The House Committee on Housing deferred three competing building-code bills — HB 1, HB 745 and HB 1321 — for decision making on Wednesday, Feb. 5.

The bills would change how Hawaii adopts building codes. Supporters said the current multi-step process is slow and inconsistent across counties; opponents warned the proposed changes could reduce public safety and strip important statewide oversight.

Committee Chair Esmel announced the deferral after testimony that ranged from industry trade groups and developers pressing for faster, uniform adoption of codes to unions, safety advocates and the International Code Council warning against rolling back statewide standards. Deputy Attorney General Christopher Hahn appeared on Zoom with comments for the committee about statutory cross-references.

Roseanne Freitas, CEO of the Building Industry Association of Hawaii, urged passage of HB 1 and said the adoption process had been captured by special interests. “The process has been hijacked by some special interest groups that do promote their agenda at the expense of affordable housing,” Freitas said in testimony supporting HB 1.

Labor and safety voices argued the building code council exists to protect public health and safety. Kika Bukowski of IBW 1260 told the committee he has attended every state building code council meeting and urged the panel not to prioritize cost over safety: “I don't think we should put a price on the safety of the public,” he said.

The International Code Council, represented by Brian Emai, opposed HB 1 and urged lawmakers to fund staff positions for the state building code council so the body can adopt updates in a timely manner. Emai said the bill as drafted could eliminate the council’s ability to adopt an updated statewide code that guides counties and state building projects.

Grassroot Institute witness Ted Kefalas and other proponents argued the process is broken and that some bills would streamline adoption and reduce inconsistent county rules; opponents said counties must retain the ability to set amendments appropriate to local wind, seismic and geographic conditions.

Committee members pressed for clarifications about when counties may exceed or not reduce minimum statewide standards and noted a governor’s emergency proclamation had suspended the code council’s recent activity, complicating the adoption timeline.

The committee recorded the deferrals to allow more time to reconcile competing bills and statutory references.

Votes and procedural outcomes were limited to deferral; no final adoption of code changes occurred at the hearing.