A newly proposed measure to amend the city’s Land Use Ordinance to require builders of so-called monster homes on Oahu to pay $25,000 or greater fines has passed an initial hurdle.

The Honolulu City Council on Tuesday voted unanimously to approve the first reading of Bill 52 — forwarded first by the city Department of Planning and Permitting, then formally introduced by Council Chair Tommy Waters on Aug. 31 — that is focused solely on levying higher fines.

Under Bill 52, builders who violate city laws relating to “development standards” and permitted uses and structures — like maximum heights, height setbacks, floor-area ratios, or the number of bathrooms permitted inside a home based on the number of dwellings, units or lot size — would be subject to an initial fine of up to $25,000, plus up to $10,000 a day per violation.

“The Council finds that monster homes in residential districts continue to be a problem for our communities, and the current penalty of $250 per day up to a total of $2,000 is a negligible cost of doing business for monster homes developers,” Bill 52 reads. “The Department of Planning and Permitting expends time and incurs costs towards additional audit, revocation and defending the Department’s revocation at the Building Board of Appeals on these monster homes, which in part justifies a higher fine.”

Furthermore, Bill 52 states its purpose “is to provide a more effective deterrent and hefty penalty to developers that violate the monster homes ordinance by supplying incorrect information on plans or convert rooms for multi-family uses during or post construction.”

Those violations of the city’s development standards would occur if incorrect information is “supplied by the applicant, plan maker, architect, and/or engineer on plans submitted for a building permit application,” Bill 52 reads.

At Tuesday’s meeting, no Council discussion was held on the measure prior to its first reading approval.

But before the vote, resident Natalie Iwasa said she was generally supportive of Bill 52 versus another monster homes measure that involves issuing false statements or information to public officials — namely, DPP inspectors — with regard to residential building projects.

“I think this is a better answer to trying to regulate our monster homes than Bill 44, which dealt with the false statements,” she said.

Still, Iwasa requested that the city provide information regarding the amount of fines DPP has actually waived in prior years. She further asserted that the prior city administration routinely “waived 90% to 95% of fines” levied against building code violators.

“And when you do that they don’t have the impact that they are intended to have,” she said. “So I was told that they don’t do that as much, but I’m still kind of curious how much it’s done.”

Meanwhile, resident Lynne Matusow wanted to see more added to Bill 52.

“This may help, but the only thing that will get the attention of all miscreants is to demolish the building(s),” Matusow said in written public testimony. “This bill must be amended to advocate for the demolition.”

The Building Industry Association of Hawaii, also in written testimony, offered mixed reactions toward Bill 52.

“While we strongly support the increase in the monetary fine to be used as a deterrent to those seeking to build ‘monster homes,’ we believe that deterrence will be achieved with more aggressive enforcement,” BIA’s statement reads.

To that end, BIA suggested that the Council amend the measure to allow unannounced inspections of dwellings or duplexes — during the two-year period that a temporary certificate of occupancy is in effect — to confirm that the same structures are being used according to city building codes and regulations.

“We believe that unannounced, multiple random inspections along with the increase in fines will act as a deterrent to those seeking to construct ‘monster homes,’” BIA’s statement reads.

In an Aug. 9 memorandum regarding what would become Bill 52, DPP Director Dawn Takeuchi Apuna explained that despite existing laws — including three separate city ordinances adopted between 2018 and 2021 to address the construction of large dwellings — the issue of monster home developments persists.

In addition, she noted the Council’s ongoing consideration of Bill 44, meant to prohibit giving false statements to city planners as a means of curbing monster homes, that may impose penalties including a $2,000 fine, a year in jail, or 80 hours of community service on violators.

Some Council members also say that measure should require demolition of any monster homes that the city discovers.

But Takeuchi Apuna notes Bill 44, as drafted, may be unworkable due to existing state law — in particular, Hawaii Revised Statutes 710-1063, which covers unsworn falsifications to authorities — that could preempt or eliminate the power of the proposed city measure with regard to lying to city officials, especially DPP inspectors.

“In contrast, the proposed (Land Use Ordinance) amendment to increase fines would simply require adding the higher fines to the city Notice of Violation and Notice of Order,” the Aug. 9 memo reads.

It adds, “At City Council hearings, there is discussion of requiring complete demolition of monster homes, which could be considered a legal taking, and could create a prolonged legal process. This proposed LUO amendment to increase monster home fines is a more feasible and tailored option than Bill 44 and complete demolition.”

Previously, Takeuchi Apuna told the Honolulu Star-Advertiser that her department “takes monster homes very seriously and is pursuing all fronts to eliminate these developments” on Oahu.

“Since January, the DPP has revoked 15 monster homes permits, and has taken the fight to the Building Board of Appeals to sustain these revocations,” she said via email. “And the DPP continues to closely monitor plans that come close to the floor area ratio for monster homes. This proposal to substantially increase fines puts monster homes’ developers on notice that there is a major price to be paid for disobeying the law that is meant to protect our residential neighborhoods.”