Stand. Comm. Rep. No. 891-12 H.B. No. 2145, H.D. 2 RELATING TO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.(Economic Development; Specific Ten-Year Projects; State Policy) AS AMENDED, PASS THIRD READING

The Office of Planning did not think the bill was the proper vehicle.
The Sierra Club voiced concerns over the planning and initiation of the projects before the risks and problems of the projects were considered. The environmental review process allows experts and the community to resolve any potential issues and avoid bad projects.
The group is worried that by naming specific projects to be state policy (ex. 690 Pohukaina Street development and the 30 meter telescope on Mauna Kea), it is likely that any future decision making process will be pre-determined.
Furthermore, the group feels that such a process may be considered special legislation and therefore unconstitutional (Sierra Club v. Department of Transportation, No. 29035 March 16, 2009).
Rep. Marumoto voiced considerable concerns over the rail project and 690 Pohukaina Street project. Neither of them are state projects (the rail being a city project) so why are they necessary for inclusion? She also voiced concerns over the status, progress, and content of the mixed use transit oriented development project planned at 690 Pohukaina. One specific was its proposed height.

Contact: or
Excerpt from Capitol TV