Hawaii Pushing For Law That Requires Minimum of 1 Charging Station in Parking Lots With 100 Spaces Or More


Back on January 30, Hawaii’s Senate Committee on Energy and Environment approved (unanimously) a bill that calls for owners of parking lots with 100 spots or more to install at least one charging station.

There Won't Be a Charger Required Here

There Won’t Be a Charger Required Here

That bill (Senate Bill 2651) is now in Committee on Judiciary and Labor.  Then, it moves to the Senate.

Details of the bill are describes as follows by Big Island Now:

  • Would go into effect on Jan. 1, 2015.
  • The measure would establish fines of $1,000 for the first violation, which would increase to $5,000 for the second violation and then double for a third infraction. Any subsequent violations would bring a fine of $20,000.
  • Owners of parking lots would be allowed 120 days after any violation to comply without being cited for another violation. Police would be responsible for issuing citations.

It’s believed that the bill will be approved by the Senate, but there may be some alterations seen in its final approved form.

As Big Island Now states:

“The Maui County Office of Economic Development expressed concern about the bill’s original language, which included fines of up to $50,000, and its possible inclusion of parking lots at county beach parks.”

So, some wording might need to be changed before the bill gets signed into law.

Unlike requirements set forth in several other states, the bill in Hawaii does not have a grandfather clause, meaning existing parking lots with over 100 spaces will have only until January 1, 2015 to install at least 1 charging station.

Source: Big Island Now

Category: Charging, General

31 responses to "Hawaii Pushing For Law That Requires Minimum of 1 Charging Station in Parking Lots With 100 Spaces Or More"
  1. Mike I says:

    The law requiring EVSE installation in parking lots with more than 100 spaces has been on the books for some time now. However, there were no fines or other penalties for non-compliance. Therefore, many property owners simply ignored the law.

    Existing law required EVSE installation by July 1, 2012. Warnings would be issued to non-electric vehicles parking in designated spaces starting January 1, 2013. Fines between $50 and $100 for such infractions would begin July 1, 2013.

    They are now trying to put teeth into the existing law.

  2. David Murray says:

    While I would personally love to see this happen, I would find it hard to support the government forcing this type of thing on businesses. because if they can get away with this, what would they force on people next?

    1. Anon says:

      How about forcing businesspeople into doing something horrible, like provide handicap access? Gosh, that would just ruin all their margins, running a business. :p

      You do realize that positive social and infrastructure improvements almost never happen on their own? This is exactly the problems government was created to address.

      1. Taser54 says:

        So you are equating EV drivers to the Handicapped. Nice.

      2. Open-Mind says:

        By the same rational, all business owners should be required to purchase and carry a loaded firearm. This will both reduce crime and make the patrons of their establishment safer. Some might object, but this type of positive social improvement is what government was created to address. Right?

        1. Anon says:

          If only the evidence actually backed up that claim that more guns causes less crime:


          1. Open-Mind says:

            Well sure, there will always be few naysayers who don’t know what’s best for them. Some people are just misguided, like those who don’t think they should be forced to install EV chargers. In the end, what they think doesn’t really matter. Society matters. So they are fortunate that I don’t mind imposing gun ownership on them. It’s the least I can do to create a better society.

            LOL … see how that works? 😉

        2. Scott Franco says:

          I missed something. Why are businesses shooting handicapped EV drivers????

          1. Aaron says:

            No, it’s the other way around. EV drivers are shooting ICE drivers who are ICE-ing their charging spots. That’s legal, right? At least it should be… 😉

      3. Independent Observer says:

        There is a difference between putting up a cheap handicapped sign or two in the stalls closest to the door, and putting in an expensive charging unit. How about logistics of electrical power, etc? Let the free market decide if there is value in the owner putting in chargers.

    2. Andrew K says:

      Perhaps we drop the wild speculative emotions and just objectively critique the law. You don’t have to think it’s a good idea, but saying that the government mandating a large business to “X” or “Y” is somehow going to be a crime the are “getting away with”, A kin to forced people to only have one child or something, just damages your credibility.

      Grow up. Make rational, fact based, arguments.

    3. kdawg says:

      If the citizens of Hawaii don’t like the laws being passed, they can vote in new leaders. I think this is a good law, so I would vote for these people again. (if I lived in Hawaii that is. I’d probably be tanner too.)

      1. Taser54 says:

        It becomes government micromanaging private businesses. That’s simply not its role.

        1. Open-Mind says:

          Taser54, I agree. What you’ve described is the perspective of the political right.

          However the political left is usually more than happy to micromanage business. Their effort usually wrapped in some good intent that can be used as a shield against criticism. Ironically that same political left usually objects the loudest when someone else is micromanaging them.

          Hawaii is a very left leaning state.

          1. kdawg says:

            It’s up to the people to govern themselves. If they don’t like the rules, vote for people who feel the same way as they do. Or if you are a business and you don’t like the laws in Hawaii, do business elsewhere. I don’t think 1 spot per 100 is unreasonable, especially if the goal of Hawaii is to create more incentives for EV purchases.

            1. Open-Mind says:

              Those who make mandates always think they’re reasonable. But what they will probably get are more parking lots that hold 99 cars. Welcome to the world of unintended consequences. This could be better accomplished with a simple tax incentive. Like the federal incentive to buy an EV … rather than a federal law that mandates the purchase.

              The right prefers incentives.

              The left prefers mandates.

              1. Steven says:

                Fine, then what incentive would you offer to a parking lot owners who has 1% of their spots specific to EV charging? And who would pay for that incentive?

                1. Open-Mind says:

                  If a state wants people to buy EV stuff, then the state can offer a tax credit toward the purchase of EV stuff. Then people can choose to participate or not. Obviously that means a bit less tax revenue for the state.

                  Laws that mandate citizens to purchase a product generally suck.

              2. kdawg says:

                I prefer a combination of both. Incentives for the EV purchases, and mandates so people have public places to charge.

        2. Scott Franco says:

          I think at this point, its a forgone conclusion that the EV revolution would not have advanced without government mandates.

    4. Just_chris says:

      Its all in the wording, the proposed law appears to be written with a rather socialist tone. If you wanted to rephrase it to a capitalist tone you just make some subtle changes so it reads a bit like this:

      “In order to stimulate innovation, create local jobs, reduce health care costs and break our reliance on foreign oil. The state of Hawaii has today passed the first of its kind legislation to exempt all car parks that contain a minimum of one “freedom” charge point from having to pay the $1000 per quarter law enforcement and maintenance duty due to be introduced on the 1st of January 2015 on all car parks exceeding 100 spaces. The duty will increase gradually with time to a cap of $20 000 to allow business to adapt to the legislation and make the necessary investment within the national infrastructure. This duty will look to reduce in the irresponsible practice of building car parks without “freedom” charge points that is giving an unfair advantage to foreign competitors”

      see all fixed, note the random use of the word freedom and that the last sentence makes no sense what’s so ever but makes it sound like American industry is being disadvantaged and that this new tax (never use the word tax) will help alleviate this. It also makes clear that the new duty is for law enforcement and in no way reduces the tax burden on high earners (who fund campaigns) or old people, who always vote and would like to see more police on the beat. If you change the location, currency and remove the word “freedom” (very American, you must always remind yourself you are free). You could pretty much release this statement anywhere in the democratic world.

    5. Mikael says:

      Forcing people to do good things if they don’t do it on their own is not a bad thing. A government is supposed to be there to help you do the right thing, like a parent guiding you in life.

      Not to mention that a lot with 100 spaces is a pretty huge one. If you really can’t afford it (which you obviously do if you need 100 spaces) then just make it into 99 spaces.
      If the law was about 10% of all parking spaces no matter how many spaces you have then I would understand someone being against it.

      1. Taser54 says:

        By that logic … the government should review what you eat and mandate that you eat only certain foods.

        1. Nelson says:

          They already do that by allowing only certain ingredients (read chemicals) in certain processed foods and drinks. Remember when the main ingredient in Coke was cocaine instead of caffeine.

          NPNS! SBF!

      2. Open-Mind says:

        “A government is supposed to be there to help you do the right thing, like a parent guiding you in life.”

        Oy veh! That belief has historically led to genocide, because those who seek power over others are usually not angels.


        But we’re getting a little off topic. 😉

  3. Big Solar says:

    I used to live there. I keep thinking how much charge I would get driving down Haleakala every day. Would I have to only charge 90% so as not to overcharge?? Sorry (off topic)

    1. Aaron says:

      Heh. I was thinking about that while driving east on H-3 toward Kailua on Oahu. How much charge could I get driving down this mountain? It would be fun watching the energy gauge go up a bar or two!

  4. James says:

    Government mandates be damned.

    Free market enterprise will ignite business investment in EVSEs without being
    forced to do so.

    The current environment forced upon us by C.A.R.B, C.A.F.E and various Euro mandates
    gives us this crazy EV world we now live in. Compliance cars most – and the negative
    squeeze of and pitiful taxpayer waste we see all over – to push the EV into the mainstream.

    Only when someone breaks out and give the public an affordable BEV with a range of
    200-350 miles will the tide turn. Tesla is the great hope.

    Literally nobody else has the momentum and will to do it.

    1. Mr. M says:

      Just wait for the Leaf next year…

  5. James says:

    Just look what Tesla has accomplished thus far. No government mandated
    their implementation of the Supercharger network. It’s slowness and the expense
    of Tesla’s one production car is al that stands in the way.

    Don’t look to any current ICE automaker to follow suit. Literally every single one
    – sans, possibly Ghosn and Nissan, are acting upon government forces making
    them do what they have done so far. From a Volt built under pressure of
    government bailout and negative green vibe from EV-1, to an i3 BMW’s CEO
    admitted exists due to present and future Euro green mandates.

    Tesla, LEAF and perhaps iMiev are the only cars with plugs that don’t have
    compliance written all over them.

    Momentum from competition will build , but not until battery packs do not cost
    so much. Gigafactory or Chinese battery pack production will have to cut
    costs. Businesses will see the value of installing charging stations as business
    tax write-offs and incentives for BEV drivers to frequent them. It’s organic.

    I no longer want to drive a vehicle that was basically forced upon it’s maker
    by governments.

    When the electric car is just a no-brainer to the consumer, everything will
    come into being naturally.