Visitors to Hawaii won’t pay more ‘green fees’ for now

Hawaii won’t impose new fees after all on tourists who want to visit more of the state’s most popular state parks and trails.

The latest version of Senate Bill 304 expanded the concept to pose a fee on tourists to offset their impact on state trails and parks.

Visitor “green fees” are already imposed at Diamond Head State Monument, Haena State Park, Waianapa­napa State Park and ‘Iao Valley State Monument.

Green fees are intended to fight climate change and help maintain the state’s most popular tourist attractions.

The bill would have established the visitor impact fee program within the state Department of Land and Natural Resources. The department then would have collected a fee of $50 from visitors to obtain a license to visit state parks, forests, hiking trails and other natural areas.

>> RELATED STORY: Bills would expand fees to access Hawaii state parks, trails

State Rep. Sean Quinlan (D, Waialua-Haleiwa-Punaluu), chair of the joint Senate and House conference committee that considered SB 304, said there wasn’t enough time to pass the measure.

“We made a significant change right at the end where we changed from a study into an implementation plan,” Quinlan, who also chairs the House Committee on Tourism, told the Honolulu Star-Advertiser. “We had offered a conference draft one to the Senate. It had a half a million dollars for the plan and then $362,000 for positions for salaries.”

Although the measure did not pass this session, Quinlan plans to work on the measure over the summer and said he is “very committed to this idea.”

Sen. Lorraine Inouye (D, Hilo-Pepeekeo), chair of the Senate side of the joint committee, called the death of the bill “a little upsetting.”

“Not knowing that my bill was going to die … was just … a little upsetting,” Inouye said.

With a background of 21 years in the visitor industry on Hawaii island, Inouye said, “I believe that, you know, charging visitors, I think, is the right thing to do.”

But she said the proposed $50 fee was too small.

“If they stick to $50 as recommended by the governor to address sea level rise, global warming, carbon infiltration, as well as addressing the parks, that’s not going to be enough,” Inouye said.

When asked whether she plans to take up the measure next legislative session, Inouye said, “Oh, yes, yes, yes, definitely.”

The idea of charging tourists to offset their impact on the state’s most popular parks and trails remains popular.

Several organizations submitted testimony in support of the latest version of SB 304, including the state Department of Land and Natural Resources, the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development and the Hawaii Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Commission.

“The green fee is an important mechanism which will fund the expansion of conservation actions across the state that would greatly increase the resilience of natural lands which are key to economic, food, water, health and climate resiliency,” wrote Leah Laramee, coordinator of the Hawaii Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Commission.

But some opposed the idea, worried that more fees will deter tourism.

“You will end up (chasing away visitors) and the People of Hawaii will Have to Come (after) you in the Courts,” wrote Gerard Silva.

Implementing additional visitor fees on tourists was one of Gov. Josh Green’s key priorities this legislative session.

“By the end of the Legislature, we’re going to have dollars for the impact that travelers have on our climate, and that’s the most important thing,” Green said in January during an appearance on the Honolulu Star-Advertiser’s “Spotlight Hawaii” live­stream program.

Following the “green fee” bill not passing this legislative session, “the Governor is disappointed that the visitor impact fee bill did not pass, but remains committed to protecting Hawai‘i’s natural, cultural, and en­vironmental resources,” Green’s director of communications, Makana McClellan, said in a statement to the Star-Advertiser. “Our administration will use this as an opportunity to have a broader conversation about tourism destination management, and work on a detailed bill for next session using all the feedback we received from this year’s legislation.”

Then-Honolulu Council member Mufi Hannemann authored legislation to charge visitors to enter the city’s Hanauma Bay. The fees went into a special fund for preservation, maintenance and education, which has been ongoing since the early 1990s.

“I’ve always believed in the concept of an impact user fee, that a fee can be assessed as long as it goes back to that particular attraction, that trail, that valley, that beach park, so that improvements can be made and that will benefit not just visitors or tourists, but also local residents,” said Hannemann, now president and CEO of the Hawaii Lodging & Tourism Association.

Hannemann said this legislative session included several bills with different variations of the “green fee,” which could be one of the reasons the effort fell short this session.

”I think one of the issues that there are so many versions of a green fee — everything from charging someone a fee to just coming to the islands and then basically the usage of that fee — was also widely debated and discussed,” Hannemann said. “So I think that all those areas led to the lack of consensus, if you will, which I think was one of the reasons why, at the end of the day, it was hard to move forward.”

When asked whether a “green fee” will deter visitors from coming to the state, Hannemann said he doesn’t see people staying away, “because we have plenty of other attractions, plenty of other places for people to go to and so forth.”

Hannemann does believes that the idea of implementing “green fees” will return again next legislative session.

“These bills take time,” Hannemann said. “There was a lot of discussion. I’m sure we’ll see it again next session. But our position is going to be very consistent. We’ll follow and we’ll support the model of an impact user fee.”