HLU-14 Reso 26-84 RESOLUTION 26-84, REFERRING TO THE MAUI PLANNING COMMISSION PROPOSED BILLS TO AMEND THE PA?IA-HA?IKU COMMUNITY PLAN AND TO CHANGE THE ZONING (CONDITIONAL ZONING) FOR 40.392 ACRES IN P??IA, HAWAI?I (EC P??IA TOWN PROJECT) (HLU-14)
Maui County should not grant permanent Community Plan amendments and broad zoning approvals based on assumptions about what affordability, infrastructure, water availability, and community conditions might look like 7 to 10 years from now. The developer has reportedly stated this project may still be 7 to 10 years away from groundbreaking.
That fact alone should fundamentally change how this proposal is evaluated.
The farther away a project is from actual construction, the weaker and less reliable present-day promises become.
The County is not evaluating a finished project today.
The County is evaluating assumptions about what Maui may look like a decade from now.
How can the County realistically evaluate:
* AMI affordability levels,
* fair market rents,
* deed restrictions,
* water availability,
* infrastructure capacity,
* wastewater demands,
* traffic impacts,
* climate risks,
* insurance costs,
* financing conditions,
* or future community needs
10 years before construction even begins?
The honest answer is:
it cannot.
That is why broad Community Plan amendments and rezoning requests this far ahead of construction become dangerous.
Community Plans were intended to guide:
* growth patterns,
* infrastructure sequencing,
* land use compatibility,
* preservation priorities,
* transportation planning,
* and long-term community vision.
But increasingly, once a project enters a Community Plan framework, it later becomes treated politically as though it is already approved “in concept,” even when:
* infrastructure does not exist,
* water remains uncertain,
* financing is speculative,
* environmental review is incomplete,
* affordability enforcement is unclear,
* and construction may still be a decade away.
That is the danger.
The Community Plan amendment becomes the first entitlement step.
Then years later the public hears:
“Well, it’s already in the Community Plan.”
That creates political momentum long before the public ever sees the final project reality.
That is why the County should not casually amend Community Plans and expand zoning capacity years before projects are realistically capable of construction.
Especially in Maui.
Maui already struggles with:
* water uncertainty,
* infrastructure deficits,
* wastewater limitations,
* wildfire vulnerability,
* housing affordability,
* insurance instability,
* speculative land pressure,
* and long-term infrastructure challenges.
Yet instead of prioritizing existing urban inventory, redevelopment, infill housing, adaptive reuse, and underutilized commercial areas, the County is once again being asked to expand entitlement value outward years before the project is even ready to begin.
That is not prudent sequencing.
The zoning itself becomes the value creation event.
Once land receives:
* Community Plan amendments,
* expanded development capacity,
* Business/Commercial designation,
* Multi-Family designation,
* or broader urban entitlements,
the land value changes immediately even if nothing is built for another decade.
And during that decade:
* ownership can change,
* project scope can change,
* financing structures can change,
* affordability formulas can change,
* densities can increase,
* conditions can be amended,
* uses can evolve,
* and speculative investment pressure can completely reshape the project.
That concern becomes even more serious with ongoing discussions surrounding expanded Opportunity Zone-style redevelopment frameworks often referred to as “OZ 2.0.”
This testimony is not alleging the project was specifically designed around Opportunity Zone programs.
But the County should recognize the broader reality:
granting broad land-use entitlements years before construction while future tax-advantaged redevelopment frameworks are actively being discussed creates enormous speculative investment potential.
Once the entitlements are granted:
* land values increase,
* speculative pressure increases,
* institutional interest increases,
* and future investors inherit the entitlement whether or not the original public promises survive intact.
That is the real issue before this Committee.
The public hears:
* workforce housing,
* local housing,
* affordability,
* sustainability,
* community benefits.
But 7 to 10 years is enough time for:
* project conditions to evolve,
* financing to change,
* ownership to transfer,
* public narratives to shift,
* and future amendments to fundamentally alter the original proposal.
That is not conspiracy thinking.
That is the reality of long-range entitlement development.
The farther away a project is from realistic construction, the less reliable present-day promises become and the more dangerous broad land-use amendments become.
Especially when those amendments:
* permanently increase entitlement value,
* create speculative investment opportunities,
* shift political momentum toward future approval,
* and may ultimately outlive the original developer, original financing structure, original council, and original public representations entirely.
That is not anti-housing.
That is prudent land-use governance.
For those reasons, Resolution 26-84 should be opposed or deferred until the County can evaluate this proposal within a more complete, transparent, infrastructure-supported, and realistically timed framework.
ARE YOU GUYS OUT OF YOUR MINDS WITH THIS PAIA DEVELOPMENT?! This dude bought more than 80 acres of Maui agricultural land at a time when our island continues facing food insecurity, rising food costs, supply chain instability, and ongoing concerns about long-term self-sufficiency after the Lahaina wildfire disaster, ONLY TO TURN AROUND AND IMMEDIATELY WANT TO DEVELOP IT? WHY WAS THIS LAND NOT OFFERED TO THE COUNTY FOR ONLY $4MILLION?! How many times do we have to learn this lesson?? HOW MANY TIMES. WHY IS AG LAND SELLING FOR THIS LITTLE IF A ZONING CHANGE IS ALLOWED?!WHY?!?! OF COURSE a capitalist is going to purchase open land for pennis on the dollar and then figure out how to develop it to make millions. COME ON. It is deeply troubling to see prime agricultural land reportedly purchased for approximately $4 million now being positioned for large-scale development instead of long-term food production and agricultural preservation. Maui cannot continue sacrificing productive ag lands for speculative growth while simultaneously discussing sustainability, resilience, and local food security in County meetings and public policy discussions.These decisions permanently reshape Maui’s future. The County should be prioritizing protection of viable agricultural acreage, supporting local farmers, and strengthening Maui’s ability to feed itself during emergencies and economic instability — not incentivizing more build-build-build = PROFIT PROFIT PROFIT. Preserving agricultural lands is one of the few long-term protections Maui still has against unchecked sprawl and dependence on imported food.I respectfully urge the Council to reject this proposal and protect these agricultural lands for their intended purpose.Mahalo for the opportunity to testify.This is ridiculous. You all are too smart for this.Yes, I am born and raised on Maui. I live in Makawao now raising a family and working in nonprofits. Sincerely, please do the right thing here. Dana Fulton, dfulton808@gmail.com
Aloha Chair and Members of the Maui County Council,
My name is Nicole Kealoha, and I am a longtime resident of Pāia. I respectfully request that the Maui County Council defer Resolution 26-84, “REFERRING TO THE MAUI PLANNING COMMISSION PROPOSED BILLS TO AMEND THE PAIA-HAIKU COMMUNITY PLAN AND TO CHANGE THE ZONING (CONDITIONAL ZONING) FOR 40.392 ACRES IN PAIA, HAWAII (EC PAIA TOWN PROJECT) (HLU-14).”
While there are public noticing requirements associated with projects of this nature, I am concerned that many community members who may be impacted by this proposed project may still be unaware of it or may not yet fully understand the project’s scope and potential long-term impacts on the greater Pāia area.
This proposed project is on a much larger scale and has the potential to significantly impact the broader community beyond the immediate surrounding properties. The proposed project, along with additional anticipated projects that may also move forward in the area, may place significant burdens on Baldwin Avenue and surrounding roadway systems already heavily relied upon by residents, workers, families, and emergency services throughout Pāia and neighboring communities.
As someone who has lived in Pāia for many years, I have personally witnessed the ongoing traffic congestion, roadway limitations, and challenges affecting our community. Additional large-scale development projects without broader community discussion and understanding of the cumulative impacts may place even greater strain on an area already experiencing infrastructure and access concerns.
Given the potential cumulative impacts to traffic, roadway access, infrastructure, evacuation routes, and public safety, I respectfully believe additional community outreach and engagement should occur before this matter proceeds to the Maui Planning Commission.
I respectfully request that the Council defer Resolution 26-84 to allow additional time for:
Broader community outreach and awareness;
Meaningful community input from residents throughout the Pāia area;
Community meetings or presentations by the project manager and development team regarding the EC Pāia Town Project;
Additional discussion regarding cumulative impacts from current and future proposed projects within the area; and
Further review of roadway, infrastructure, evacuation, and public safety concerns affecting Baldwin Avenue and surrounding communities.
Projects of this magnitude warrant broad public engagement and community discussion due to their potential long-term impacts on the future of Pāia and surrounding areas.
I respectfully ask the Council to defer Resolution 26-84 before referral to the Maui Planning Commission to allow the community additional opportunity to become informed and provide meaningful input.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony.
To whom this may concern. I oppose this type of development, that’s farm and agriculture land, creating waste that will be dumped into our ocean. Paia does not have the infrastructure to support any type of development like this. Let keep country, country.
To Whom It May Concern: I support carefully planned housing and mixed-use growth within existing planned boundaries, but only with enforceable safeguards, permanent affordability protections, verified infrastructure capacity, water and drainage accountability, and measurable long-term protections for the Pāʻia community and surrounding agricultural lands. Please see attached written testimony.
Testimonies received from HLU Committee
Maui County should not grant permanent Community Plan amendments and broad zoning approvals based on assumptions about what affordability, infrastructure, water availability, and community conditions might look like 7 to 10 years from now. The developer has reportedly stated this project may still be 7 to 10 years away from groundbreaking.
That fact alone should fundamentally change how this proposal is evaluated.
The farther away a project is from actual construction, the weaker and less reliable present-day promises become.
The County is not evaluating a finished project today.
The County is evaluating assumptions about what Maui may look like a decade from now.
How can the County realistically evaluate:
* AMI affordability levels,
* fair market rents,
* deed restrictions,
* water availability,
* infrastructure capacity,
* wastewater demands,
* traffic impacts,
* climate risks,
* insurance costs,
* financing conditions,
* or future community needs
10 years before construction even begins?
The honest answer is:
it cannot.
That is why broad Community Plan amendments and rezoning requests this far ahead of construction become dangerous.
Community Plans were intended to guide:
* growth patterns,
* infrastructure sequencing,
* land use compatibility,
* preservation priorities,
* transportation planning,
* and long-term community vision.
But increasingly, once a project enters a Community Plan framework, it later becomes treated politically as though it is already approved “in concept,” even when:
* infrastructure does not exist,
* water remains uncertain,
* financing is speculative,
* environmental review is incomplete,
* affordability enforcement is unclear,
* and construction may still be a decade away.
That is the danger.
The Community Plan amendment becomes the first entitlement step.
Then years later the public hears:
“Well, it’s already in the Community Plan.”
That creates political momentum long before the public ever sees the final project reality.
And over a 7-to-10-year timeline:
* councils change,
* mayors change,
* planners change,
* developers change,
* investors change,
* financing changes,
* market conditions change,
* and federal incentives change.
But the land-use designation remains.
That is why the County should not casually amend Community Plans and expand zoning capacity years before projects are realistically capable of construction.
Especially in Maui.
Maui already struggles with:
* water uncertainty,
* infrastructure deficits,
* wastewater limitations,
* wildfire vulnerability,
* housing affordability,
* insurance instability,
* speculative land pressure,
* and long-term infrastructure challenges.
Yet instead of prioritizing existing urban inventory, redevelopment, infill housing, adaptive reuse, and underutilized commercial areas, the County is once again being asked to expand entitlement value outward years before the project is even ready to begin.
That is not prudent sequencing.
The zoning itself becomes the value creation event.
Once land receives:
* Community Plan amendments,
* expanded development capacity,
* Business/Commercial designation,
* Multi-Family designation,
* or broader urban entitlements,
the land value changes immediately even if nothing is built for another decade.
And during that decade:
* ownership can change,
* project scope can change,
* financing structures can change,
* affordability formulas can change,
* densities can increase,
* conditions can be amended,
* uses can evolve,
* and speculative investment pressure can completely reshape the project.
That concern becomes even more serious with ongoing discussions surrounding expanded Opportunity Zone-style redevelopment frameworks often referred to as “OZ 2.0.”
This testimony is not alleging the project was specifically designed around Opportunity Zone programs.
But the County should recognize the broader reality:
granting broad land-use entitlements years before construction while future tax-advantaged redevelopment frameworks are actively being discussed creates enormous speculative investment potential.
Once the entitlements are granted:
* land values increase,
* speculative pressure increases,
* institutional interest increases,
* and future investors inherit the entitlement whether or not the original public promises survive intact.
That is the real issue before this Committee.
The public hears:
* workforce housing,
* local housing,
* affordability,
* sustainability,
* community benefits.
But 7 to 10 years is enough time for:
* project conditions to evolve,
* financing to change,
* ownership to transfer,
* public narratives to shift,
* and future amendments to fundamentally alter the original proposal.
That is not conspiracy thinking.
That is the reality of long-range entitlement development.
The farther away a project is from realistic construction, the less reliable present-day promises become and the more dangerous broad land-use amendments become.
Especially when those amendments:
* permanently increase entitlement value,
* create speculative investment opportunities,
* shift political momentum toward future approval,
* and may ultimately outlive the original developer, original financing structure, original council, and original public representations entirely.
That is not anti-housing.
That is prudent land-use governance.
For those reasons, Resolution 26-84 should be opposed or deferred until the County can evaluate this proposal within a more complete, transparent, infrastructure-supported, and realistically timed framework.
ARE YOU GUYS OUT OF YOUR MINDS WITH THIS PAIA DEVELOPMENT?! This dude bought more than 80 acres of Maui agricultural land at a time when our island continues facing food insecurity, rising food costs, supply chain instability, and ongoing concerns about long-term self-sufficiency after the Lahaina wildfire disaster, ONLY TO TURN AROUND AND IMMEDIATELY WANT TO DEVELOP IT? WHY WAS THIS LAND NOT OFFERED TO THE COUNTY FOR ONLY $4MILLION?! How many times do we have to learn this lesson?? HOW MANY TIMES. WHY IS AG LAND SELLING FOR THIS LITTLE IF A ZONING CHANGE IS ALLOWED?!WHY?!?! OF COURSE a capitalist is going to purchase open land for pennis on the dollar and then figure out how to develop it to make millions. COME ON. It is deeply troubling to see prime agricultural land reportedly purchased for approximately $4 million now being positioned for large-scale development instead of long-term food production and agricultural preservation. Maui cannot continue sacrificing productive ag lands for speculative growth while simultaneously discussing sustainability, resilience, and local food security in County meetings and public policy discussions.These decisions permanently reshape Maui’s future. The County should be prioritizing protection of viable agricultural acreage, supporting local farmers, and strengthening Maui’s ability to feed itself during emergencies and economic instability — not incentivizing more build-build-build = PROFIT PROFIT PROFIT. Preserving agricultural lands is one of the few long-term protections Maui still has against unchecked sprawl and dependence on imported food.I respectfully urge the Council to reject this proposal and protect these agricultural lands for their intended purpose.Mahalo for the opportunity to testify.This is ridiculous. You all are too smart for this.Yes, I am born and raised on Maui. I live in Makawao now raising a family and working in nonprofits. Sincerely, please do the right thing here. Dana Fulton, dfulton808@gmail.com
Aloha Chair and Members of the Maui County Council,
My name is Nicole Kealoha, and I am a longtime resident of Pāia. I respectfully request that the Maui County Council defer Resolution 26-84, “REFERRING TO THE MAUI PLANNING COMMISSION PROPOSED BILLS TO AMEND THE PAIA-HAIKU COMMUNITY PLAN AND TO CHANGE THE ZONING (CONDITIONAL ZONING) FOR 40.392 ACRES IN PAIA, HAWAII (EC PAIA TOWN PROJECT) (HLU-14).”
While there are public noticing requirements associated with projects of this nature, I am concerned that many community members who may be impacted by this proposed project may still be unaware of it or may not yet fully understand the project’s scope and potential long-term impacts on the greater Pāia area.
This proposed project is on a much larger scale and has the potential to significantly impact the broader community beyond the immediate surrounding properties. The proposed project, along with additional anticipated projects that may also move forward in the area, may place significant burdens on Baldwin Avenue and surrounding roadway systems already heavily relied upon by residents, workers, families, and emergency services throughout Pāia and neighboring communities.
As someone who has lived in Pāia for many years, I have personally witnessed the ongoing traffic congestion, roadway limitations, and challenges affecting our community. Additional large-scale development projects without broader community discussion and understanding of the cumulative impacts may place even greater strain on an area already experiencing infrastructure and access concerns.
Given the potential cumulative impacts to traffic, roadway access, infrastructure, evacuation routes, and public safety, I respectfully believe additional community outreach and engagement should occur before this matter proceeds to the Maui Planning Commission.
I respectfully request that the Council defer Resolution 26-84 to allow additional time for:
Broader community outreach and awareness;
Meaningful community input from residents throughout the Pāia area;
Community meetings or presentations by the project manager and development team regarding the EC Pāia Town Project;
Additional discussion regarding cumulative impacts from current and future proposed projects within the area; and
Further review of roadway, infrastructure, evacuation, and public safety concerns affecting Baldwin Avenue and surrounding communities.
Projects of this magnitude warrant broad public engagement and community discussion due to their potential long-term impacts on the future of Pāia and surrounding areas.
I respectfully ask the Council to defer Resolution 26-84 before referral to the Maui Planning Commission to allow the community additional opportunity to become informed and provide meaningful input.
Thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony.
To whom this may concern. I oppose this type of development, that’s farm and agriculture land, creating waste that will be dumped into our ocean. Paia does not have the infrastructure to support any type of development like this. Let keep country, country.
To Whom It May Concern: I support carefully planned housing and mixed-use growth within existing planned boundaries, but only with enforceable safeguards, permanent affordability protections, verified infrastructure capacity, water and drainage accountability, and measurable long-term protections for the Pāʻia community and surrounding agricultural lands. Please see attached written testimony.