LIHU‘E — Concerned citizens voiced their displeasure with a proposed draft bill that would amend existing regulations for shoreline setbacks on Wednesday in one of the few breaks from the County Council’s day-long discussion of transparency and the body’s rules
LIHU‘E — Concerned citizens voiced their displeasure with a proposed draft bill that would amend existing regulations for shoreline setbacks on Wednesday in one of the few breaks from the County Council’s day-long discussion of transparency and the body’s rules and regulations.
Critics say Draft Bill No. 2319, proposed at the behest of the Planning Department, would undermine legislation passed last year that ranks among the strongest in the nation by exempting from shoreline certification requirements any proposed activities that Planning Director Ian Costa determines would not be affected by coastal conditions.
The bill would also create loopholes for unmanned civil defense facilities installed for the primary purpose of protecting life and property, structures and activities necessary to be within the shoreline setback area for public health and safety, and scientific studies and surveys, including archaeological surveys.
From a legal perspective, former council member Mel Rapozo said the state law — the Coastal Zone Management Act — overrides county law and does not allow county agencies to waive the required shoreline certification.
“That is the law, you cannot mess with that,” Rapozo said. “This county doesn’t have the authority to take away that obligation.”
North Shore coastal advocate Caren Diamond said the new bill could allow such activities as plantings, fences and seawalls if they are deemed minor by the planning director.
“I don’t understand why these amendments are in anybody’s interest, and they’re certainly not in the public interest,” she said.
Diamond made a presentation outlining how landowners adjacent to the shoreline can use plantings and fences too close to the high water mark to effectively privatize beaches by cutting off access, increasing their property’s value or advertising private beach access for vacation rentals.
Council member Derek Kawakami said blocking beach access is an “unlocal” thing to do.
“It’s just going against the grain of everything that we stand for when it comes to our beaches,” Kawakami said.
Other residents brought up concerns that the proposed bill could be used to push through various controversial segments of the multi-use coastal path.
Council member Tim Bynum said he couldn’t imagine the possibility of the path being exempted from an environmental assessment, and told Rapozo he wouldn’t allow “giant loopholes” to be put into the law that they had worked hard on together.
Another former council member, JoAnn Yukimura, said she was open to the idea of amending the existing law — one she said the county should be proud of — as long as changes don’t undermine or weaken the integrity of the bill.
“It’s not always black and white, and we have to get down to the level of details to find out how to make the best law,” Yukimura said.
The bill was passed unanimously in first reading last month, but could face a considerably tougher path when it comes before the Planning Committee this Wednesday. The Planning Committee meeting will also include work on bills covering small wind energy conversion systems and farm worker housing, according to the agenda posted on the county Web site this week.
For further coverage of all three bills, see upcoming editions of The Garden Island.
•Michael Levine, assistant news editor, can be reached at 245-3681 (ext. 252) or mlevine@kauaipubco.com
