Bill Overview
Title: Kaena Point National Heritage Area Act
Description: This bill directs the Department of the Interior to conduct a study to assess the suitability and feasibility of designating Honolulu County, Hawaii, as a National Heritage Area, to be known as the Kaena Point National Heritage Area.
Sponsors: Sen. Hirono, Mazie K. [D-HI]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals in and visiting Honolulu County, Hawaii
Estimated Size: 1000000
- The bill involves the study of designating a specific area, Kaena Point, as a National Heritage Area.
- National Heritage Areas are designated to recognize and protect areas with special natural, cultural, and historical value.
- The designation can impact local communities through increased tourism, funding, and preservation efforts.
- As the study is conducted in Honolulu County, the immediate population impacted will be the residents and stakeholders within Honolulu County.
Reasoning
- The immediate impact of the policy will primarily affect the residents of Honolulu County, where Kaena Point is located.
- There might be some indirect effects on individuals outside Hawaii, primarily involving tourism or cultural interest, but these impacts would be low unless they have a strong personal connection to the area.
- The budget reflects the limited initial scope of the policy, focusing on conducting a feasibility study rather than implementing large-scale changes.
- Since this is an exploratory phase, direct impacts on everyday wellbeing metrics might not be significant initially.
- Future phases post-study could see more substantial impacts if the area is indeed designated as a National Heritage Site, potentially improving local infrastructure, economy, and cultural recognition.
Simulated Interviews
Local Business Owner (Honolulu, Hawaii)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think recognizing Kaena Point as a National Heritage Area could be beneficial if it increases tourism responsibly.
- It would be important to ensure that the natural landscape is preserved and not overly commercialized.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Travel Blogger (Los Angeles, California)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Designating Kaena Point as a National Heritage Area sounds exciting. It could add a new dimension to my travel content.
- The challenge would be to balance heritage preservation with tourism growth.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Retired (Honolulu, Hawaii)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As someone who hikes to Kaena Point often, preserving its natural beauty is crucial.
- Additional resources from being a National Heritage Area could help manage and maintain its trails and environment.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Historian (New York, New York)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Having Kaena Point recognized would provide more resources and visibility for cultural studies related to Hawaii.
- It might not directly change my life but could enhance academic resources.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
University Student (Honolulu, Hawaii)
Age: 25 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could boost local conservation efforts and bring more attention to protecting our natural resources.
- It's important that the decision includes input from the community and environmental groups.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Tourist Agency Owner (Chicago, Illinois)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- If Kaena Point becomes a National Heritage Area, it could be an attractive new package for our tours.
- However, it must be handled in a way that doesn’t ruin the experience for locals and nature admirers.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Teacher (Honolulu, Hawaii)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Bringing more attention to our local history through Kaena Point could enrich educational resources for my students.
- It needs to focus on genuine cultural representation, not just for tourism.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Environmental Activist (Seattle, Washington)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Any move to protect natural areas like Kaena Point is a step in the right direction.
- It's critical that development doesn’t override environmental needs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Cultural Anthropologist (Miami, Florida)
Age: 38 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This recognition could broaden academic and public understanding of Polynesian culture.
- It offers a chance to better preserve cultural sites, though I'd expect minimal personal changes directly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Freelance Photographer (Honolulu, Hawaii)
Age: 28 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Designating Kaena Point could bring more recognition to my photography work.
- The area needs to remain accessible yet protected.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $400000 (Low: $250000, High: $500000)
Year 2: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 3: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 5: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The study will evaluate the suitability and feasibility of designating a National Heritage Area, which could lead to future legislative actions depending on the study's findings.
- Key stakeholders will include local communities, indigenous groups, environmental organizations, and local governments.
- The outcome of the study may influence future federal and state funding opportunities for preservation and development projects in the area.