The published report mistakenly interprets the section of state law (HRS 205-5(b) ) as allowing counties to regulate this cigar/coffee shop operation as an "accessory use."  The 2012 state law (Act 113 of 2012) established this use as one of some 20 PRINCIPAL - not accessory - permitted uses.  This new permitted use was established in HRS 205-2(d) as permitted use number 15 ("Agricultural-based commercial operations") of those 20 permitted uses.  Although none of the 20 permitted uses is described as primary or principal, only one permitted use is defined to include "accessory uses:"  Use no. 7, for "Bona fide agricultural services and uses that support the agricultural activities...and ACCESSORY to any of the ABOVE activities...".  And BTW, there are only 6 permitted uses "above" to which the allowed "accessory" uses could apply.  Therefore, the cigar/coffee retail (or restaurant) operation is not an accessory use which the counties are allowed to "further define by zoning ordinance."