House Standing Committee on Tourism

Convening the very first committee hearing for the House Committee on Tourism for 2025. Today is January 28, 2025. We are in Conference Room 423. The time is 10:00am. In order to allow as many people to testify as possible, there will be a two minute time limit for testifier. Know that we also have your written testimony.

So if you have submitted written testimony, please feel free to stand on your written testimony unless you have anything to add additionally. Because morning hearings must adjourn prior to the noon floor session, not all testifiers may have the opportunity to testify. In that event, please know that your testimony will be considered by the committee.

Please keep yourself muted and your video off while waiting to testify and after you your testimony is complete. The Zoom chat function will allow you to chat with the technical staff only. Please use the chat only for technical issues. If you are disconnected unexpectedly, you may attempt to rejoin the meeting.

If disconnected while presenting testimony, you may be allowed to continue if time permits. Please note the House is not responsible for any bad Internet connections on the testifier's end. In the event of a network failure, it may be necessary to reschedule the hearing or schedule a meeting for decision making.

In that case, an appropriate notice will be posted. Please avoid using any trademark or copyright images and please refrain from any profanity or uncivil behavior. Such behavior may be grounds for removal from the hearing without the ability to rejoin. On this committee today, we have my Vice Chair Shirley Ann Templo.

We have Representative Ikaika Hussey, Representative Laura Matsumoto, and Representative Chris Todd. First on the agenda, House Bill 97, relating to travel insurance. It establishes a new regulatory framework for the sale of travel insurance in the state, including licensing, registration requirements for the Limited Allianz Travel Insurance Producers. Effective October 1, 2025. First up to testify we have DCCA with comments. Thank you. Next we have Crum and Forster in support. Next we have AGA Service Company on Zoom.

Good morning. My name is Duke de Haas with, I'm with Allianz in Richmond, Virginia. 3:00pm here. Nice to see you. Thank you for having me and appreciate you bringing HB 97 before this committee. I am deputy general counsel at Allianz, and I'm also co-chair of the USTIA Law and Reg Committee. We stand on our testimony, and I'm here simply to answer any questions that you may have. Thank you for the opportunity again.

Thank you so much. Next we have the US Travel Insurance Association and the American Property Casualty Insurance Association on Zoom.

Hi, good morning. Thank you. My Name is Michael Byrne, and I represent the United States Travel Insurance Association and the APCIA as well. The USTIA's members include insurance carriers, third party administrators, insurance agencies, and related businesses in the development, sale, administration of travel assistance products. Thank you for bringing HB 97 before the committee today. Stand on our written test testimony as well, and happy to answer any questions. And again, appreciate you bringing the bill before the committee. Thank you.

Thank you. That is all that we have signed up to testify in person and on zoom. Is there anyone else wishing to testify on House Bill 97c9? We're going to move on to the next bill on the agenda. House Bill 446 relating to a state hotel.

It requires the Hawaii Tourism Authority and the School of Travel Industry Management at the University of Hawaii Manoa to collaborate and actively plan for design, construction and operations and maintenance management of estate hotels. Requires reports to the Legislature and appropriates funds. First up we have the School of Travel Industry Management with comments.

Yes, good morning, I'm Dan Spencer and I'm the Director of the School of Travel Industry Management at the University of Hawaii at Manoa.

And while we appreciate the laudable intentions of those who are proposing the planning and construction of the state hotel, we have a number of very serious concerns about it and so our faculty is unanimously opposed to it.

Oh, okay.

I'll be happy to answer any questions that anyone might have.

Next up we have the Attorney General with comments on Zoom.

Deputy Attorney General Candice Park. In accordance with Article 10, Section 6 of the State consitution, we recommend identifying. This bill as a law of statewide concern. Thank you.

Next up we have the Hawaii Tourism Authority with comments.

Aloha Chair and Vice Chair, Daniel Nahoopii, Hawaii Tourism Authority. We stand on our testimony with comments and available to answer any questions concerns for you.

Next up we have the Hawaii Logic and Tourism Association with comments.

Morning, Mr. Chair, Madam Chair, Members of the Tourism Committee, this is a laudable goal on your part, but I think there is just some significant concerns from the Tim School and of course hca, which is this is really not in our wheelhouse, but certainly we think it merits further discussion.

But we just wanted to go on the record to commend you for trying to do something from your perspective on workforce development. But this may not be the appropriate vehicle to get it done with the timeframe that you're talking about. So discussion on this, but we cannot take a position to support it at this time. Thank you.

Thank you. We have three other, four other people with testimony opposition is there Anyone else willing to testify on the measure for us? Go ahead. Please state your name and your position on the bill.

Aloha, Angela Melody Young testifying on behalf of Rourke Hirs and Happy New Year Chair and Vice Chair and the Committee. So I like this idea of a state hotel from the University of Hawaii. So section 2B.

The State Hotel shall be jointly managed by the Hawaii Tourism Authority and School of Travel Industry Management at the University of Hawaii Manoa.

My amendment is so under that the Hawaii Tourism Authority and University of Hawaii may invite relevant stakeholders to operate a boarding Commission to provide advice to the joint partnership relevant stakeholders and may include housekeeping and hospitality unions and business management organizations to help provide advice for such co management of a partnership to build a state hotel.

So the standard structure for such an organized activity is usually a gathering the primary agencies, B making a list of the board or the Commission to carry out the functions of the primary agencies and C to set common goals as well as legislative priorities and community outreach ideas to discuss within the group.

And the legislation has a very basic idea, but without a border Commission, you may not be able to have University of Hawaii and Hawaii Tourism Authority accomplish all the responsibilities. So the burden should be upon the legislative debate process to characterize and to build the state hotel plan.

A lot of times the legislation will just designate a task without thinking about all the responsibilities in building the board and the Commission and the appropriate and relevant stakeholders to invite to the partnership. So yes. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Is there anyone else wishing to testify on the measure before us? Seeing none. Members, any questions? Chair does have a question for the travel industry management. Daniel. So I understand that the bill is like written this way, but if we were to amend the bill into a study, would that be more considerable?

And would should the school be open to participating in the idea of working out a plan on seeing if this is feasible?

Well, it's my understanding that the bill as written is only for the purpose of planning at this point, and a subsequent bill then would need to be enacted to execute the plan and actually construct the hotel. So we are regrettably and unfortunately opposed to the idea of a state hotel for the reasons articulated in my written testimony.

And so for that reason we're opposed to even planning for the hotel.

All right, thank you. Is there anyone else wishing to testify on the measure or is there any other questions you guys have? Seeing none. Actually.

Can I ask a question?

Go ahead. Rep. Hussey.

I'm sorry, I didn't catch your first name. Yeah, nice to meet you. Sir, thanks so much for coming. Can you speak a little bit more about the basis of your objection to the entirety of this idea, including just a planning process?

I'd be happy to, and it's all in my written testimony, but I'll just try to summarize it. We feel that this state hotel could be perceived as unfair competition by the lodging sector of the state's travel industry.

And so if we were to support it, we would be perceived as facilitating and cooperating with a hotel that unfairly competes with commercial hotels.

And we don't want that to happen because we depend directly on the support of the hotel sector, of the industry to provide us with internships, to provide jobs for our graduates, to serve on our advisory council and our alumni association. And so we don't want to jeopardize this extremely fruitful relationship. So that's why. One reason.

Another reason is that we feel the funds could be more appropriately used to help solve more urgent problems in the state, like homelessness and traffic congestion and shoreline erosion due to rising sea levels and those sorts of issues. Clearly, the construction of a hotel anywhere on the island would be extremely expensive.

And there's lots of other uses for the funds that would be appropriated for the hotel.

In addition to that, based on my conversations with Representative Tam and also what's simply written in the bill, it's clear that one of the objectives of the construction of the hotel would be to basically serve as sort of a demonstration project about how to build and operate a green hotel, okay?

One that minimizes its negative sociocultural and environmental impacts. And we feel that while that's a laudable objective, there's lots of other ways that those same objectives can be achieved. For example, the state could subsidize a program whereby hotels would bring in sustainability experts that are employed by globally recognized eco certification organizations like Green Globe and these.

What these experts do is they scrutinize the operation of a hotel from top to bottom and make recommendations for how they can become greener by minimizing their energy consumption and their production of solid waste and air and water pollution.

And if the hotel meets certain criteria, it can be certified at the lowest level, and if it meets even more stringent criteria, the next level. And then yet another level.

There can be three or four levels, and the state could start a program whereby a certain percentage of the hotels in Hawaii would have at least the basic level of certification, and then they could go on to the next level and the next level with additional subsidies.

And this would be a way of greening the entire hotel sector and then we could move on to other sectors. And so this is a way that we can become greener.

In addition to that, I and my colleagues feel that there is a long standing need in Hawaii for welcome centers by which visitors can walk into a facility, preferably in a place like Waikiki, where there's lots of pedestrian traffic by tourists, and learn about how they can become a more responsible visitor, how they can put their litter in the right place and obey traffic laws, not trespass on private property.

It's a long list. And at these same welcome centers they can also book tours and activities and learn more about Hawaii's Flora and fauna. And it's a great mystery to me why many states on the US mainland have these welcome centers, sometimes many of them in the same state.

And here in Hawaii, which is a premier global destination, we don't have them. And yet we have this Waikiki with tremendous volumes of pedestrian traffic where it's just so easy for people to just wander in, you know, especially if you have clean restrooms. And so, you know, which is a basic strategy of McDonald's.

You know, that's how they get people into Mcdonald's is because people know there's clean restrooms there. So there's other ways that we can green this industry besides competing with commercial hotels.

Okay, I have a follow up question. Do you think that the KCC Culinary Institute has an unfair advantage over restaurants because they operate a restaurant? Because by your logic, they do.

There's a difference between a restaurant and a hotel. And the hotel the restaurant is a smaller scale operation. So yes, there is competition with the private sector by KCC, but it would be, it is at a smaller scale than what would be experienced through the construction of a hotel.

But by your logic it's still competition, right? So yes, yes, they do have an unfair advantage. So you also listed in your testimony that you have off internships. Is the Tim School's official stance is that they rather have these hotels teach their students than the actual school teach their students or give them the hands on experience.

Because Maui College just opened a hotel recently and I don't know why there was no opposition to that hotel.

Well, I don't know if there was. I didn't hear of any opposition. There might have been some, but it wasn't, didn't get into the news. But the. I'm sorry, could you repeat your question?

No, I'm just saying like, you know, why was, if there was was this opposition or animosity towards this bill, Therefore, when Maui was going to construct their Maui Academy, going to construct their hotel.

I did not hear of any such opposition.

Do you think where do you get this idea that constructing a hotel would be expensive and would you be open to possibly purchasing an existing hotel then if cost was the main concern?

Well, I think constructing any hotel is expensive, especially in a place like Hawaii. So I think that's a given. Certainly an existing hotel could be purchased. That would have fewer environmental impacts than building a new one. But then it would be under state ownership and state operated and state subsidized.

And so it would still be unfair competition at a larger scale than what we have with KCC's restaurant.

So one hotel is unfair competition to the hundreds of hotels across the state. Yes or no?

Yes, it is.

Interesting. Anyone else have any questions? All right. Anyone else seen? None. We're going to move on to the next bill. Moving on to House Bill 348 relating to single use plastics.

It prohibits lodging establishments from providing personal care products in small plastic containers within sleeping room accommodations. Any space within sleeping room accommodations or bathrooms used by the public or guests. Establishes civil penalties effective 7-1-3000. First up, we have the Department of Health. Well, to testify in person, we have Starnel, Tool, Marcus and Fisher.

Hello, Micah. Co Chair Tab Vice Chair Temple and Members of the Committee. My name is Ivan Lui Kwan. The lodging industry has really moved substantially toward bulk dispenser usage. Accordingly, the definition in the Bill of personal care product is very important. And we would respectfully recommend that the definition of personal care product align with SB670.

And what we recommend is that personal care product means shampoo, hair conditioner, bath Soap or lotion. SB670 has this definition without a word lotion. So we suggest for inclusion the word notion.

And the reason for this suggestion is that it's more succinct, less open to broad interpretation, and aligns with the precedent of this definition used throughout other states and accepted as industry precedent. So allow me to present testimony.

Thank you. Next we have Hawaii Logic and Tourism Association.

Mr. Chair, I think our comments is basically, we support the intent of the bill. As you can see, many of our hotels are already moving towards this. And we always have a fundamental issue.

When we are mandated to do something that we're already doing, it's going to be an increasing trend that more and more of the hotels will comply with the intent of your bill. Those were our comments. We support the changes proffered by Mr. Kwan.

Next up, we have Environmental caucus of the Democratic Party of Hawaii. That's all that we have signed up to testify. Sharon knows that we have. Is there anyone else wishing to testify on the measure before us? Go ahead. Please state your name and your position.

On the Angela Melody Young. Roar cares. I'm neutral. I neither support nor oppose it. I have a brief comment. So we advocate at the City Council as well. So there was a similar request by resolution for elementary school to ask the City Council to only supply counties events with biodegradable bottles.

I think or if it wasn't to only supply biodegradable bottles, it was to instead of the plastic bottles at the county's events, work with water fountains and biodegradable bottles. So within this act, if it's enacted, it will reduce single use plastics, right. In hotel operations.

I think it's a little bit harsh the punishment to find them because you have to consider the business operations as is right. Sometimes we have an idea, but then it's a bit of a stretch to get to the ambitious goal.

So with over 10 million tons of plastic entering our oceans yearly, responsible recycling has never been more important in the quest for rapid organization urbanization to build cities. But at the same time, it is a time in our generation to learn to care for the dolphins, whales and the turtles.

This generation, as we learned from the prior generation, we are continuously challenged by traditional business models, business operations supporting plastic pollution and plastic production to make decisions for an environmentally friendly future. Plastic recycling efforts are only occurring on a small scale. Right. To recycle the plastics and then to upgrade our materials that we're working with.

And so because we are still in this generation of trying to find a new material to work with, adequate and appropriate material to work with because we care about the dolphins and whales and turtles. And so we still have to balance the cost of what it takes to implement such business strategies. Right? Because it's a cultural shift.

Thank you so much and may we have an environmentally friendly future.

Thank you.

Is there anyone else wishing to testify on the measure before us? See none. Members, any questions? C9. We're going to recess for decision making. Thank you. Members and audience. We are reconvening our 10 o'clock agenda for the House Committee on tourism. Today is January 282025. Year Room 423. First up, we have House Bill 97.

Chair's recommendation is to pass this with amendments. We will be defecting the date and we're also going to note in the court Committee report the suggestion suggested amendments from the DCCA so that the next Committee, which is the Cpc, can consider them. We are not the CPC Committee. So. Members, any questions? Comments See none.

Vice Chair for the vote.

Voting on House Bill 97. Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments. Chair and Vice Chair vote aye for the row. Representative Holt excused. Representative Hussey, Representative Ilagon, Representative Todd, Representative Matsumoto noting the absence of Representative Holt. Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. Moving on to House Bill 440 relating to a state hotel. We had a lively discussion and I think that this is worth moving forward to continue this discussion, frankly, because I just.

I just don't think that the reasons given is a good enough excuse to stop all of this, considering Tim's school used to be up here. Now it's not there anymore. So we're going to amend this Bill to become a study.

We will have the study address a lot of the concerns, including resources and staffing, which we consider very valid. And it will also take a look at the cost of this endeavor of whether or not constructing a whole new hotel or purchasing an existing property would be more feasible.

We're going to defect the date and we're going to note in the Committee report that we recommend $150,000 for an appropriation for the study. Members, any questions? Comments? None.

Vice Chair for the vote voting on House Bill 446. Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments noting the previously excused Member. Any nos, Any reservations? Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. Next up, we have House Bill 348. Chair's recommendation is to pass this with amendments. We're going to take the amendments adding a definition to personal care product which will mean putting in the definition which will mean now mean shampoo, hair conditioner, bath soap or lotion.

And because the dates are defected, that's the only amendment we're going to make. Members, any comments or questions? Seeing none.

Vice Chair for the vote voting on House Bill 348. Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments noting the previously excused Members. Are there any nos, Any reservations? Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. This hearing is adjourned.

SA.