Hawaii County Policy Committee on Planning, Land Use and Economic Development – July 7, 2026

The Policy Committee met on Tuesday, July 7, 2026, at 11:01 a.m. in the Hilo Council Chambers to consider Bill 170, which amends the Hawaii County Code to distinguish data centers from data processing facilities for zoning and land use purposes. The meeting included extensive public testimony, deliberation among council members, and a vote to forward the bill to the planning director and planning commissions for recommendations.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Karen Foster (Hawaii resident since 1963) testified in opposition to the proposed data center in Pāhoa, citing concerns over water consumption, electricity demand, and noise/light pollution. She urged the council to protect agricultural and residential areas.
• Noelle Lindenman (Kailua-Kona) testified in strong support of Bill 170 and urged adoption of amended language including a 20-megawatt electrical threshold, campus language covering multiple facilities under common ownership, and an explicit prohibition in the zoning code.
• Corey Hardin testified in support of Bill 170 and called for additional legislation to ban non-disclosure agreements related to data centers. He cited examples from Virginia, Mississippi, Texas, and Arizona where data centers caused water shortages, noise, and infrastructure strain.
• Charmaine Banther (Papaikou) strongly supported Bill 170, noting that an average data center uses 60 megawatts of electricity per day (one-third of Hilo’s electricity) and 5 million gallons of water per day (equivalent to 50,000 people). She questioned whether data centers should take priority over water for people, schools, and farmers.
• Tanya Yamanaka Anasasian (Pāhoa) supported doing “absolutely everything we can to stop data centers.” She reported attending a tax conference in Detroit where rural communities described water depletion after approving data centers, and urged banning them in the county code.
• Topher Dean (representing Clean the Pacific) strongly supported Bill 170, urging the council to focus on preserving the natural world and the ‘āina rather than rushing into technology.
• Chuck Flaherty (Sierra Club, Hawai‘i Island Group) supported the concept of Bill 170 but argued the definition should make clear that hyperscale data centers are manufacturing facilities for artificial intelligence, not mere data processing. He stated that special permits for data centers would likely require state land use commission approval.
• Ken Honma (self and ‘ohana) called for a legislative ban on data centers, claiming they enable surveillance and AI-driven autonomous decisions that violate the Bill of Rights. He proposed adding language to Bill 170 to explicitly ban AI agents and machine learning, and include penalties for non-compliance.
• Kaleika‘ilikini (Hilo) supported banning AI data centers and urged clear, concise language to avoid litigation. He proposed an amendment stating “AI data centers shall not be allowed in Hawaii County,” along with requirements for transparency, environmental impact statements, and fines/jail time for violations.
• Kathy Cohen (Kona) testified in strong support of Bill 170, asking for “airtight” wording to prevent corporate exploitation. She emphasized that a medium-sized data center can use roughly 110 million gallons of water per year, and that the island’s finite resources cannot support such facilities.
• Susan Roberts Emery (co-chair, Green Party of Hawai‘i) supported Bill 170 with amendments to ban all industrial data centers. She stated that the Green Party supports only local schools, libraries, and bookstores as “data centers,” and called AI “artificial idiots.”

Discussion Items

• Councilmember Heather Kimball, the bill’s introducer, explained that Bill 170 is necessary because the current zoning code lists data processing facilities as permitted uses, but data centers are not defined. She noted that the code’s default is that anything not listed as a permitted use is prohibited, and this structure has been upheld in federal court. She expressed openness to refining the definition to better capture industrial-scale data centers (e.g., those using 20+ megawatts) but cautioned against listing prohibited uses, which could create loopholes. She also acknowledged that the bill does not address special permits, which could still be sought for data centers in agricultural districts.
• Councilmember Rebecca Villegas thanked Kimball for the legislation and noted that data center jobs are primarily temporary construction jobs. She expressed interest in amendments to close loopholes, including those suggested by constituents.
• Councilmember Michelle Galimba asked Planning Director Jeff Darrow about the planning department’s process for evaluating water and electricity use. Darrow responded that the current plan approval process does not address water consumption or electricity use; those factors are considered only in change-of-zone applications. He confirmed that he is not aware of any large-scale data center proposals on the island, only small-scale inquiries.
• Councilmember Matt Kaneali‘i-Kleinfelder asked about federal jurisdiction and existing data centers (e.g., at UH Hilo and military facilities). Councilmember Kimball clarified that the bill would not apply retroactively and that federal facilities are generally outside county jurisdiction. Darrow confirmed that county laws cannot supersede federal abilities.
• Councilmember Jennifer Kagiwada encouraged the public to follow the planning commission review and submit testimony at that stage.

Key Outcomes

• Motion and Vote: Councilmember Kimball moved to forward Bill 170 to the planning director and planning commissions for review and recommendation. The motion was seconded by Councilmember Kagiwada. The committee voted 8–0 in favor (Councilmember Onishi was excused). The meeting adjourned at 11:54 a.m.
• Next Steps: The bill will be reviewed by the planning director and the county’s planning commissions, who will provide recommendations. The council will consider amendments when the bill returns to committee. The public is encouraged to participate in the planning commission hearings.