Bill 6, a measure meant to temporarily increase the use of outside professionals at the city’s Department of Permitting and Planning to reduce the months-long backlog of building permit applications there, returned for further scrutiny this week.

The City Council’s Committee on Zoning on Wednesday held additional discussion over the draft measure — last heard by the panel in April — that would, if approved, give the city’s DPP director more authority to continue the use of third-party reviewers as well as add self-certifying licensed architects and engineers to lessen the department’s workload.

Under the bill, those self- certifying professionals will have to attest that any plans, specifications, computations and other data they submit to the department are true and correct.

At the meeting, DPP Director Dawn Takeuchi Apuna said her department remained supportive of Bill 6 as “it provides another option for building permit applications while we continue to make the major changes in the department to alleviate the backlog.”

Still, Takeuchi Apuna said Bill 6 needed further work as “a lot of the details and requirements will be put forth in the administrative rules that will be authorized in this bill.” Potential additions to the measure may include enforcement provisions and penalties “when people don’t comply,” she said.

For her part, Vice Chair Esther Kia‘aina questioned the difference between self- certification and third-party review.

“So third-party review is as if they’re doing the same review that DPP code reviewers would do,” Takeuchi Apuna replied. “And then self-certification is the actual design professional self- certifying that the work they’re providing meets all the codes and regulations. So, it’s kind of the actual designer versus the reviewer.”

Kia‘aina also questioned the current use of third-party reviewers at DPP.

Takeuchi Apuna said third-party reviewers review specific codes like mechanical, electrical and structural for commercial projects, and worked on residential projects as well as the city’s land use ordinance.

Conversely, DPP staff handle permit application pre-screening, routing and “then the issue of approval,” she added. And DPP, she noted, does not conduct final reviews over the work of third-party reviewers.

Kia‘aina also questioned whether DPP staff or third-party reviewers handled matters related to historic preservation, protection of iwi kupuna, archaeological sites and other historic and cultural properties.

Takeuchi Apuna said DPP staffers typically route historic preservation to the State of Hawaii Historic Preservation Division and did not delegate such work to third-party reviewers.

Later, Kia‘aina questioned the need for Bill 6 at all. “And if this bill does not pass, will DPP continue to use third-party reviewers?” she asked.

Takeuchi Apuna said “from a legal point, the statutory authority is not there to allow third-party review, though it is in our rules.”

“So, in a way, I think it would legitimize it,” Takeuchi Apuna said. “If we aren’t able to pass it, we would look at that question — whether we would continue.”

Under a related question, Takeuchi Apuna said no one has challenged DPP’s legal standing in its ongoing use of third-party reviewers.

Although no legal challenges have occurred, problems with DPP’s use of third-party reviewers did surface earlier this year.

On April 11, DPP faulted a third-party reviewer for granting an unwarranted building permit. DPP asserted that local architect Jimmy Wu — working on behalf of the city — reviewed and certified plans for what was later deemed a “monster home” in the Kalihi area. DPP issued a building permit on March 28, 2022, for the project at 1532 Hanai Loop.

But based on an inquiry from Council member Tyler Dos Santos-Tam and state Rep. John Mizuno, DPP “re-reviewed” the plans and determined incorrect information was provided to DPP by the project applicants and that the planned two-story, single-family home with nine bathrooms, no side yards and insufficient parking was a gross violation of the city’s “monster homes” ordinance, the city said.

DPP revoked the project’s building permit and issued a notice of violation and a stop-work order to the owners, Junqin Chen and Maonan Wang.

At Wednesday’s meeting, Kia‘aina asked, “Given the problems that have occurred with third-party reviewers, what disincentivizes applicants to self-certify projects that do not comply with existing codes?”

Takeuchi Apuna said DPP would ensure “specific standards for the types of people that can be self- certifiers and (have) a good, clean record of the types of applications that we have gotten from them in the past.”

She added that those wishing to self-certify will receive training and noted Bill 6 potentially, should have penalties for “bad actors” in the system.

If passed, the self- certification provision under Bill 6 might include a repeal — or sunset — a few years after it takes effect. But the number of years — possibly three or more — are still to be determined. Other aspects of Bill 6 also could involve a reporting requirement to the City Council, every six months or annually, to show how well the measure is working to relieve DPP’s permit backlog.

Some from the public spoke with concern over Bill 6.

Kauanui Sabas, representing the Hawaii Government Employees Association, said the measure was a short-term, temporary solution to fix a permitting backlog linked, in part, to Honolulu’s nearly 3,000 city worker vacancies.

“Until DPP is able to obtain enough staff to meet the permit demand, we respectfully ask that the bill be amended to include a sunset date of two years,” he said. “We believe two years is a reasonable amount of time for DPP and the city to develop and execute a plan to invest in their current and future workforce.”

Sabas added HGEA’s expectations for this plan include “increasing the pay for public employees involved in the permitting process, providing other recruitment and retention incentives and also to hire and train new staff.”

Although discussion was taken with regard to Bill 6, the zoning committee voted to postpone the item to its next meeting in July for further review.