STAND.
COM. REP. NO. 234
Honolulu, Hawaii
, 2025
RE: H.B. No. 966
H.D. 1
Honorable Nadine K. Nakamura
Speaker, House of Representatives
Thirty-Third State Legislature
Regular Session of 2025
State of Hawaii
Madame:
Your Committees on Agriculture & Food Systems and Tourism, to which was referred H.B. No. 966 entitled:
"A BILL FOR AN ACT RELATING TO AGRICULTURAL TOURISM,"
beg leave to report as follows:
(1) Creating
agricultural tourism activity requirements that are applicable to all counties
that have adopted an agricultural tourism ordinance;
(2) Requiring agricultural tourism activities to
be registered by the respective county planning commission; and
(3) Requiring agricultural tourism activities to coexist with an agricultural activity on a farming operation and providing for the termination of agricultural tourism activities upon the cessation of the agricultural activity.
Your Committees received testimony in support of this measure from Heavenly Hawaiian Farms; Covfefe Coffee Farm; Hawai‘i Farmers Union; Hawai‘i Farm Bureau; Hawaii Coffee Growers Association; Rising Kona Coffee Farm Tours; Kailua Kona Estate; Hawaii Coffee Association; and one individual. Your Committees received testimony in opposition to this measure from the Hawaii Cattlemen's Council; Kualoa Ranch; and two individuals. Your Committees received comments on this measure from the Department of Agriculture; Hawai‘i Tourism Authority; Mahina Farms, Maui LLC; Grassroot Institute of Hawaii; and one individual.
Your Committees find that agricultural
tourism is becoming an essential revenue stream for farms and ranches
nationwide, helping to sustain agricultural operations. However, Hawaii's inconsistent county-level
permitting processes create regulatory barriers that hinder the growth of
agricultural tourism and limit its potential as a viable business model. A uniform statewide framework would encourage
investment, support regenerative tourism efforts, and strengthen partnerships
between farmers and local businesses. To
achieve this, this measure establishes consistent agricultural tourism activity
requirements, mandates county planning commission registration, and ensures
that agricultural tourism remains tied to active farming operations.
Your Committees have amended this measure
by:
(1) Deleting language that would have prohibited revenue from all agricultural tourism activities on a farming operation from exceeding revenue from the agricultural activity conducted on the farming operation;
(2) Clarifying that agricultural tourism shall only be allowed on land on which productive agricultural use is occurring;
(3) Removing language that would have prohibited a person from staying in overnight accommodations included with agricultural tourism activities for longer than twenty-one days in total within one county during any one-year period;
(4) Clarifying that agricultural tourism activities shall be registered by the owner or lessee with the county planning department, rather than county planning commission;
(5) Expanding agricultural-based commercial operations to include a roadside stand or retail activities in an enclosed structure under three hundred square feet that is on a trailer;
(6) Changing the effective date to July 1, 3000, to encourage further discussion; and
(7) Making technical, nonsubstantive amendments for the purposes of clarity, consistency, and style.
As affirmed by the records of votes of the members of your Committees on Agriculture & Food Systems and Tourism that are attached to this report, your Committees are in accord with the intent and purpose of H.B. No. 966, as amended herein, and recommend that it pass Second Reading in the form attached hereto as H.B. No. 966, H.D. 1, and be referred to your Committee on Water & Land.
Respectfully submitted on behalf of the members of the Committees on Agriculture & Food Systems and Tourism,
|
____________________________ ADRIAN K. TAM, Chair |
|
____________________________ KIRSTIN KAHALOA, Chair |
|
|
|
|