Less than a year after the wind-driven wildfire that destroyed Lahaina and claimed the lives of at least 101 Hawaii people, it is simply unconscionable that the state Legislature is quickly considering House Bill 2089, which, nonsensically, seeks to address legitimate staffing and resource challenges faced by Hawaii’s building departments by arbitrarily preventing the state from keeping its building safety standards up to date. Consistent with similar efforts advanced by analogous lobbies in other states, this bill puts the builder and developer interests ahead of Hawaii’s residents, whose health and safety it places at greater risk.

For nearly a decade and a half, I ran Florida’s Division of Emergency Management for then-Gov. Jeb Bush, and then the Federal Emergency Management Agency for then-President Barack Obama. I saw first-hand just how much modern building codes contributed to the resilience of individuals and communities. Since I left FEMA, we’ve continued to see an increase in extreme weather events in other regions of the nation — whether hurricanes in the Gulf of Mexico and up the Atlantic Coast, record wildfires in the West, tornadoes in the heartland and Southeast, and repeated record floods in coastal and riverine areas.

The bad news is that these disasters will get worse. Most Americans remain woefully unprepared. One basic reason is human nature: jurisdictions don’t take threats seriously until a disaster forces their hand. We think it will never happen to us — until it does.

As written, HB 2089 would prohibit the Hawaii State Building Code Council (SBCC) from keeping the state up to date with the latest building codes and standards. If this bill becomes law, and based on the code review timeline of the SBCC, which has never been funded and is entirely reliant on volunteer support, Hawaii would consistently be building to codes that are nearly 10 years outdated. And of course, Hawaii’s residents would be forced to pay new home prices for homes constructed to decade-old standards.

When disasters strike communities with strong and modern building codes, people have homes to come back to. Where codes are weak, we lose lives and livelihoods, especially in low-income and minority communities. Storms tear apart the fabric of towns and can decimate local economies for years, even decades.

>> RELATED: Column: Meet evolving mental-health needs after Maui tragedy

RELATED: Column: The Maui catastrophe is a wake-up call

Over the last decade, several studies have confirmed that the adoption and implementation of current model building codes is one of the most cost-effective mitigation strategies for natural hazards including hurricanes, flooding, earthquakes and wildfires.

The National Institute of Building Sciences (NIBS) estimates that building to modern building codes saves $11 for every $1 invested through earthquake, flood and wind mitigation benefits, with up to $8-to-$1 return in wildfire mitigation savings. These benefits represent avoided loss of life and injuries, property damage, business interruptions, first responder and annual homeownership costs, and are enjoyed by all building stakeholders — from governments, developers, titleholders and lenders, to tenants and communities.

FEMA projects that if all future construction adhered to current codes, the nation would avoid more than $600 billion in cumulative losses from floods, hurricanes and earthquakes by 2060. According to the same study, modernization of codes in Hawaii have already reduced the risk of loss from earthquake hazards by 25%.

Developers and builders often cite codes as an additional cost. This wholly unsupported contention is based in its entirety on the builders’ own unscientific, self-interested talking points. Although several studies have considered the question — including studies published by the National Bureau of Economic Research, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Investigative Journal of Risk Reduction, and the principal NIBS report investigator — no peer-reviewed research shows that building codes have an appreciable impact on construction costs.

Given their benefits to public safety and the savings they provide in avoiding what would otherwise be much more substantial disaster response costs, the federal government has increasingly incentivized the adoption and implementation of current codes and standards.

Hawaii’s current pause on code updates already hurts the state’s access to federal mitigation dollars. HB 2089 — if it becomes law — will put substantial mitigation and recovery dollars at risk, as FEMA offers increased funding for communities that prioritize resiliency through the adoption and effective implementation of up-to-date codes. Administrations from both parties have and continue to hold a deep aversion to seeing federal tax dollars funding reconstruction in disaster-damaged communities that actively chose to weaken safety standards.

Instead of arbitrarily prohibiting safety code updates, and to truly address HB 2089’s stated purpose, the state Legislature should ensure the SBCC and Hawaii’s building departments are properly staffed and resourced. As drafted, HB 2089 would accomplish neither.

I join the dozens of emergency management, building and fire safety professionals, engineers, architects, contractors, insurers and sustainability advocates in opposition to this legislation. Hawaii’s people should expect and demand better from their elected representatives.

Craig Fugate is former director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).