July 29, 2026: Housing and Land Use Committee Meeting on Haiku Fire Station Zoning and Land Use Amendments

The Housing and Land Use Committee of the Maui County Council met on July 29, 2026, at 9:07 a.m. to consider Bills 89, 90, and 91 (2026) – land use amendments for a 6.097-acre parcel at Ha'ikū Fire Station site (TMK (2) 2-7-007:008). The meeting included a presentation, public testimony, legal discussion, and a vote to recess to August 10, 2026, for continued deliberation.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Leilani Miranda (long-term resident, board member of Mālama Hāmākua) opposed the site location (Site B), recommending Site D (Holokai Road) due to clear title issues, water access, less grading, and reduced conflict with cultural sites and Kuleana interests. She stated the project lacks proper permitting and would impact erosion and downstream areas.
• Suzette Philosilda (Lahaina fire survivor) opposed the project, arguing that federal funds allocated for Lahaina recovery should not be used for this project. She requested clarification on the source of $15,181,000 in federal funds referenced for FY2026.
• Kanani Puho (Lahaina) opposed the station, stating it does not support Lahaina recovery under RCD 9, and that the county has not demonstrated the property qualifies as publicly owned land under the directive. She urged prioritizing Lahaina's needs.
• Kai Coolkine (calling in) expressed concern about procedural transparency, inclusion of Native Hawaiians, and the Royal Patent chain of title. He supported other testifiers and questioned the county's approach.
• Jocelyn Costa (ʻĀhamoku representative for Hāmākua Loa) opposed the specific location, citing prior development that disturbed burials. She cautioned that the archaeological assessment is inadequate and called for a halt until proper cultural consultation occurs.
• Kaw Moku Kapu (Lahaina) presented a Royal Patent (LCA 1714) adjoining the property, arguing the county does not have clear title and that undivided family interests exist. He urged the committee to verify title before proceeding.
• Coniloa Kamaunu (Kuleana descendant) urged rejection, arguing the county failed to demonstrate a clear chain of title, that the Newlands Resolution did not extinguish private rights, and that descendant interests must be respected.
• ʻIolana Johnson (Kanaka Maoli) requested careful consideration of OIP Appeal 26-30 concerning a Sunshine Law issue at the Planning Commission meeting. She highlighted the need for transparency and meaningful consultation with Kuleana families.
• Moʻi Kawaʻakoa (descendant of Hāmākua) opposed, citing existing fire station in Paia, the need for investment in existing stations, and the presence of burials and cultural sites. She supported alternative site locations with full community dialogue.
• James Langford (software developer and auditor) characterized the funding approach as a potential RICO pattern, alleging misuse of federal money. He opposed the project but supported a fire station at a more appropriate site.
• Jason Medina (Paia resident) opposed Site B, preferring Site D for its larger space and lower environmental impact. He argued the 6.1-acre proposal is oversized and noted the water corridor would disturb additional parcels.
• Maya (community member) opposed Site B, advocating for cultural preservation over expediency. She emphasized that community love for land should not be seen as an inconvenience.
• Kapali Keyahi (testifying via Teams) urged deferral until legal, cultural, and procedural questions are resolved, including title, archaeological studies, and alternative site evaluation. He warned of costly litigation if the project proceeds prematurely.
• Dr. Kahala Johnson (activist, Kiaʻi) opposed the bills, citing the county's use of police force against Kanaka at Ukumehame and warning that similar actions would necessitate community defense. She argued the county cannot ignore disputed title and should choose an alternative site.
• Kanye Lee Williams (recognized cultural descendant) provided extensive legal and archaeological testimony: the 2010 AIS omitted Land Commission Award 3336; burials on site are not registered; consultation has not occurred; the water corridor crosses parcels under active litigation; and the county has not fulfilled its fiduciary duty. He incorporated prior testimony and requested the committee defer action.

Discussion Items

• Presentation by Munekiyo & Hiraga (Hoku Kruger, Mark Roy) and Fire Chief Bradford Ventura detailed the project need – 17 years in planning – to improve emergency response in Haʻikū and reduce station coverage gaps. Proposed improvements include a 10,360 sq ft building, apparatus bay, parking, water tank. The project is county-funded (no federal money). The site (Site B) was acquired in 2007; the final EA and FONSI were published in 2024. The Planning Commission recommended approval in January 2026.
• Legal discussion on Recovery Coordination Directive (RCD) 9: Deputy Corporation Counsel Nūnūkawā explained that RCD 9 (June 15, 2026) allows public uses by right in agricultural districts on county-owned land during the emergency proclamation. If the committee does not approve the zoning change, the administration could proceed under RCD 9, but that status is temporary. A code amendment is being drafted to make the use permanent. RCD 9 does not affect funding eligibility.
• Committee recusal: Chair Nohelani Uʻu-Hodgins recused herself due to a potential Ricoh-related concern? Actually, after recess, she stepped aside out of abundance of caution. Vice Chair Batangan recused earlier due to prior work with Munekiyo & Hiraga. Tamara Paltin served as temporary chair.
• Funding clarification: Chief Ventura stated that the $15.181 million in the mayor's budget was a placeholder for a federal grant that did not materialize; the project is fully county-funded. Funds for FY2026 are under contract; additional funds in FY2027.
• Site D (Holokai Road) analysis: Chief Ventura explained that Site D lacks a water meter; the state-owned property would require a new water storage tank and additional purchases – costs are prohibitive.
• Title and land disputes: Guy Hiranaka (Land Acquisitions) presented a title insurance policy for the 27.9-acre parcel (from Grant 6553) showing county ownership free and clear. Kanye Lee Williams disputed this, arguing that the chain from Royal Patent 383 (Richard Armstrong) and Land Commission Award 3336 (William Pit Lileohoku) shows unextinguished Kuleana interests, and that county records do not show a complete chain. He cited a county policy for returning land to families when title disputes arise.
• Archaeological concerns: Gina McGuire (Kialapono Archaeological Consulting) stated that the Kapakai analysis consulted 18 individuals, resulting in 5 interviews. The analysis recommended verifying LCA boundary survey. Kanye Lee Williams noted that burials are present but not registered or addressed, and that the AIS did not cover all parcels. County archaeologist Janet Six had begun consultation but it stalled. SHIPD has received burial registration materials since March 2026.
• Future meeting: The committee lacked time for full deliberation and agreed to recess to Monday, August 10, 2026, at 9:00 a.m. using the same meeting link and location.

Key Outcomes

• Motion approved (7 ayes, 2 abstentions) to have Councilmember Tamara Paltin serve as temporary chair under Rule 7(c) after Chair Uʻu-Hodgins recused herself.
• No vote on Bills 89, 90, 91; the committee recessed without taking action.
• Meeting recessed to August 10, 2026, at 9:00 a.m. via the same Microsoft Teams link and in-person at the Planning Conference Room, Kalana Pakui Building, Wailuku. Written testimony remains open.