Senate Standing Committee on Agriculture and Environment

Aloha. Good afternoon. Welcome to the Joint Committee on Education and Committee on Agriculture and Environment. And we are here to hear one bill, Senate Bill 659 relating to the Department of Education.

This bill exempts from the electronic procurement system the Department of Education's purchase of fresh local agricultural products and local value added processed agricultural or food products not exceeding $100,000 subject to certain requirements requires the Department of Education to establish guidelines for determining a geographic preference for locally sourced products. Thank you. Our list of testifiers.

First is Superintendent Hayashi.

Good afternoon. Chair Kidani, Chair Gabbard, Vice Chair Kim and Bonaventura. My name is Dean Uchida, Deputy Superintendent with Department of Education. The department stands on its written testimony supporting this measure. Also I'd like to clarify like this is a similar bill that was heard last week, Friday, Senate Bill 1548.

And I fail to tell the committee that this tool will be used for us to purchase things that are not currently on the vendor list like poi and limu and things. So it's kind of a short term fix that gives us more flexibility to buy local stuff that's currently not on the distributors list. Thank you.

Thank you. Sharon Hurd, Chairperson, Hawaii Department of Agriculture.

Aloha chair, members of the committee. Cedric Gates here on behalf of the Department of Agriculture. We stand on our written testimony offering comments and supporting the intent.

Supporting the intent. Thank you, Cedric. Brian Miyamoto Executive Director, Hawaii Farm Bureau.

Aloha chairs, members of the committee. Brian Miyamoto here on behalf of Hawaii Farm Bureau. Holds down on written testimony in support.

Thank you, Brian. Bonnie Kahakui, Administrator State Procurement Office.

Good afternoon chairs, vice chairs, members of the committee. Monica Hakois, Administrative State Procurement Office will stand on our written testimony providing comments and recommendations. But we do apologize we have made incorrect references to the section and page numbers. But we will send you a corrected version after this meeting. Thank you. Available for questions.

Thank you, Bonnie. We also have testimony from Ted Bolan, Nancy Redfeather, Nancy Moser and Hunter Hevelin all in support. Are any of them here to testify? Thank you. Any additional testifiers present who wish to testify on this matter? Thank you. Members, are there questions of any of the testifiers? DOE, please.

Thank you. Why are they not on the list? Why are these vendors on the list or why aren't these. You said that these allows DOE to procure because these things that you want to procure is not on the vendor list. Why aren't they on the vendor list?

I don't think we ever procured before. It's like the Hawaii based products like poi, limu, so we.

But don't you first determine what the vendors list is?

It wasn't put on the list in the past and we're looking at that now.

But can't you put it on the list without a bill?

We will, but we're going to go through the RFP. We cannot amend the RFP . The contract is already out. But the next time we issue it, we will have things that are locally grown.

So why do you need the bill?

Because we haven't issued the RFP yet. So in the interim, we can use this bill to purchase a couple $100,000 of poi or limu or something.

When is the next RFP?

I think it's either it either went out or it's going to go out soon. We're trying to see if we can amend it to include the poi and the locally grown products in it.

And if you don't win, when is the next time you can do that could.

Be next year, the next cycle.

Okay. And if this bill, if this bill passes, then it won't pass until June or July. And then by the time you get up and running, I mean, it's like, it seems like it's a temporary thing.

It is a temporary thing.

Yeah. So why don't want to put in statute? What is the amount exceeding now that you can, you can get without?

The limit is 25,000.

25,000. You want to go all the way up to 100,000.

Thank you, Senator. If I may, I was just going to speak to that, that currently on the small purchase contract, we're only able to purchase up to $24,999. So for locally sourced product like poi and limu, that's all we can purchase. This bill would then allow us to go up to $100,000.

Right, but we talked about this last time about you folks are going to be purchasing individual things other than going to your vendor. I mean, isn't it more efficient that you're going to the vendor instead of, I don't know who in your department is going to be responsible for buying from all these different local small vendors.

We are looking at a comprehensive package on how we can look to purchase more locally sourced product. This bill would support the department in helping us to purchase the type of foods that may not be on the list.

Like Deputy Uchida said, things like poi and limu and other locally sourced so that we can start to change our menu while we're offering for students to support locally sourced.

Right, but it should go through the vendor because you're going to need employees to have to now go and get from these individual vendors. You know, if you have 30 other kinds of local foods, are you going to be procuring to 30, don't you?

That's why you have the large vendors to put it on their list so that you folks, I mean you folks have enough things to do and some of the things that you have to do, you don't do it as well as you should be doing. I'm sorry to say but.

And so therefore, you know, we're going to try and make you more efficient instead of giving you all these little tiny tools that's going to add more to the work and to the cost to the taxpayers.

The last time we did the poi at 24 we selected a vendor who could distribute to the schools. So there wasn't any middleman. We just bought it and then it provided to the schools.

As you said, Senator Donna Kim, that as a tool this would allow the department to be more flexible and able to support more locally product provide more local products to our students. So it's really important for us we.

You have a vendor now that if you put it on the vendor list, that they can get these products. Correct?

That's the long term solution.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Members, further questions. So Superintendent, can you explain what the exactly what the change in procurement would be and do you have a list of these fresh local products?

Thank you. Chair. Yes, the change in procurement currently for small purchase is the limit for us to purchase. For example, poi is up to $24,999 per purchase. This would allow us to raise that limit to up to $100,000. So it would allow us to quadruple the amount of product that we're local product that we're able to purchase.

Okay, but is this only for poi or?

No for other local value added foods.

Okay, so this $24,999 per purchase is going to be up to 100,000 years.

Yes or for. Yes, locally processed food and products.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Other questions, members? Senator DeCoite.

Thank you. So when you guys do the purchase, so say you're gonna purchase poi which schools you guys gonna designate that to?

I believe the. And ask Deputy Uchida to help me on this one. I believe we did, we did a this past year we did a sampling of poi in one of our complex areas. We weren't able to purchase state wide. So in one complex area up to $24,999.

What we want to do is actually to expand that to offer these type of locally grown product to other students. How the individual complexes are selected. I can turn that over to Deputy Uchida. We can get more information back to you on that.

So what if I said this because one of the schools had asked you guys that they wanted to do their own meals and they had poi and they had uwala, but you guys did refuse them.

They're. Senator, I'm not familiar with that particular situation.

Charter. They wouldn't come under that.

Charter school would be under, if I'm mistaken, under the Charter School Commission, not under the department head. Charter schools are separate.

But you guys had told the, the email went to you guys and you guys denied it for them to do the setup of their own meals.

Oh, we can, we can get back to you on that senator, definitely. Okay, we take a look into that because. Yeah, I, I believe that charter schools are able to procure under their own sources under the Charter School Commission.

Check your email because I made sure the email came back like that because I was wondering why you guys wouldn't allow them since they would be able to source locally for the smaller schools.

We're checking it back, definitely. Thank you. Thanks for that.

Thank you. Chair.

Superintendent. So the 24,999 is per vendor, per complex area? Per what? How does that work?

If I'm not mistaken, Senator, I can get back to you the specifics on that. I believe it was for that one time for that one complex area up to the 24,999.

So if you do three different complex areas, it would be 24.99 per complex.

What we don't want to do, we want to avoid any kind of parcelling. So we want to be sure that we follow procurement code so that this $100,000 threshold then would help us to provide additional.

Is it per vendor or per combined, combined together?

I, I believe it's per vendor, but I will, I will double check.

Per vendor, so is there a poi vendor in Hawaii that can provide $100,000 worth of poi?

There are, I believe, and I get back to you senator. I believe there are a number of vendors that are able to provide. I can get you the names of the companies.

That can provide 100,000 on their own?

I can get you the names of the companies, the providers that are able to help provide that amount of poi. I think one of the things too that we're looking at is as we're able to move forward with locally sourced produce and are able to support our local farmers that will give them.

Hopefully we can help to provide the confidence that because the department is able to purchase from them on a regular basis, then that would help farmers know that they can go ahead and produce because there's a market that the department will be able to purchase.

Right, but isn't that what you use your vendor for?

So. Right. So this does give us a flexibility.

That's what you use your vendor for. So I'm saying the 24,999 is per vendor. So if you move it to $100,000, that means that you can buy $100,000 worth of poi from one vendor. And the question is, do you have a vendor that can even provide $100,000 worth of poi? Don't you want to give it to different.

Different companies.

Definitely leverage as as much as possible for a vendor. If they're able to provide, then I think that's great. If they're not, then, you know, hopefully we can provide confidence for them so that they'll be able to plant and to produce up to that amount to support them.

If you want to poi to Maui or poi to Molokai, not necessarily you're going to go to one vendor maybe on Oahu. Right. Because then won't you want to support the vendors on these neighbor islands? Right. And so again you don't need $100,000 then a limit for that?

Well, I'm not sure how much each of the respective island able to produce. So the if we have the threshold, it's up to $100,000. So right now it's currently at 24,999. Up to $100,000 then would give us flexibility to be able to support our local farmers up into that. Up to that amount.

Okay, I keep hating to hear when you say support our farmers because we do support them. That's why we have the vendors. But you want this flexibility, which concerns me because of various issues, but I'll leave it at that. Thank you.

I would think that though in specific cases like wildfires or etc that this would. Without this you would be limited on what you can get from a vendor that's maybe not in a situation where wildfires took away their crops. So I do understand the purpose of the bill.

Superintendent, I guess so. So this is just for state funds then? Because you, you have for school lunch you have the federal funds. So do you have to follow state procurement for the federal funds? As federal has all their own procurement standards.

Federal USDA has their own procurement standards.

So then, so this is solely where we're gonna, we're gonna draw down all local stuff on the state funds. Then. Is that the plan for this one?

It's a short term.

We're just trying to figure out what the plan is. Because if you open up the stateside, that's fine, but then there's this whole other pot of federal funds that you pay for school lunch for.

And if you're going to draw down all the state funds with this local food, that's fine, but we need to know if that's your intent.

Because I think to Senator Kim's point, why she's pointing always to the vendors, is because at some point you have to be able to make sure that it's federal compliant if you're going to draw on the federal side. Right.

So if you're going to sell directly to the DOE, you might be able to use your state funds and draw down the state funds, but they may not be federal compliant. So then you're not drawing down on the federal side.

Senator, if I may, I believe we did check into that. And as long as there are, there are. I believe, and I can get you what they are. I believe there are four categories that as a state agency we need to be taking a look at in terms of federal compliance and USDA.

As long as they meet those four areas and I can get you those four areas, then we are, they meet the federal requirements and then we then would be able to draw down federal funds so that we're not. So that state fund is not paying for anything.

So I guess the challenge with the federal side is then the farmers have to be federally compliant. Right. So to Senator Kim's point, that's why you have to have these third party vendors to get them compliant, because the farmers aren't going to be compliant themselves.

And that's why if you're going to use state funds, it's one thing, but if you're going to use federal funds, it's another thing. So that's why I think it's a conversation that we just need to understand. And I think that's why we had this conversation last weekend and that's why you piecemeal it.

And we don't understand all the moving parts. It's really hard for us to kind of put it together to really understand what is the end goal because as you know, we try to sell to the dua, but it's not worth it for our family to do that because we don't want to get federally compliant. Right.

And so, okay, you're going to draw down the state funds, that's one thing. But we don't know what all moving parts are in my mind.

Thank you. We'll definitely take all of that into consideration when we do this.

And your failure to plan does not constitute a bill because you didn't put it into your procurement because you failed to plan for these vendors or these types of locally produced foods or plants products. Right. So you fail to put it in your procurement or you fail to put it in the contract again.

Now you want to come in with a bill to cure something temporarily. Take that in mind, please, in the future.

So, superintendent, just to clarify that the current procurement allows you $24,999 per purchase, and this bill would raise it to $100,000 per purchase.

Okay. So. Is that specific to certain goods or, you know, that we need to raise in this.

It would be used for things that the vendor doesn't provide right now. It's unavailable to the vendors that we're dealing with.

Okay.

Like the poi or limu or something. So we're trying to add it to the next RFP so that it's included in the list that the distributor can. Can order off the list, basically.

So, I mean, I guess I'm looking at the jump from, you know, basically 25,000 to 100,000. And I think this is what the senators are trying to get at. Is that why such a big jump? Has the increase been 400% or is that what we're anticipating in the next couple years so you don't have to come back?

Can you explain that?

I think the original pilot, when we did the small purchase of 24.9 it was successful. The first purchase, when we bought the small purchase agreement at the 24.9 it was successful. The kids really liked the poi. So we're trying to expand the reach and get into more schools.

And this was kind of the language we talked to the State Procurement Office about.

Thank you, members. Further questions. Senator DeCoite.

Thank you, Chair. So, you know, there's not very many people today that do poi. How many of them is food safety certified?

We can get back to you on that, Senator.

Only because if you take it from the state and the federal level, they all got to follow food safety guidelines. Would it be that? Would it be limu? And I know on that base, will you guys help them to be food safety certified, being that you guys want to increase? Because that's the biggest challenge.

I believe we're working with different organizations, whether it be Department of Ag, North Shore, EVP. There are other, there are partners that we're working with that help to certify our farmers and help them become food safety certified.

Thank you. Thank you, Chair.

Just for clarification, then whatever products DOE purchases has to be food safety certified?

Correct.

Thank you. One more question.

We procure fresh local agricultural products and local value. Does that mean that you, you cannot purchase anything that is not local with this amount? Says May not show. This is May. That's another concern.

The intent, the intent of the bill, Senator, is to, for us to purchase local. So the question.

So we can change that because. Yeah, I don't want people going out and buying all this other stuff because now it goes up to 100,000 or 50,000.

But I, I disagree, Senator. Only because if something happens, a wildfire or whatever wipes out our crops or I think we're going to have to buy from somebody else.

Well, yeah, but that's why we have the vendors. We already have the vendors. These are only for those, those products. Supposingly that is not on the vendors list, Right? That the vendors can't, the vendors can't get for you the larger vendor that you go through. This is not.

So, Senator. Once the, once the contracts are cut with the vendor, then if I'm, I'm not mistaken, I believe it's a yearly contract. So if the contracts were already cut for the 25/26 school year, then without this bill we wouldn't be able to purchase up to.

Just for one year.

Yes, but for us.

And you're not even. Sure that it's finalized.

But for us the year is really important because we're really serious about trying to get as quickly possible up to a 30 percent and we're far from it. So we really want to move in that direction.

Well, I was hoping you've been moving in that direction for the last couple years and not me to the last minute. Right. Okay, thank you.

Other questions, Members? If not. Thank you.

Thank you.

Okay. Anyone else here wishing to testify on this measure? If not.

Okay, can we recess?

Calling the meeting. Back to order.

Members, we are in decision making on Senate Bill 659 relating to the Department of Education, which exempts from the electronic procurement system the Department of Education's purchase of fresh local agricultural products and local value added processed agricultural or food products not exceeding $100,000 subject to certain requirements, requires the Department of Education to establish guidelines for determining a geographic presence for locally sourced products.

Members, the Chair's recommendation is to pass this measure. Any comments, any questions?

Yeah, I'll be voting no, Chair. Because first of all, my I think that word may in there allows the department to not just purchase local value foods and products. And this is a temporary. We shouldn't be using a statute to take care of something temporarily that they didn't do in their previous contract.

And so now they're coming in for a band aid fix on this. And then we did take up a bill very similar to this and deferred it just this past week leave. So with that, I'm going to be voting no. Thank you.

Thank you. Members, further questions. Recommendation of the Chair is to pass Senate Bill 659.

[roll call]

Three, I. Two, no. The measure is adopted.

Sorry, I forgot to add something. So we have to retake the vote. We are passing with amendments, but we're defecting the date to July 1st, 2050.

Adding those amendments, is anyone wishing to change their vote? Hearing none. Three I's in favor. To no's. The measure is adopted.

Same. Recommendation for AEN. Chair votes I. Any discussion? Chair votes I.

Senate Bill 659 passing with amendments.

[roll call]

Motion is adopted.

Thank you. This meeting is adjourned.

Good afternoon. Calling to order the 3:02 p.m. meeting of the Committee on Education. Welcome to the Senate Committee on education. Today's Monday, February 10, 2025. This is our 3:02 p.m. agenda and we are in hearing room 229. This meeting, including the audio and video of remote participants, is being streamed live on YouTube.

You will find links to viewing options for all Senate meetings on the live and on demand video page of the Legislature's website. This Zoom meeting and YouTube livestream event will be will include the 3:02 p.m. agenda for this Committee on Education.

In the unlikely event that we must abruptly end this hearing due to major technical difficulties, the Committee will reconvene to discuss any outstanding business or on Wednesday, February 12, 2025 at 3:00 p.m. in this room 229 and a public notice will be posted on the Legislature's website.

I'd like to take this time to remind our testifiers that due to time restrictions on our hearings, we will be limiting testimony to 1 minute per testifier per bill for people participating. Please remain muted and video disabled until shortly before it is your turn to testify. When I call your name, unmute yourself and your time will begin.

After your minute is completed, staff will mute you so that we can move this hearing along in an orderly and efficient manner. First on the agenda is Senate Bill 894. SD1 relating to education.

Appropriate funds to the Department of Education to f to fulfill the local farm to school farm to school meal goal requiring 30% of the food served in public schools to consist of locally sourced products. Do we have any testify?

Okay to testify. Superintendent Kit Kayashi, please.

Good afternoon, Chair Kidani, Vice Chair Kim. Dean Uchida, Department of Education. The Department stands on its written testimony and support this measure. Thank you for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you. Brian Mito Miyamoto Executive Director, Hawaii Farm Bureau.

Thank you. We also have Janine Mariano, Hawaii Food Policy in support not present. Nancy Redfeather testifying in support for Ohana Na Onapua. Nancy D. Moser, also an individual in support. Are there any additional testifiers wishing to speaker Members? Any questions?

So the funding that the bill asks for is for what purpose?

The department's not asking for the funding.

The Bill has a blank for funding. There is appropriate General funds blank amount.

Of money to modernize the kitchens in the different cafeterias.

So that's what the money is for, correct? Not to purchase or not to.

No, it's more for Equipment because there hasn't been a lot of scratch cooking in the kitchens.

Which do we know which schools?

No, we're trying to figure out that right now.

So how do you know, how do you estimate the amount of money that's going to be required?

We're going to have to provide that at a later date because we're still in the process of trying to determine which cafeterias need what kind of upgrade.

So where are you in that evaluation process?

There was a study done a few years ago, so we're trying to update that right now, find out where we are in the cafeteria.

The the mandate to reach 30% locally sourced products by 2030 was passed back in 2021. Since 2021 till now, only now you're trying to figure out the equipment and what is needed.

If I may, Senator, I, I believe that this Bill also is to is to look at the the regional kitchen that we are developing in central District and to look at funding for that same type of kitchen in various complex areas across our state, which includes Hawaii District, Maui District and Kauai district, in addition to in Honolulu and the four districts in Honolulu.

This bill doesn't say anything about central kitchens. Don't we have a separate bill for central kitchens?

I believe it's all just one second. It is related to the regional kitchens.

Don't we have a separate bill for regional kitchens?

Ken Kakisaku, Department of Education so this is the way we're reading the bill. It's very akin to that bill about regional kitchens.

But the way we're reading and the way the both the preamble and the way the funding is parceled out to these different areas, our understanding of the bill is that it is for funding for regional kitchens.

Well, it doesn't say anything in here about that.

So just a preamble related to giving buying the required equipment that would allow for, as Deputy Uchida said earlier, about doing some of that scratch cooking, that's what would be happening at those regional kitchens.

Right. But the regional kitchens is a huge investment, a huge amount of money, which I understand has a different budgetary and a different bill. This bill seems to be to improve the different school cafeterias so that they can have equipment in there to warm up the foods and so forth.

So not necessarily these are going to be regional kitchens in these four areas. That is noted in the bill. So you guys need to get your message clear and straight, because you can't talk about regional kitchens here when we have regional kitchens there. So we're putting funding here and funding there and then the money comes together.

We don't know what happens to that money. There's no accountability.

We appreciate that.

Yeah, but you guys keep coming up with these bills that are just, I'm sorry, it's very difficult because if I add up all the amount of money that DOE is asking for all these different programs and proposals is huge and then there's no accountability for that.

So it should be made clear exactly what you folks will be spending the money on should the monies be appropriated because it just say necessary for these years and it talks about meeting your 2030 farm to school meals. It doesn't really mention some equipment, but it doesn't mention anything about central kitchens.

So can we get a list of what the schools and what complexes and what needs to be upgraded so we can know what the cost is? I mean shouldn't that come first before you come in and ask for something this General.

And again we are actually trying to read into the preamble of the bill understanding what's happening with the bill itself. So we were more than happy to continue this conversation with other fellow legislators, your fellow legislators, to figure out what exactly is being asked for that.

But we are just trying to read into both the preamble and the way the funding is being appropriate in the bill. But we're happy to continue having those discussions.

So this is not your bill, correct? Right. But you're supporting it.

Correct.

Because anytime this Legislature willing to give you money, you guys will take it. Right?

Correct. Well. And it is driving us towards our goal of trying to increase our, our 30 by 30%.

So we're open to whatever avenues past it. Right. And so it's like didn't you have a general plan on the whole thing instead of coming in piece by piece by piece more.

I think we keep developing that as we move through. Yes, we would love to have had everything in place and I, I think all our ducks aligned, but we are trying to figure that out now and move more towards that. We do apologize for not having that completely stretched out as of then.

But moving forward now, I think we have a good team in place that are trying to get towards that.

Members for the questions, thank you.

Moving on.

Senate Bill 187. Relating to a library in Ewa Beach, requires the Department of Education to transfer the Ewa Beach public and school library from the state public library system to James Campbell High School. Testify, Superintendent.

Good Afternoon, Chair Kidani, Vice Chair Kim. Dean Uchida Deputy Superintendent with DOE. The department stands on a written testimony offering comments on this measure. The department wishes to support the desire of the school community to transfer the Ewa Beach Library to James Campbell High School, but acknowledges the challenges that this could entail such as staffing and library outside of school hours. Staffing the library outside of school hours. Thank you for the opportunity to testify.

Members, questions? Thank you. Anne Horiuchi, Department of Attorney General.

Good afternoon. Chair Kidani, Vice Chair Kim, members. Anne Horiuchi, Department of the Attorney General. A couple of items that we noted in our testimony. One, it's our understanding, well, from reading the preamble, it lists the hours of the library, but it's our understanding that those hours have recently been changed so that information should be updated in the preamble of the bill. Also, the bill states that the DOE shall transfer the library from the state library system to the school school.

But it's unclear from our reading what this transfer entails. One, if the intent of the bill is to transfer operation and management of the library to the school so that the school has authority to change the library's hours or to otherwise operate and manage the library, then this should be stated explicitly in the bill.

If the intent though is to transfer ownership of the library property, then that authority is actually with the Board of Education and not the state library system or the Department of Education. Finally, the Section 3 of the bill talks speaks to the transfer relating to the employees.

And we noted that the state library system and the Department of Education are separate entities for purposes of employment. So to ensure clarity, that section should be revised to transfer employees from one agency to another rather than transferring employees within an agency. Thank you. I'll be available for questions.

Questions.

I know you probably didn't see the principal's support. So the reason why I say that is because the operations and the maintaining of the school will follow under the school. Campbell High School to the property is actually DOE property. It doesn't belong to the state library. Look at the actual map of the school is on school campus.

That's the reason why it says public school library, not just public. So it's on the school campus. And with the jurisdiction of transferring of workers, we have a very shortage of librarians right now. And there's other areas that is closed because of lack of librarians. So the suggestion was that the school would.

I know you got the Current library hours 12:00 to 7:00, 12:00 to 7:00, 12:00 to 7:00 pm Monday, 12:00 to 7:00 pm on Tuesday, 9:00 to 4:00 Wednesday, 9:00 to 4:00 on Thursday, 11:00 to 4:00 on Friday, Saturdays and Sundays close. So the community was asking for a while, why on weekends when it's supposed to be more utilized for students that cannot utilize the library during the weekdays because of the scheduling that they have here, School is on session at 7:45. They cannot be in a library until 12:00 pm okay.

And then the restrictions that they have to bring their own librarian to utilize the library. When I was going to school not too long ago, we used to go in there lunchtime, before school, after school, hang out there. I never used to study. I used to just go watch my friends study.

But the bottom line is it was accessible and it was accessible by the school. On the school site, it's locked. So transferring those things. I understand what you're saying, but there is a lot more to that and I understand you guys concern, but it would be more utilized in a sense. It's not taking away community access.

And that's what the principal highlighted. And the students that came see me, that wanted me to reintroduce this bill. So it's not taking away anything from the public. It's just transferring ownership, maintenance. Because the library hasn't been painted for 94 years. There's no grass, no grass is being cut. The maintenance of the parking lot is really bad.

So there's a lot of things that the school was willing to take over. Not telling the public that they couldn't use it and probably the public would have more access if the school maintains it and have the operations to run it because they would open it up from 7:00 am in the morning so when the bell rings, the kids can go to class. So those are the things that a little bit what people are understanding on the bill. Thank you.

Thank you, Senator.

Thank you. Thank you for the questions. Thank you. Stacey Aldrich, State Librarian.

Aloha Chair and Vice Chair, members of the committee. Our testimony highlights multiple errors within the bill. And I urge the Committee to really listen to the voices of the community that feel very strongly about this library. I would also like to address some of the things that Senator Fevella has brought up.

The library is open to students at 7:30 am and it is available to the students of the high school when there is a school person present. The library is again, the hours have been changed and we're very excited about that. And we did get input from the community on those hours.

We do know that people would like to see weekend hours and we'll be analyzing the system hours across the state to review how we can better serve and have better hours across the state. But this is a library that is utilized by the community and it does matter. Mahalo. I'm happy to answer any questions you might have.

Thank you. Members, questions.

Did you get to see Principal Lee's support letter?

No, I did not.

So just to let you know, students, teachers, and the principal that attends Campbell High School, I understand you guys seeing it's utilized by the community a lot. But it's not. Monday through Friday when they do open, the library parking lot is empty. And I brought this up before.

So the amount of public that use it, not saying that they're not gonna get to use it, doesn't weigh out on the fact that the students need to have access. Not because the school gonna hire a librarian, but why does the school have to hire a librarian? When did that change?

It hasn't changed.

It did. When I was going to school in 1986, school did not have a librarian. It was a librarian that was at the there that was run by the state and we could utilize. Campbell High School never had own librarian. That's why when I asked Principal Lee, I wanted to know when.

Because when I was going school, we didn't have that. We didn't have to have a librarian. All we needed was a note from the teacher. Go to the desk over there, punch them in the time we went there, and then when we leave, we punch the time when we go out. We never had that.

And then you guys had a security where that security gate stay that don't work anymore used to be there. Just. Just to let you know the library hasn't changed since 1986. Everything is there. Most of the things are not working. We cannot utilize the area that used to have the planting and the greenery and everything.

You guys have storage with chairs and desks in the back. So the library is not being utilized in a capacity that is not only accessible to the community and in a safe way. It ain't. Everything is old in there. You know what I'm saying?

So we had all of this time to upgrade a lot of stuff in the library and we didn't. And you know, the thing is, I understand you guys concern about the jurisdiction, but that's all it is. And then you guys have a shortage of librarians.

On our neighbor islands, yes.

Yeah, I thought you told me when the last time I talked to you, you told me we had shortages of librarians the last time island-wide.

Across the state, but mostly neighbor islands.

Okay. No, that's not what you ask. I'll ask you if we have a shortage of librarians. You said only on the other islands. And mostly mostly on the neighbor islands. But you guys have on statewide, right?

Yes, but our hours and then some of.

You guys ours operation is according to that accessibility from librarians. And that's why a lot of libraries close across the state. Because you guys don't have enough staff.

Well, they're not closed across the state but they'll have fewer hours depending on staff available.

Okay, so when these areas are open and closed the question I have 12:00 to 7:00. From 7:00 in the morning to 12:00 who's in the library?

The library assistant who serves the students.

Okay, so the library assistants in there from the reason why I concerned is because we just not too long ago a librarian just the librarians that I've seen you another area across the state had a pay raise that nobody in the states did anything about. You guys getting one pay raise.

But with the pay raise that was introduced then we had. Then after we introduced the pay raise or you guys got the pay raise, we had cuts in the libraries because of a lack of staffing. So shouldn't we had concentrate on not giving everybody one raise and try to figure out we get more staffing so we can actually have the thing open on Saturdays. Maybe not Sundays, but Saturdays.

I believe those are determined by the union negotiations. I don't determine how much salary our staff gets.

I'm saying we understand that you guys would get have the raise coming in or whatever. Not saying they don't deserve. But nobody came to the body to tell us that reason why these libraries are not open on Saturdays and certain communities don't have it that many hours is because of staffing.

If we could help you with staffing to staff these libraries so that they can be open at the time when the students should be using it. Not. I mean I'm not saying 7:00 in good pm is it's all good. But the staffing hours you're talking about some of them is 8 hours, some of them is less. 11:00 to 4:00 is less close on Saturdays.

The hours that you have there are not correct. They're eight hours a day. So it's Monday and Tuesday it's 12:00 to 7:00 and then it's, I wrote it down.

So Friday you guys open up earlier than 11:00 to 4:00.

Friday is 11:00 to 4:00 so staff can can catch up. And we also do training for our staff.

Okay. Thursday 9:00 to 4:00.

I believe so. I have it here.

So when the 7:00 to 8:30 or 8:00, those days that you open later. 12:00, 12:00, 9:00, 9:00, 11:00 am, you don't think you can put in your guys training for your library or the people at the library on those days because you take you one whole day right from 11:00 to 4:00, all these hours from 7:00 to 10:00, 11:00, there's nothing happening there. So you guys couldn't coordinate better to have training for your staff on those days that you're not open early?

Well, the staff only work, can only work eight hours a day. So they can only come in at 11:00 to work till 7:00. The 11:00 to 4:00, they're, that's where we do training on Fridays. 11:00.

That's what I'm saying. So the day is there you come in. What I'm saying is that you guys are training every Friday.

Yes, sometimes. And then other times we're using it to, for staff to catch up because they are working on materials, they're making orders, they're moving materials.

Just like Nahali used to do them before. Okay, thank you. Appreciate it.

So can you clarify again, what are the hours?

Monday is 12:00 to 7:00. It's actually seven hours. So Monday and Tuesday are 12:00 to 7:00, Wednesdays are 9:00 to 4:00, Tuesdays or Thursdays are 9:00 to 4:00 and Fridays are 11:00 to 4:00. It's 33 hours a week.

And what about on weekends?

They currently don't have weekend hours. No weekend hours. But we know the community would like to have weekend hours. So again we're doing an analysis statewide of all of our hours to see what we can do to better the hours across the state.

So the school shares the library because they don't have their own library. They share this library.

We share the space. So the library is the public. So in the 60s and 70s, they built 12 public and school libraries. When the Department Ed and the libraries had a divorce, we took those libraries with us. So we've been responsible entirely for those spaces.

And we've continued to provide library services not only to the community, but to students. Out of the 12 libraries, in the beginning, there was a school librarian in every library along with any other assistance so that they could provide services directly to the staff. Today we have one librarian in one of the schools.

There is a position at Campbell. She retired one or two years ago and they're not filling that position. So if they had a librarian, they could do more for the students because our focus is on the patrons but also supporting all patrons but also supporting the students.

So the remedy is for the school to hire its librarian. Then they can alter the hours accordingly that you. You don't already do.

Absolutely.

Do you? Well, you probably don't know. I guess DOE needs to ask answer this question then. Thank you. So is there funding for this position?

I'd have to get back to you on that. I don't know right now.

So. Or was the money taken out of this and used for something else and then the position is there but no funding. I need to get back vacancy savings.

I can get back to you. I'll go check on what the status of the position in the funding.

So Senator Kim, a school would bring out their funding to fund the position that she's talking about. But they don't get to go there far as I know. They don't get the key and they only can go when the library is open.

No, I don't think so. I think she said so.

So they can get the key. So they have the key right now if they want to go in the library, they can open the library.

They have an employee who has a key that can help them get into.

The library right now?

Yes. During the school hours. It's open to the school.

It contradicts what Principal Lee is talking about about the current underutilizing, not being able to have access to the students. Teachers who utilize it. We have an impact, a significant impact on students and teachers being unutilized, cannot use it. So.

So whose requirement is it to have the librarian, the school or the library?

I was looking to see where that actually started. But I think the idea when they built it was that you would always have a school librarian who could work with the students and the public library to work with the public as a whole. So it does help because students have particular needs and you're talking about critical thinking skills and reading that our public libraries are focused on everybody. So not just students.

So it's to Campbell's benefit to fund this position because they don't have the cost of a library within their school like other schools have that cost for full on library. Right? Able to partner with the state library and then have somebody that's specifically there for the students benefit.

Yes. And we didn't have problems before when we had a librarian because our librarians work together and we continue to make the meeting rooms accessible for weeks of testing that have to happen.

So just a two years since that librarian retired and they haven't filled that position. Can you get back to us immediately?

I'll check on that.

So, Stacey, on all the other school libraries, do you guys have any issues?

Yes, we do. There are challenges because sometimes the campuses close down because of they can have a lockdown. So then the library won't be available to the public during that time. There are issues with when projects are happening during when school's out. Sometimes we don't know when electrical is going to be cut. So we lose power and our Internet for the public. So we try to work.

Why can't that be relayed to you by the school?

It's just misfiring of communication. So we've been working on. Actually, we have an MOA, a draft MOA that has been written with Eva Beechen Campbell. And we're waiting for the principal to have to give us more information. He's been asking for a key directly for himself and we give the keys to the people who work in the library.

I frankly don't know why this has to come to our attention, why the DOE can't work with the library. Can you guys figure it out yourselves? Thank you very much. It's done. Thank you. Senate Bill 757, relating to libraries. Requires reasonable terms in license agreements for digital literary materials between libraries and publishers.

Defines prohibited items for license agreements between libraries and publishers. Declares offer of a license agreement with the prohibited terms an unfair or deceptive act. Makes a license agreement with a prohibited term void and unconscionable. Creates right of action by libraries, library officers, and borrowers. Department of the Attorney General.

Good afternoon, Chair Kidani, Vice Chair Kim, Members. Anne Horiuchi, Department of the Attorney General. In our testimony, we've offered some clarifying amendments. One is to ensure consistency with a federal law that provides libraries with certain rights to reproduce copyrighted works. We've provided a suggested revision in our testimony.

Also to clarify that the bill doesn't restrict the publisher's right to choose whether or not to distribute, we've provided a suggested amendment as well. And also to, we've suggested a non-Impairment savings clause to make sure that certain requirements in the bill would not be interpreted as impairing existing agreements. Thank you. I'll be available for questions.

Members, questions? Thank you, Anne. Stacey Aldrich.

Thank you, Chair. We stand on our written testimony. I would just like to reiterate that this issue is of particular importance to the State of Hawaii because digital books help us to create more access to materials across all of our islands where we cannot buy physical items for every branch and every library. I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.

Thank you. Members, questions? Yes. Stacey, I do have questions. Why was this measure needed?

So with ebooks, so we have digital books and we have physical books. The publishers have created a whole new model for digital books. And so when we buy physical books, it's a one time fee. We own the book, we can use it, circulate as many times as we want to.

With digital books, they have decided it's a separate kind of item and they have different models that they use. So we have to pay over and over again for the same title. So instead of being able to buy multiple copies of a digital book and circulate them one at a time, we buy them. But we have to pay $50, a minimum of usually $50 to buy access to one book, and we're only leasing that book. We don't have rights after. It depends on the model and the publisher. In some cases it's 26 circulations, and then we have to buy it again.

If it's another model is you have it for one year. So it assumes that libraries have these unending pits of money that we can keep buying these different digital books over and over again to make sure that they're accessible, and it's not a model that is viable for any library. And we're facing this issue across the United States.

So, Stacey, if you guys are facing this across the United States, what are other states' libraries doing?

Several states have tried to pass similar bills to create an opportunity to have books be more affordable for libraries to purchase and make them available. Most of them have not passed in the neighboring states. So Maryland has tried to pass, Washington State, New York. Right now, Rhode Island and Connecticut are trying to pass rules to allow to try to get the publishers to allow libraries to be able to afford digital materials.

Thank you. So is this what this bill tries to do for our library system?

Yes.

Thank you.

Stacey, how do you get the authors to agree? I mean, this is a bill that we're seeing, but how do, you know, why would they agree to this?

So there are different... There are some authors who agree that the book should be affordable. They're usually the authors who get a nice amount of funding. They're usually the more popular authors who do get money. There is a challenge for authors who are not as well known. They do not have as good of agreements with their publishers on how much they get per ebook that gets circulated, so it's more of a challenge for them. But to me that's an issue between the publisher and the author.

But how does this affect them? Because we can't legislate to them. Right. I mean, this is, we can legislate within the government and the State of Hawaii. So how would all these authors abide by this?

So most authors have a publisher and the publishers are the ones who create the agreements with libraries in order to have access to the materials. So it would have to be a three way conversation about what's the best way to make sure that there's access, but to also honor the authors. Because we're not trying to take money out of the author's pockets. We support authors every day. We're advertising them every day in all of our libraries.

Okay, so you have to excuse me, I'm not that up on how you negotiate with publishers. But this is the purpose of this act to ensure that Hawaii's public libraries can acquire and lend digital literary materials on reasonable terms and preserve the ability to serve as vital public research. I agree with that. I listen to ebooks. But I'm wondering how does this law change the publishers, how they deliver or get the authors to give it to us at a lower price? This doesn't mandate then to do it.

It's not a mandate, but it is to encourage them to create pricing that is affordable for libraries.

And how does that, how does this encourage them?

Because it requires that they don't put certain stipulations within the way they lease their books or sell their books to us.

And if they don't agree, if they don't abide by the restrictions, then what?

Then they can choose not to provide access, which is a challenge. That would be a challenge for us.

So that currently is the process, right? I mean, either we negotiate with them and they agree, or they don't, they don't lend us their books or whatever. So I'm not sure how this bill changes that. That's what I'm trying to find out.

I think the bill is trying to make them play nice. Doesn't mean they have to.

It doesn't mean they have to.

Right. So that's why I'm saying, if they decide not to, how does this bill change that? Because they have the same ability now to walk from letting us any of their books. Right. I mean, and you get to say, no, this is too expensive. I'm not going to, I'm not going to allow my readers. So people like me who want to get all the New York Bestsellers are not going to have that. But, you know, that's...

I think it also hopefully begins the conversation that other states have tried to pass. I've worked with publishers at the national level. I've talked with OverDrive. OverDrive is a company that consolidates and they try to get better pricing for libraries, but we're still in this model of either pay. I think what they're doing is they're also heading towards pay per sip, which we've seen. There's another product called Hoopla, and you can download any book that's available, but we pay every time somebody downloads something.

And so my concern is, if we don't start making the publishers aware that this is a problem and we really need to do something, they're not going to work with us. Ideally, we probably need to work at the national level. The Copyright Act of 1971, I believe it is, or 73, hasn't been cracked open in a long time, and that copyright determines ownership and how things work. So it gives libraries fair use. So when we buy a book, it's ours. We can sell it, lend it.

I'm all for encouraging that, certainly. But again, I know we're passing something that really has no effect of law. And are you working with the congressional delegation on the federal level? Will it have more impact than us?

I have been talking with Senator Hirono, and I'm working at the national level with other libraries. There are libraries that are state libraries. I just saw New Jersey, the state librarian sent to me their law that they're trying to pass. They're actually trying to gather a committee to do a study on all the issues around ebooks and bring together all the players to have a conversation so we can find a, find a resolution. And I think that's a very, that's a good way to go, actually.

So when you buy a paperback, are there restrictions on how you can utilize the paperback?

No. Fair use lets us. We own it, so we can give it to the friends to sell. You can give it away. It's sort of...

Can you have somebody read it? And create our own ebooks from the paperback?

No, that would be copyright infringement. Yeah.

But you can, you can give the books once you buy it, but you can't do anything where...

Yeah, and so digital books, we can't lend out more than the times they let us lend them out. I think the argument too is their assumption is, if they don't charge a lot for an ebook, then authors will lose out. But the reality is we buy multiple copies of everything already in paper. We would buy multiple copies of digital books. And we do now. We try to, but they're at $50 a hit. It's a lot.

When I go on, it says three copies, 50 people waiting. You have a three month wait on it.

Exactly. And then it's not, the investment is the leasing of that book. Because after a certain amount of time, we don't own that book anymore. So we've lost an investment. But we created access.

Okay, further questions, Members? Thank you.

Thank you.

Is there anyone else here wishing to testify in this measure? Please come forward.

Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. My name is John Clark III and I am a published author of five books, some of which include ebooks. I stand in support of this Bill. Libraries are a public good. The use of their books are good. And I believe it is the state's responsibility to protect that public good.

To your point, Senator Kim, things may not go the way we want them to go, but I believe in a matter of, shall we say, negotiation, it's best to set that standard and let the publishers rise to that level. So I am disappointed I could not provide a testimony on 187 earlier.

I spent quite a bit of time typing up comments. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else here wishing to testify in this mission?

Anybody else? No? All right, Members, further questions.

Okay, moving on.

Did you submit your. Your written testimony for the previous. You can. You can turn it in if you have it.

Senate Bill 799, Freedom to Read. This bill requires the Department of Education to select materials for inclusion, circulation, and exclusion in school library collections according to certain criteria. Requires the Department of Education to uphold the freedom to read. Prohibits the Department of Education from excluding books based on certain criteria.

Requires the State Librarian to select materials for inclusion, circulation, and exclusion in school library collections according to certain criteria. Requires the State Librarian to uphold the freedom to read. Prohibits of State Librarian from excluding books based on certain criteria. Okay, to testify, Department of Education.

Department of Education. I'm sorry.

Thank you. Sorry. Aloha, Chair Kidani, Vice Chair Kim, and Members of the Committee. Teri Ushijima, Assistant Superintendent of the Office of Curriculum Instructional Design. I'm testifying on behalf of the Department of Education. The Department stands on its written testimony, which provides comments on this measure. The Department has some requested amendments to ensure that all staff, including non certified-librarians, have access to clear, standardized guidelines specific to school library collections. Thank you for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you. Stacey Aldrich.

Aloha. Long time no see. HSPLS stands on its written testimony in support of SB 799 with amendments. Our mission is to inspire curiosity and create opportunities for everyone to read, learn, and connect. The Hawaii State Library is dedicated to building collections that consist of accurate information and tell the stories and create voice for everyone.

And public libraries have the responsibility to support the freedom to read and to ensure access to materials that individuals and families want and need to support their information, educational, and creative needs. We are aware that values and acceptance of materials vary, and we continue to support individuals and families rights to choose by checking out only materials that are most appropriate for them. Thank you. I'm happy to answer any questions you may have.

Kim Cordery.

Aloha. My name is Kim Cordery. I'm testifying on behalf of Aloha Freedom Coalition, 20,000 followers. This bill is unbelievable. I think it is, the term that's used for the bill itself is very interesting. The freedom to read these graphic books that are going to be allowed to be introduced to the library I think is an absolute travesty on our children. I'm not sure if you have children. I have children and I have grandchildren.

And if you've seen the graphic pictures of these books, every person that I've shown them to has been just appalled. If people want to go that direction in their viewing, there's other places to find those types of, those types of books. This is absolutely an assault on our schools. This is not education. And with that, I yield.

Members, questions? Members, questions? Next, Savanah Mendiola.

Good afternoon, Chair. Good afternoon, Chair Kim. Good afternoon, Chairs. So for me, with this bill being passed, again, like what she has shared, if you had seen the graftivities of this literature that is about to or has been fluctuating throughout the communities, public school, or public libraries, you would be appalled yourselves. For me, I oppose it.

It's just where I'm at right now. But that being said, if that's the, if that is the rightful way of giving it to, sending it out to our children, you might as well give them the pornography books. You know I'm saying. I mean, everybody here in this room, I mean, can, can actually say, would you give that to a child and call it educational? From a background that I grew up in to where I'm at today, they only see the outer shell. This is from trauma. Trauma, abandonment, all of that.

But to give it and place it upon innocent lives, that, that's uncalled for. You set an example for the next generation for do whatever you please. To hell with everybody else. That's exactly what we're going to share with them if this bill is passed. So I oppose. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. Please. Next to testify, Tara Malia Gregory.

Aloha. Aloha Kakou. I'm Tara Malia Gregory. Mahalo for allowing me to speak on SB 799. I have an education and background in child development and neuroscience. And as a former middle school teacher, current coach and mentor, I strongly oppose this bill as it stands due to concerns about age inappropriate content.

Although it may have not been the intention of those proposing the bill, various overtly sexual material has found its way in our school curriculum and library shelves. I advocate for the freedom to read, but we have to protect our keiki. I propose three amendments. On page two, lines 10 and 11, or page five, line 18, if you could define age appropriate content with a tiered system according to developmental stages to prevent premature exposure to explicit materials.

Secondly, insert mandatory parental consent on page four, line six, to involve parents in their child's reading choices not limited to the Department of Education alone. And finally, establish a local review board on page five, lines 10 through 20, to include educators, psychologists, librarians, parents, and community members in material evaluation prior to any materials being submitted that's sexual in nature.

As you may be aware, peer reviewed studies, such as the one just done August 2024 by the American College of Pediatricians. They found that premature exposure to overtly sexual material has been directly linked to developmental, emotional, and psychological dysfunction, violent behavior, teen pregnancy, suicide, and child trafficking. Mahalo for considering these amendments to safeguard our children while preserving educational freedom. If these amendments aren't possible, I strongly oppose this bill.

Is there anyone else here wishing to testify? Proceed.

Okay. First, I'm a child of God and I'm here to, you know, represent some small voices. My name is Nelson Sua. I oppose this bill, SB 977. I come from a family that has done over 230 years of prison time. I witnessed my mom, at 10 years old, punched over the second floor rail, broke her neck and her back. The murdered law was dropped because of my brother. So I'm not sharing this just to edify or glorify anything, but it's to let you know I understand what the darkness looks like. And this bill is dark.

And my concern as a parent, as a grandfather, is that this will be a gateway to something even worse where someone might introduce a bill that allows adults to have sex with underage kids. And that needs to stop. You know, the teaching of sex should be left to the parents. And I feel like those things are trying to be taken away now. So I oppose SB 977 and I just wanted to say that in the name of Jesus, amen. 799. Sorry.

Testifiers, I'm going to ask you to stick to your one minute because we have a number of testifiers and we're ending in 14 minutes.

Hi. My name is Frances Apilando. When I looked at the pictures in this book, the picture content reminded me of when I was a five year old child. It brought back childhood memories of when my grandfather stuck his penis in my mouth. That led me to have bad grades in school, which led me to start doing heroin, intravenous drugs, which led me to hep C, which led me to prostitution, which led me to prison time. This book inhibits those pictures. To let a five year old child see those pictures would not be in the best interest of our future generation. What are we trying to do? Confuse them? Because that is exactly what it did to me. I oppose this bill.

Please wait till I call your name. Did we hear from Jamie Detwiler on Zoom, please?

Aloha, Chair Kidani, Vice Chair Kim, Members of the Committee. Jamie Detwiler, Hawaiian Islands Republican Women in strong opposition of SB 799. While our membership supports the freedom to read, we oppose the contents of SB 799 for the following reasons. It violates the 14th Amendment of the US Constitution, where parents, these are where parental rights are held.

So you're violating parental rights, as spoken earlier. Children's brains are not fully developed til the age, human brains are not developed til the age of 25. Also, I do have a suggested solution and recommended amendment on pages 3 and 4, section 2, chapter 302A. To add to that. Because right now it says the Department shall select these materials for kindergarten through 12th grade. I want to add access to library books and materials. Excuse me, other people went over a minute.

Thank you. Your time is up.

Wow. Please read my testimony. Thank you.

In the interest of time, how many are you here in the audience are in opposition to this? Please. Right. Oppose, opposition. Yes. Okay. In the interest of time, how many here are wanting to testify in support? Okay, thank you. Is there anyone online whose testimony is in support?

Madam Chair.

Okay. Is Michael Golojuch, Jr. Please go ahead, Michael.

Oh, thank you, Madam Chair. Michael Golojuch, Jr., Vice Chair of the Hawaii State LGBTQ Commission. We stand in strong support of this bill. We cannot let anybody and one group of people dictate what we are allowed to read. This is a very... I'm sorry we actually need a bill like this because banning books is not what America is about. We encourage you to amend the bill to include sexual gender identity and gender expression to the list of protected classes.

Especially seeing what we're seeing coming down from the federal government when it comes to trying to erase our Māhū, intersex, and non-binary ohana members. So on behalf of the Hawaii State LGBTQ Commission, we encourage you to pass the bill with those amendments. Mahalo for hearing this bill, and thank you for your leadership.

Thank you. If you guys want me to clear the room, I can do it. Otherwise, please refrain from speaking and let the testifiers testify. Carolyn Golojuch on Zoom. Not present. Nikos Leverenz on Zoom.

Aloha, Madam Chair, Vice Chair, Members. Nikos Leverenz on behalf of Hawaii Health and Harm Reduction Center in strong support of this bill. We ask that it be amended along the lines of what Commissioner Golojuch just said. Will also raise the fact that when we're talking about freedom to read, book bands on the continent have included books like Mao's, Color Purple, the Handmaid's Tale, the Perks of Being a Wallflower, and the Bluest Eye. So mahalo to the authors for introducing this and for you to hear for hearing it today. Mahalo.

Thank you. Dean Hamer on Zoom.

Not present, Chair.

Gary Cordery.

Can you hear me?

Yes.

Okay. Thank you for hearing my testimony. I testify and testify against this bill and strongly oppose it. It is an absolute travesty and attempt to normalize deviant behavior. This is not education. You cannot find any educational component in these books. These books are picture books designed to normalize homosexual behavior.

It's not a place in the classroom or in the library. This is a place for the home. This is violates parental rights. And I also asked for an amendment on line four that parents must opt in to have this educational material if it makes it to the classroom. Parents must be notified and they must opt in for their children to see this material. In closing, there is, there has never been a time when the nuclear family has been under such attack. And yet we see in our society the crumble of moral values, sex crimes, trafficking, hate crimes.

Your minute is up. Next.

What happens when we run out of time? All measures get deferred.

Recess.

Sarah, are you there?

I am here, but it's not letting me turn on my camera, but I will just go ahead and start the conversation. So I am here with HSTA, the Hawaii State Teachers Association. I am the teacher lobbyist. I'm also a middle school teacher who's taught for 19 years. I am standing with the 13,700 teachers that cannot be in that room today. I hear it's quite a riled up place. I will say of the books, the 1600 books most often banned on the continent, in the last year, they were brought by only 11 people.

Groups like Moms for Liberty train parents on how to object to books being in the classroom, and it's really scary as a teacher to see how this has spread throughout our classroom. As a teacher, I don't feel safe. I feel like I'm going to be attacked by these parent groups for doing my job that is developmentally appropriate.

I will also say in the history of the world, the people who ban books are never the good guys, which is why we need this rule today. I have a friend in Ohio who was actually put on leave for reading a book to her little kids in elementary about crayons trying to get along.

So this really makes me nervous that we, that we need this bill in the first place. But clearly testimony today says why. So please support this. Teachers need to know that you support us and that we have the freedom to read in our classroom and so do our students.

Thank you. Okay. Questions? Yes. Members, questions? Yeah.

Can we have the librarian? Is this your priority? Is this the librarian's priority, this bill?

I think it's important. There, across the country, we have librarians now who are being put in jail. They're being picked up for making books available to people who have different values or have different needs or informational needs. And it's important to make sure that everybody, everybody in this room also has access to the resources that they want and need.

But is this your priority? I was told this is a librarian library priority.

It's not our bill. Thank you.

Thank you. DOE. DOE. So is DOE banning books right now?

No, we're not banning books.

You're not banning any books?

No, we have selection criteria, and it's aligned to our national professional standards.

Question. Does the Board of Education get involved in any of your selections or...

No.

Thank you. Further questions? Stacey. Thank you. Stacey, has the State Librarian had any comments to the Department about banning books in the school's public libraries?

In public libraries, we have had people request to have books taken off of the shelf.

Yes. But has, have you required the DOE remove the books from the shelves?

No.

Any questions?

Department of Education. Thank you, Heidi, for being here. I know that this is more than likely going to be a librarian selection, but do you feel that this would increase the literacy in our students? Do you feel like this would help with graduation rates? Do you think that it would help with teacher shortages? I'm just really trying to find the ground on why would we be, maybe not necessarily prioritizing, as she had mentioned, but find it to be important? So would this help us? Would this help our students?

Right now, we do, as AS Ushijima mentioned, we do have a criteria, and we do take the maturity of the child in mind. Anything sexually overt would not be a material that we purposely put on our shelves. We do serve children from a variety of backgrounds. We are public education.

And so it is not our kuleana to promote or not promote a particular ideology, a particular religious belief, a particular family value. That's at the home. What we do have to do is welcome children in our schools as they are and educate them in English, math, science, social studies, et cetera.

Sure. Who determines at the Department of Education the level of maturity, as you stated?

That is professional judgment. It is not explicitly written out. But the Department does not promote overtly such that doesn't have a place in K-12. And that's not something that we would support. And we also want to honor the diversity of our families. And at any time a family can inform the school that they do not want their child or children K-12 exposed to any particular type of book or a book that has a particular content, and this school will honor. They'll put that in the system and will honor that request.

Sure. So if a student says and requests a particular book, maybe it's not necessarily under the guidance or recommendation of the parent, does the school end up making the decision for the parent on what the student is mature or not mature enough to...

We have our grade level standards and our understanding of ability and social emotional stability at certain, at different ages. We are educators, but there is not, we don't have explicitly set out in kindergarten X, Y, and Z. Do you have anything else to add to that?

Yes, we have some systems that we utilize and it's separated from elementary and secondary. So the librarians, they use these resources as they build their collection. And it's really important that, you know, the resources that they do add to their collection is aligned with curriculum. It's relevant, it's of quality materials, it promotes critical thinking. It represents diverse perspectives and cultures, and also that there's different access digital as well as hard copies.

Reconvening the Committee on Education. We are on Senate Bill 249 relating to local agricultural products. Modify certain benchmark goals and timeline for the Department of Education to provide locally sourced agricultural and food products. Superintendent.

Good afternoon, Chair, Vice Chair. Dino Chida, Deputy Superintendent with DOE. The Department stands on its written testimony which provides comments on this measure. The Department appreciates the bill's intent to separate the local food purchase goals from other state departments by clarifying goal targets.

Additionally, the Department is continuing to assess opportunities to work with our food distributors to reach the slated goals, closest being the 30 by 30 goal for purchasing of local products. Thank you for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you. Sharon Hurd, Department of Ag

Aloha Chair, Vice Chair.

Thank you. Thank you. Brian Miyamoto, Executive Director, Hawaii Farm Bureau.

Thank you. Chair. The Hawaii Farm Bureau will stand on written testimony in support.

Nancy Moser, individual in support. Hunter Helvelin, Advocacy Director, Hawaii Farmers Union in support. Are there additional testifiers present? Wish to testify on this matter. Members, questions going to recess. Reconvening the education for decision making. Members, recommendation of the chair For Senate Bill 894 SD1 is to defer. For Senate Bill 187 to defer. For Senate, zero, I'm sorry.

For Senate Bill 894, defer with no objections. Senate Bill 187, defer with no objection. Senate Bill 757 relating to libraries. Recommendation of the chairs to pass with amendments to include the testimony of the ag. To clarify the purpose of this Bill and effective date to July 12050.

Recommendation is to pass Senate Bill 757 with amendments. Chair Kidani.

Aye.

Vice Chair votes Aye. Senator Hashimoto Aye. Senator Kanuha is excused. Senator De Court I. Four eyes one excuse. Recommendations adopted.

Thank you. For Senate Bill 799, defer without objection. 7. Senate Bill 249 passed with amendments but defecting the date to July 12050. Chair votes are okay.

Chair votes are on. Senate Bill 249, pass with amendments. Any Member voting? No. Any Member voting with reservations. Hearing not in. Four Members present one excuse. Recommendations adopted.

Thank you. Members. That concludes our hearing.

The Bill was deferred.