negative votes in the provided history. The measure advanced through Senate committees on zoning, land use, judiciary, and ways and means, suggesting broad interest in strengthening enforcement of residential property standards. However, its later recommittal indicates that some issues remained unresolved or required further work.
Contention
The main points of contention are likely the severity of the enforcement mechanism and due-process concerns. The bill authorizes substantial daily fines, automatic lien treatment, and potential foreclosure for failure to remediate zoning violations, which may be viewed as aggressive against property owners. At the same time, the bill includes an appeal right with de novo court review, suggesting concern about fairness and oversight. The recommittal to JDC/WAM implies that legal and fiscal questions, as well as foreclosure procedures and property-owner protections, may still need refinement.