Commission member Wayne Hedani led off by asking if anyone could show him "any logical reason as to why we should be hearing about superstores. We're just wasting our time."

He said the council could find more useful employment by dealing with traffic, water and "400 gangs in this state."

But commission member Jonathan Starr described big-box stores as "Draculas sucking the blood" out of the business community.

After more than two hours, all the commission managed to do was vote 6-1 to defer action on any recommendation.

Commission member Kent Hiranaga was in the middle.

"I have no basis to make the determination," he said.

Despite language in the council resolution about "overburdening the existing infrastructure" and "deterioration of fragile ecosystems" and "decimation of small businesses," Hiranaga said there was nothing, no case studies, no numbers to back that up.

The Planning Department is not taking any position about whether superstores should or should not be regulated, said Joe Alueta, the administrative planning officer who drafts ordinances for the department.

He said he was concerned about the structure of the bill, in particular about how it would be enforced if passed as written.

Hokama's proposal would forbid any new stores that exceeded 90,000 square feet of total retail space, if they either stocked more than 25,000 different products or devoted more than 20,000 square feet to groceries.

Alueta said that would be very difficult to enforce — "Are the Handi Wipes a grocery item?"

Also, he didn't see how the code inspectors could count the SKUs — stock keeping units.

If anything is to be done, he pleaded, keep it simple: Make the limit a set square footage.

He asked the commission to help him "hedge my bets." It could recommend no special legislation against big-box stores. But if it did favor a bill, he pleaded that the commission recommend to the council that any legislation simplify the standards to something easy to enforce.

Although the council resolution says "this ordinance is not intended to preclude any particular retailer, company, end-user or tenant from doing business," nobody in the Kalana Pakui hearing room believed that.

They all recognized that it was aimed at Wal-Mart, or possibly a Target. Those are the only national chains that have big retail stores that include sizable grocery stores within them.

Commission member Bruce U'u said Home Depot was one of his favorite stores, so he was glad to know it wasn't a target, since it doesn't stock groceries.

But he lambasted Brian Halsey, Wal-Mart's Hawaii market manager, for being anti-union and offering a poor medical plan.

Halsey declined to say whether Wal-Mart is anti-union, saying it was "pro-associate," and he said its full-time workers are offered HMSA or Kaiser Permanente medical coverage — complying with Hawaii law for large employers.

Commission member Joan Pawsat said she thought 95,000 square feet was "big enough" but complained about the sameness of the architecture of the big boxes.

Testimony at the public hearing was uniformly against the ban.

"Are you kidding me?" said Susan Moikeha, a former member of the planning commission. "Are there not more important things in the county that need to be addressed?"

Ann Hunt was one of several retirees who said low prices at big boxes help retirees on fixed incomes get by. She said she called stores in Dallas to check the prices and found that they were the same as here on Maui.

"This is a great benefit to all people who live on Maui," she said.

Pedro Gapero said he had lived on Maui for 58 years but traveled all over the Mainland.

"I really enjoyed doing all my shopping in one place. You cannot stop progress."

Alueta said the bill, as proposed, would not affect the three stores on Maui that are bigger than 90,000 square feet: Costco, Wal-Mart and Home Depot. They would become existing, nonconforming uses.

They would not be able to expand, at least not if they had more than 20,000 square feet in groceries.

Hiranaga described the Hokama bill as a "scorched-earth" approach based on "hearsay."

Commission member William Iaconetti, the only vote against deferral, tried to pin down Halsey about a letter from the United Food and Commercial Workers union complaining about Wal-Mart personnel practices. But he didn't like the bill.

"Legislation directed toward an entity is a big mistake ... the bill should be denied," he said.

Commission member John Guard IV had some questions about what happens when big boxes change locations. He said he had observed in Nebraska that a community of small retailers would grow up around a big box, only to be left to whither when the retailer abandoned one location for another.

Iaconetti moved to tell the council to forget the bill, seconded by Hedani. That failed 2-5.

Starr then moved to defer. The commission does not have unlimited time to make up its mind on a recommendation to the council.

A 120-day clock started ticking, either when the council transmitted its resolution or when the Planning Department certified the transmittal as complete.

Deputy Corporation Counsel James Giroux said ordinances and the County Charter may be in conflict. In any event, Alueta said perhaps the commission could try again in January.