SB67 would amend Hawaii’s county zoning law to prohibit any law, ordinance, or rule from requiring inclusionary zoning for certain housing developments offered exclusively for sale or rent in perpetuity. The exemption applies only to housing reserved for Hawaii residents who are owner-occupants or renters and who do not own other real property. In practical terms, the bill creates a carve-out from county affordable-housing set-aside requirements for projects intended to remain permanently available to qualifying local residents.
The bill also makes a targeted change to Section 46-4 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes, which governs county zoning authority, by adding a new subsection that defines “inclusionary zoning requirement” as a mandate to set aside a fraction of units for below-market sale or rent. The measure is framed as a response to Hawaii’s affordable housing shortage and the out-migration of residents, and it is intended to preserve local communities by protecting resident-focused housing projects from county affordability mandates.
Impact
SB67 would limit county authority to impose inclusionary zoning conditions on a specific category of housing projects, effectively preempting local ordinances and rules that would otherwise require affordable-unit set-asides in those developments. It would amend HRS §46-4, the state’s core county zoning statute, while leaving the rest of county zoning powers intact. The bill would affect counties, developers, and housing projects structured for perpetual occupancy by Hawaii residents who are not owners of other real property.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests generally favorable sentiment toward the bill at the committee level. The Senate Housing Committee passed the measure with amendments by a 3-0 vote, and the bill later advanced with a report adopted and second reading as amended (SD 1). The bill’s findings and purpose language indicate strong support for expanding resident-focused housing options and reducing barriers to local homeownership or rental access.
Contention
The main policy tension is between state-level protection for resident-only housing and county-level inclusionary zoning tools used to secure below-market units in new developments. Supporters appear to view the bill as a way to preserve housing for Hawaii residents and reduce displacement, while potential opponents may be concerned that exempting these projects from inclusionary zoning could reduce the number of affordable units produced through county requirements. The bill does not include committee transcript debate in the provided materials, so specific objections or amendments beyond the SD 1 changes are not available.