Top officials in Mayor Kirk Caldwell’s administration say they worry that two bills that would prohibit lying and sitting on all Oahu sidewalks and ban defecating and urinating in public areas might not pass constitutional muster.

Instead, the administration would prefer that Honolulu City Council members stick to Caldwell’s original plan to implement a "sit-lie" restriction and urination-defecation ban in Waikiki only as part of a multipronged "compassionate disruption" plan to battle homelessness islandwide, Deputy Managing Director Georgette Deemer said.

"We believe these (Waikiki)bills will withstand constitutional challenge and that they’re on solid ground,"Deemer said. "We would like to work with the Council, if these bills are successful, to expand to other areas in the future."

Members of the Council Zoning and Planning Committee, at the end of a long day of public commentary and debate, kept alive all four bills.

Approved were:

>> Bill 42, prohibiting sitting and lying on sidewalks in the Waikiki Special District, which is defined as the area bordered by Ala Wai Canal, Kapahulu Avenue and the ocean. The vote was 3-1, with Councilman Breene Harimoto the lone "no" vote. Members Ann Kobayashi and Ron Menor voted "yes" with reservations.

>> Bill 43, prohibiting urinating and defecating in public areas in the Waikiki Special District. The vote was 4-0.

>> Bill 45, prohibiting sitting and lying on sidewalks throughout Oahu. The vote was 3-1, with Harimoto as the one "no" vote and members Kobayashi and Menor voting "yes" with reservations. Menor described the measure as "clearly unconstitutional" and said he will support its final passage only if improvements are made to it.

>> Bill 46, prohibiting urinating and defecating in public areas islandwide. The vote was 4-0, with Harimoto, Kobayashi and Menor voting "yes" with reservations.

The bills are now expected to be heard by the full Council, for the second of three necessary approvals, July 9 at Windward Community College.

A fifth measure, Bill 44, prohibiting sitting and lying on sidewalks from River Street to Ward Avenue, was deferred. 

During a special meeting of the full Council, Deemer said the Waikiki "sit-lie"bill is patterned after a similar restriction in place in downtown Seattle. That law applies to certain business areas of Seattle, and only from 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. 

City attorneys contend that because many Waikiki businesses operate around the clock, a solid argument can be made that they and their customers need unimpeded sidewalk access 24 hours a day. It’s less certain the same argument can be made for Chinatown or other parts of the island, Deemer said. 

"Any ban or prohibition on lying does need to be tied to pedestrian safety, and it should be tied to the amount of pedestrian activity on the sidewalks and the time pedestrian activity occurs on the sidewalks, and this will vary from community to community."

Meanwhile, Deemer said, the administration is taking steps to ensure publicly accessible restroom facilities are available 24 hours a day in Waikiki. As for an islandwide ban on urinating and defecating in public areas, "we are concerned, again, about a challenge if there are no public restrooms available in the area," Deemer said. 

Public testimony was split, with part of the audience urging passage due to the need to clear city sidewalks for pedestrian use, and the other segment opposing the bills because it would hurt those in most need of help.

Activist Kathryn Xian said her research shows the Seattle law was meant "to protect people from muggings and assaults in abandoned areas" of downtown Seattle. The homelessness situation improved in Seattle only when the city implemented Housing First programs, she said.

Charles Canipe, who lives at the 10-story Pacificana condominium on Young Street, said 85 percent of the people in his building support the islandwide sit-lie bill. Many are seniors and cannot navigate their wheelchairs through the area people camped on the sidewalks leave for them.

Waikiki business interests testified in favor of the Waikiki-only bills but were questioned by both Council members and opponents of the bills about what they were doing to improve the situation.