Hawaii Gov. Josh Green has asked lawmakers to begin reviewing a proposed slate of green fee projects totaling $126 million, an administration plan aimed at environmental protection work and responses to climate threats, state officials and lawmakers said. The request arrives as the Hawaii House and Senate prepare for negotiations over the state budget and as senators look for details on how the new stream of money will be used and tracked.
The administration’s proposal, released for legislative review this week, breaks down funding for a range of projects across the islands. It includes $1 million to close out cesspools in Hōnaunau on the Big Island and projects approaching $20 million for beach restoration at Ala Moana and Waikīkī and in West Maui, along with other initiatives tied to climate resilience and conservation.
Green described the green fee as the “biggest and perhaps most exciting change” happening in state government, according to the report. Denise Antolini, president of the nonprofit Mālama Pūpūkea-Waimea, said the new process requires time and steps, calling it “cracking the nut for the first time” and saying, while slower than people are used to, it was “inventing a whole new system, and that takes time.”
The money behind the proposal comes from two tax changes created by the green fee law. The state hotel room tax would rise from 9.25% to 10%, and the state would also add a new levy on cruise ships. Green and administration officials said the changes are expected to raise about $126 million a year, though they warned the final outcome could be affected by a legal challenge filed by the cruise industry.
Senate and House leaders signaled that they want the project list provided promptly so lawmakers have time to study it before budget negotiations begin. Senate Ways and Means Committee Chair Donovan Dela Cruz said it was important that lawmakers receive the list in time to review it as House and Senate discussions move forward over where the funds will go within the broader budget.
The projects selected for legislative review reflect requirements in the green fee law that the money be divided into three categories: environmental stewardship, climate and hazard resilience, and sustainable tourism. The law also created a process that included public input: more than 600 proposals for green fee projects, totaling more than $2 billion, were submitted last year, with a 10-member Green Fee Advisory Council vetting the ideas after being appointed by Green.
The council then produced a curated list in December for the governor’s consideration, and the administration said it has been sorting through that list to make sure it fits state requirements. Will Kane, a senior adviser to the governor, described the effort as aimed at projects that would benefit communities across the state, and the administration’s list includes projects such as $5 million to support community efforts to control invasive species and more than $10 million for community reforestation and habitat recovery initiatives.
The proposal also includes more than $3 million for mosquito control to protect native birds, updates to the state’s water-conservation and drought response plans, and proactive wildfire prevention steps. It further lists funding for “Makai Watch” community groups to monitor coastal areas for marine resource enforcement, $5 million to retrofit homes against hurricanes, $3 million to create a climate disaster resilience workforce, and $1.25 million to support “green job” creation.
Lawmakers also pressed questions about how the green fee will be financed and whether money could be delayed. Senators said they were surprised to learn last month the administration planned to issue bonds to borrow $42 million for green fee construction projects in the fiscal year, with administration officials saying borrowing can give departments more time to spend because construction borrowing can be carried over from one year to the next.
Administration finance staff told senators that, in addition to the borrowing in the current fiscal year, there would be another plan to borrow $43.5 million and spend $43.5 million in cash in the fiscal year that begins July 1, for a total of $87 million in that fiscal year. Dela Cruz questioned the approach, saying the borrowed money would not really come from the green fee because the general fund would be used to repay the debt, which he called misleading.
Republican Sen. Kurt Fevella said taxpayers would be “confused and unhappy” if some projects are funded with borrowed money instead of with funds generated from the green fee itself. The administration also faces uncertainty tied to the cruise industry’s challenge to the cruise-ship tax, and officials said that if the legal challenge succeeds, some projects may need to be deferred later in the process, according to testimony cited in the report.
House and Senate leaders highlighted concerns about how climate costs would be assessed and how the Legislature would track the results of spending decisions. House Majority Leader Sean Quinlan, speaking at an event last month, joked about where the money could be spent but said more broadly that the biggest climate-related cost could involve relocating coastal infrastructure, including coastal roads, power plants near the ocean, and airports at or near sea level. Quinlan also said investments in hurricane shelters would be “nice,” describing concerns about storm impacts.
State Sen. Chris Lee said the state needs investment in research and analysis to assess the real cost of addressing climate change, saying it would help lawmakers decide what to fund and build accountable systems to track spending and outcomes.