HB989 updates Hawaii law governing the filing and recordation of subdivision plans, metes-and-bounds descriptions, and related maps in the Bureau of Conveyances. The bill amends several provisions in chapter 502 to remove outdated references to tracing cloth and blueprint copies, replacing them with more general requirements for a “tangible medium of good quality” approved by the Department of Accounting and General Services (DAGS). It also revises the list of acceptable plan sizes and drawing scales, and updates the process for replacing deteriorated maps or plans with certified copies that are treated as originals.
The bill also changes recordation and survey-check procedures. It removes a requirement that a licensed professional surveyor certify that a metes-and-bounds description conforms to the accompanying plat map, while retaining the requirement for a county-certified plat map and metes-and-bounds description in most subdivision transfers. It replaces a fixed hourly survey-check fee with a fee set by DAGS rules and clarifies that the landowner must deposit the cost before approval of the survey and plan. The bill further authorizes DAGS to approve the format of plans and allows the department to determine exceptions to the rule that only contiguous parcels may be shown on the same plan.
In practical terms, HB989 would modernize the statutory framework for land survey and subdivision filings, affecting landowners, surveyors, the registrar, and DAGS. It would not appear to change substantive land-use or property rights rules so much as update administrative and technical filing standards, while preserving core requirements for metes-and-bounds descriptions, monumentation, and recordation. The bill’s stated purpose is to remove obsolete filing requirements and align the law with current document formats and administrative practices.
The general sentiment reflected in the bill materials is neutral to favorable, with the measure presented as a housekeeping and modernization bill. There is no recorded committee testimony or vote history in the provided materials, so there is no evidence of strong public opposition or support in the available record. The re-referral to WLA/GVO and WAM suggests the bill remained under further legislative review rather than moving cleanly through final passage.
The main points of potential contention are administrative discretion and fee-setting authority. By shifting plan-format approval and survey-check fees to DAGS rules, the bill gives the department more flexibility but also more control over filing requirements and costs. Another possible issue is the removal of the surveyor certification language and the exception authority for noncontiguous parcels, which could raise questions about oversight, consistency, and how much discretion the department should have in land-recordation matters.
Impact
HB989 would amend Hawaii Revised Statutes sections 502-17 through 502-20, modernizing the legal requirements for subdivision plans, file plans, and map replacement procedures. It would eliminate obsolete references to tracing cloth, duplicate filings, and blueprint copies, substitute “tangible medium” language, update acceptable plan sizes and scales, and authorize DAGS to approve plan formats and set related fees by rule. The bill would also affect registrars, surveyors, landowners, and the Bureau of Conveyances by changing the technical standards and administrative process for recording and maintaining land survey documents.
Sentiment
The bill appears to be generally viewed as a technical modernization measure rather than a controversial policy shift. The available materials describe it as removing outdated requirements and updating administrative procedures, which suggests a favorable or at least pragmatic legislative posture. No committee transcript or vote record is provided, so there is no documented floor-level debate or recorded opposition in the supplied context.
Contention
The most notable areas of potential contention are the expansion of DAGS discretion and the fee changes. Stakeholders could question whether allowing DAGS to approve plan formats and determine exceptions for noncontiguous parcels gives the department too much flexibility or could create inconsistent standards. The shift from a fixed hourly fee to a fee established by rule may also draw scrutiny from landowners or survey professionals concerned about cost predictability. Finally, removing the surveyor certification requirement could be seen by some as reducing a layer of verification, while others may view it as an unnecessary formality.