Senate Standing Committee on Agriculture and Environment

Okay, Aloha, everybody. Welcome to the reconvening for decision making on items that were previously heard on Tuesday, February 11th of 2025 at 3pm on February. Sorry, February 6th, we heard these measures at 3pm or decision making on them today, Tuesday, February 11th, 2025, in room 225. A lot of two fives meeting is being streamed live on YouTube.

In the unlikely event that we have to roughly end this hearing due to technical difficulties or false alarms, the Committee will reconvene to discuss any outstanding business at 3:01 p.m. Thursday, Feb. 13, 2025 in room 225. And a public notice will be posted on the Legislature's website. So with that, we'll go right into the decision making.

The first bill we had up was Senate Bill 1513. Given the testimony that was submitted and other issues that were brought up, we're going to defer this measure indefinitely. Okay, next up, we have Senate Bill 786. Members. You remember we had testimony from Mr.

Fritz and others on some of the things that need to be done in the bill. A lot of things need to be done. And given the constraints of timeline and everything else, we are in a biennium.

So I'm going to park this bill here for this session so we can work on it during the interim and come out with a proposed SD1 that encompasses all the things that were being discussed and perhaps can capture the ongoing changes that are occurring every day in the Federal Government.

So we're going to park this one for this year, deferred indefinitely. And finally, on Senate Bill 1031, we're going to move this as a Senate draft one. I went ahead and I spoke to the author about the changes to the bill, and with their support, we are recommending the following.

The Legislature may adopt Concurrent Resolutions, propose non binding advisory referendum questions only on proposals concerning issuance of General obligation bonds to the electorate. The chief election officer must publish notice of each referendum question at least 30 days prior to the advisory referendum and then results of the advisory and the Legislature must consider them when authorizing bond issuance.

If the legislative action opposes the majority vote, a written explanation is required in the legislative record. And due to the changes and to keep the conversation going, we're going to make the effective date of January 1, 2491.

And also in the Committee report, we're going to note that should the next Committee, if they choose to hear the bill, they thoroughly examine the concerns raised by the opposition regarding this amended, this proposal. This amended proposal, as well as the underlying Proposal.

The review should also include analysis of potential fiscal, administrative and legal implications of implementing advisory referendums solely for budget issuance. Members, questions? Comments? If not. Vice Chair, Senate Bill 1031 SD1. I vote yes.

[Roll Call]

All right, thank you guys. Appreciate.

I feel this concludes our decision making on this agenda. Start off with us, right?

Aloha everybody. Welcome to the Joint Hearing between government operations and our amazing friends at Water and Land. We're here Tuesday, February 11, 2025 at 3:05 p.m. you heard the housekeeping notes from previously. And to add to that, in order to facilitate this hearing in a timely manner, we will be enforcing a strict two minute time limit on testimony.

Senate Bill 411. First up we have Budget and Finance.

Good afternoon, Chairs, Vice Chairs, Members of the committees. The Department of Budget and Finance stands on its testimony in opposition.

Okay, thank you. Okay, thank you for coming up and saying that. All right, next up, Don Chang, DLNR Megan. Oh, this another one.

Good afternoon, Chairs, Vice Chair, Committee Members, Megan Stats administrator for the division of Boating and Ocean Recreation. The Department stands on its written testimony in support. I'm here for any questions as well as our state park administrator. Thank you.

Thank you so much. We have Deputy Attorney General John Dubile.

Hi.

In person. Thank you.

Good afternoon Chairs, vice chairs and Members of the Committee. Our testimony is that this bill is subject to challenge based on the fact that it implicitly says that there is Shelby funding for these small board however these capital improvement projects without actually appropriating any funding.

And so we would recommend adding some amount of appropriations to this bill so that it is no longer subject to challenge. And I'm here to answer any questions you may have. Thank you. Thanks.

Okay, we have, let's see. Edwin Watamura for H Vac Fishermen's Alliance. They have submitted written in support. We also have Denver Saxton Coon for Ocean Tourism Coalition written in support. Zachary Laprade for Calypso Charters. They have written in support.

We have a late individual, William Chang, submitted written in support late from Antoinette Davis Activities and Attractions Association of Hawaii. Written in support. We have Kim Polinsky and individual in support. Also three Ali'I Grimes, Keahi Ho and Kate Thompson. All individuals, all in support. That's all we have on 411. Anybody in the audience wishing to test?

Seeing none. Members, are there any questions? Nope. Seeing none. I believe I turn it over to my illustrious co chair.

Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Let's proceed then to SB 1103 relating to community districts. It establishes a process by which the Legislature may establish community districts by Concurrent Resolution. Requires the board Members of the community districts to be elected by residents of the community. District Attorney General.

Aloha. Good afternoon. Kevin Tongg, Deputy Attorney General. We have concerns that this bill may be challenged as violating Article 3, Section 14 of the Hawaii Constitution by establishing law through Concurrent Resolution and also section 37.52.3 by failing an establish, failing to satisfy the requirements to establish a special Fund. And we have recommendations in our written testimony.

I'm available for questions.

Thank you. Hcda.

Good afternoon. Chairs, Vice Chairs and Members of the Committee. Craig Nakamoto, Executive Director of the Hawaii Community Development Authority. My testimony is in two parts. I've got to go through some general comments and then some specific comments.

For the general comments, you know, we support the vision and concept of a legislatively established community district governed by elected boards. With the technical assistance, I think, you know, we can lead the community planning and possible development in this district districts.

I would also note that I'm hoping that in the near term, you know, specific districts do not get established so that it affords me and the agency and the board the opportunity to kind of look at the agency's existing governance and management structure to determine what kind of structure is optimal to implement this bill.

And I'll get into a little more details chairs in a moment. When you look, when you look at the bill and the governance, it's going to require an elected board. That elected board, it really kind of takes the place of, in a lot of ways, of our traditional HCD authority board.

So the comments that I have, especially on item three of my testimony as it relates to powers and the powers of the board, try to sort of carve out instances where the board may our board, when I say our board, I should say the authority board may want to step in and kind of, you know, opine on some of these or decide take action on it.

So I've added language or suggested language for page four, line 13 to 19 for that says as necessary to carry out the purpose of this part as to matters brought before the authority by the Executive Director, as to matters upon which the authority has not accepted delegation by the board, because there are some instances where, for example, just, for example, if there is a condemnation action that's required and the board, the board, the elected board has that power, the it may be necessary to get the authority board to weigh in and to approve that condemnation.

So I think I'm trying What I'm trying to do is sort of balance the governance of the elected board with the governance of the authority board. The other thing I would note is if this is going to be.

If the district is going to be established by Concurrent Resolution, and I heard the deputy Attorney General's comments, I would suggest that the establishment of these districts be conditioned on two things.

One, that it establish at least one dedicated FT position for the district, at least one and appropriate amount of money that may be necessary to carry out the purpose of this park.

The one position I contemplated as kind of like a city planner kind of person that's going to be with the district from start to sunset and kind of work with the community to engage with them on a community plan. So it's kind of like a city planner kind of concept. Those are the.

I think my main sort of specific comments. There's other comments in there that are more formatting and typographic. Typographical in nature, but those are really my specific comments in the try to balance the elected board governance with the authority board.

Well, you know, I've had plenty of experience with this thing. So have I. Together. Yeah. But one of the things, and I'm sorry, chair. If I could just jump in real.

Quickly, Senator McKelvey, that came up was.

Just an appointed board versus an elected board. Conversations on the Bill last year went back and forth. The community, at least the community and discussion of that Bill was starting to move back towards an appointed board because of the recognition that with elected board you could have all the unintended consequences, including lack of diversity representation.

Do you think that that's something that should be looked at further down the road?

Well, you know, Senator McKelvey, I think if we're going to go to a kind of appointed board, it sort of takes away a lot of the, you know, vision and intent of this, this community district.

I saw some of the testimony of submitted by individuals talking about whether the elected board Members have qualifications to, you know, serve in that function. But what I would, what I would note, Senator McKelvey, I think is, you know, it's just like any other election.

You know, the constituents will, you know, look at a person's qualifications and decide whether that person is right to be on this board as an elected official. If they don't like it, then the next election they can put somebody else up and run against democracy. So I hope I answered your question.

You did, but I mean, like, for our area in particular, I'll just leave it at this because I know we're running out of time is that we have a major first capital Hawaii. The community felt that needs to be Native Hawaiian representation on there at all times. An elected board, you're not guaranteed that at all.

So that's, I think the concerns of ensuring that there is representation from critical groups within the community.

And I think, I think I said this when we were out in the community with the Le Bill and what I suggested was that what it means is I think the community has to come out and they have to put a candidate or have candidates nominated, you know, and for elected position, they have to come out and vote.

Yeah.

Well, that's the way we keep reaching that.

Yeah. And everybody else doesn't seem to pan out that way all the time. Yeah, I know that sounds pretty, you know, so.

No, I appreciate this conversation. Thank you, Chair. I appreciate the indulgence. That's all for me.

No problem. I have, well, several, several questions when we talk about elected board, who's the electors? Who, who votes for these people that the district.

It's going to be. So what I envision is in the first part of Bill, when a Bill is being established. I'm sorry, when a district is being established, there's going to have to be a boundary and you know, set boundary, geographic boundary. So it's just like having District 1 as an example.

You know, they're the ones that are going to be voting for the board. Okay. We're talking about the population of those in District 1. Yeah. As an example. The only question I ask is aside from Oahu, where you have the community board members, we don't have that on the neighbor islands.

So that's, it's a little bit confusing because we would have to establish these community, I guess, organizations. So that's, I can see an issue. How, I guess, is the county supposed to set that up or what we're going. What's called in this bill, who will give the direction is the county councils.

So, so the way as, as you read it.

Yeah. So.

And I'm sorry, I. No, no, you're not the introducer of this measure. So. No, it's, it's good questions because.

Yeah, it's fine. So on page one of the Bill, line 13 and all the way down to the end on paper, on line 17 establishes how these community districts will be established by Concurrent Resolution. So.

So that means that the counties, then we're giving the opportunity for the counties.

Well, no, the Legislature will be creating these community districts by Concurrent Resolution.

And you've heard that Attorney General. Sure. And I totally agree with him. But it's the Legislature that will pass a Concurrent Resolution establishing community districts.

Okay.

Okay, okay. And these groups are doing what? They're approving developments in that particular district if there is a development, like housing, like anything that would create some economic, I guess, development or something like that.

So I think the elected board's first and primary task is laid out on page five, line 12. That's in 206 E-F. The board, the elected board shall create and implement as expeditiously as possible a community plan for the district. This would be no different in a lot of ways than what HCDA does.

I mean, we do community planning, we do master planning. The board, through HCDA and the staff will be creating this community plan no matter what.

The county's General plan is already adopted by the counties. So then this particular community Committee will then create their own development plan or whatever plans they see they wish to have in their district.

This particular Bill, unlike some other bills, doesn't specifically Supersede County. So I would think that we would work in coordination with the county and create a plan. What does the community want to see in terms of development? You know, in certain districts you have people who are spearheading community planning and development.

In other districts you don't have anybody. And I think for those districts, this community district might allow the community to engage in that center.

Okay, yeah, well, it's, it seems like it's interrupting. And let me say that coming from the Big island or any other counties aside from Oahu, I can see this, maybe for Oahu, because you got the population and you have growth here that may not be around for a while with their population increase.

But I think I see this as more dangerous in doing something like this and circumventing the counties and what they do in their own General plans.

But I guess because the districts are, as an example, when you create districts, who decide what the districts are, because we're a population, as an example, big island, we're 200,000 population, and you have communities spread out. So if you have, in my district and further on Hakalau, the Hamakua Coast.

So would you decide, would we develop that as a district like you say, you know, I guess you're going to create districts. So yeah, if, if this was only for a particular county, I can see, but I, I think there's more issues.

I see that interrupts, interrupts some of the bigger, the county's responsibility for managing their own areas.

Sure, yeah, I, I, I respect the questions and the comments, but if you allow me to. Sure. Explain a little bit more. So one, you know, this is these are districts that are not going to be established by me or HCDA. These are districts that are going to be established by the Legislature.

Second, I don't think there's, I don't think it's fair to say that we're going to circumvent the city. I think what's fair is we're going to work with the city and work with it to work on a community plan. I disagree.

I think the power of CDA is with the fact that it becomes your one world community government. So it should actually supersede the county.

Down the road here. It doesn't specifically say that the second, you know, I would slightly disagree that this is not for the neighbor islands.

I would offer that this might be just suited for neighbor island communities where, you know, it's not as built up as an urban community on Oahu and they're looking to get some community planning for districts. So I would kind of note that, I mean I'm not sure I agree with that comment that it's not for the neighborhood.

Well, the thing is that the Legislature is creating this and this is not being created by the mayors or the city councils or the county councils. And so as an example, I love what you're doing, HCDA.

I'm a big supporter of you for several reasons because you already have established board and you already can make there's a lot of exemptions you have, you have developments can occur immediately because of your previous and your current responsibilities, which I saw.

So it seems like now we're creating many HCDAs throughout the counties and that's what I see. And it's troubling. And on top of that, when you talk about different if we were one state and not have island structure, it's probably easy to manage.

But now where we're going to get the monies and the personnel to manage all these community districts around. But anyway, it's just an interesting concept but I think I'm not ready to create something that but I, I know because you're, you're here.

So but I think Senator, if, if you think it's not ready for the neighbor islands, then the Legislature shouldn't create it for the neighborhoods, but at least have the option to create it wherever the Legislature sees fit.

The second comment I think is again, I would slightly disagree with the whole mini HCBA kind of concept because what we're trying to do here is through the resources of ACDA through the experience that we have with ACD is to lend resources to this elected board to help them plan out plan a community.

So I would a little bit disagree with the mini CDA comment. I think we're trying to use our resources knowledge to help this community of this elected board.

But how do you give autonomy to planning if the County Planning Commission's Department has the final trump? It's not really taking planning.

No, I think it's still planning. Senator McKelvey. I think within the confines of that plan, maybe the people want certain things in this area. They want a park. I mean I think those can all be done.

Yeah. I'd like to follow up with with Senator McKelvey's comments as well. All of our counties in their organizations they have already under their public works division and planning departments they are governed by charter that they have the boards and commissions. We have planning commissions that do all of their district development plans approvals.

So I think this is going to interrupt what the counties are presently doing. That's my personal feeling. You're taking away the responsibilities from we the Legislature is then now telling all the districts creating a new division. I think there's an interruption of management anyway.

Yeah, I think we just agree to disagree. I think this could actually instead of an interruption it could complement what's.

I don't think so. Not. I don't think so. You got the leeward planning commissions on Big island. You got the windward planning commissions and it's going to interrupt I think with whatever they do and their General plans that's approved by the councils. I think this will interfere with with the county's responsibility.

Thank you, Senator.

Kauai and Malawi I can speak but I think the concept may be good if we didn't have a good government regulations in management our counties. But I think I have a feeling this is more of an interruption. Chair Senator. Yes. Senator Moriwaki.

Here it just this kind of reminds me of what we did in Pulehonui in Maui where they needed to have the resources. So this language that says may the Legislature may establish or help in areas that are undeveloped, but you bring in the resources necessary to work with the county.

Might be something where it's an option as Craig says, but I'm just not sure because it's an elective board. The Mpuleho Nui was all appointed so I don't know how that sits but if you can compare that with what.

Is under hcda.

Yeah, but it was the frustrations with the county.

It was. Yeah. Oh yeah, it was created, I think, several years ago.

Yeah. Yeah. In the 22 legislative session. I think this is, to clarify, I think this is a little more analogous to the Leleville for Lahaina then the plenum is sort of squarely within hcda and we have a board that's patterned after the other HCV boards just to build infrastructure.

But I think this is pattern more after the LELE Bill.

As I discussed, there was a lot of ongoing conversations on that Bill, you know, still back and forth with the community. So. And again, there was these opposition.

There's, there's people there, like my good friend, Hawaiian friends are like, we want one community government with the community controls the zoning, the money and everything at the local level, regardless of political subdivision. So there's that vision. Then there's a vision, of course, of the idea this could be a community overlay to work with the counties.

But there are competing visions about this.

I think there's going to be a lot of thought into this measure. I mean, it's you already, we already experienced with you and your district in Pulehonui.

So, I mean, I'm a supporter, but my community, there's a lot of people like, man, we should have done that, though.

Yeah.

Okay. All right. But.

But anyway, thanks so much, Scott. Okay, let's. Craig, let's hear from Scott Nago. Elections, State elections Office has communication, comments, Budget and Finance. Okay. Also has communications, actually in comments, Danny Degrassia, an individual in opposition, Jacob Weinscheck in comments. And I don't think anyone is on Zoom, because our Attorney General was going to be on Zoom.

I'm so happy you're here, but thank you for your comments as well. Is there anyone else wishes to speak to SB 1103 hearing? None. Then shall we move on to the next one, Chair? Okay, let's proceed to SB 1308 relating to plans.

Removes outdated requirements for plans filed with the registrar's office, updates the statutory fee schedule to reflect those adopted in Chapter 40 of Title 3H of the Hawaii Revised Statute. Grants additional discretion to DAGs to approve the formal of plans, updates permissibles, drawing scales used in plans, and let's call on our test.

And this is, by the way, Members, this is an Administration spill. And we'll call in DAGS.

Aloha, Mr. Chair, Members of the committees, my name is Meyer Cummins. I'm a land surveyor for DAGS Land Survey Division. I'm here testifying on behalf of Comptroller Regan. We stand in support of this bill and we stand on our written testimony that's submitted, and I'm here to answer. Any questions you might have.

Okay. Thank you so much. Is there anyone else? Yes. Okay. Senator McCullough.

No. Since you're here, quick question. Will this measure assist or could it be a vehicle to assist in replacing the survey monuments that were removed from the lands of Lahaina were cleared during the wildfire cleanup?

No, it wouldn't. This Bill is mostly housekeeping and it has to do with reducing costs for the public that submit maps for my office to review. Which helps. Which does help. But it doesn't quite replace monuments per se. But it does provide information for future subdivisions to. Or surveys to refer back to.

If there were, let's say, another natural disaster, it would assist in getting more maps through our office. And approved.

I want to flag this for you and your people. Now, I don't know what vehicle, if any, could be done, but all of the survey monuments are gone. Yes. It's causing absolute chaos with the rebuild. So anything you guys can do to help us on this.

We are. We are aware of that. Yeah. If I can quickly testify on behalf of the Hawaii Land Surveys Association. We are trying to work with as many of the surveyors in Maui as we can right now. So. And I'm happy to have private conversations.

Because the Committee signs. Absolutely.

Yes. Just. Just to add, though, but you are addressing the areas owned by the state, like the schools and. And our buildings and. Because I think you need to conform.

I'll shoot you an email.

To the plans per the rules that are being changed. That just has to do with any. Whether it be state or private. Is. Yeah. With regard to land, court maps, file plans. Sure. That nature.

Okay. All right. Thank you so much. Thank you for your presence here. Anyone else wishes to speak to SB 1308? Okay. Hearing none. Members, any questions of DAX while they're here? Okay. Seeing none. Chair, shall we go into. Okay.

First up with Senate Bill 411. While I appreciate the testimony of the AG's office and the Budget and Finance, I think that what we're asking here is not unheard of for other departments utilizing it. So as such, we'll note the concerns in the Committee report.

However, my recommendation is we put a defective date on it for further conversation. We'll move this along. Okay. Members, questions or comments? If not gov ops SB411 Senate draft 1. I vote yes with amendments.

Yes.

Yes with amendments. [Roll Call]

Measure passed Chair's recommendation on the Committee of Water and Land to move to pass SB411 with amendments. Any discussions? Members hearing none. Vice Chair for the vote. Chair goes Aye.

Chair recommendation to pass SB411 with amendments. [Roll Call] Yes, Madam Chair. Recommendations adopted.

Thank you. For SB 1103 relating to community districts, the Chair's recommendation on this measure is to defer those. Though probably I would say there needs to be a lot of discussions on something like this and could be good in the next few futures to come, but Chair's recommendation is to defer. You agree? Chair? Yeah. Okay. All right.

Okay. We'll Proceed then with SB 1308. This is relating to plans. This is an administration's Bill. The only amendments that the chairs recommend is to recognize that there are technical amendments on this measure. With the clean date, though? Yeah, with the clean date, yes. As well. Okay. Any discussions?

We note in the Committee report, just. Just so it's a flag for the public about the. The monument issue. Is that cool?

Okay. Perhaps we could find some language.

Yeah, let's find some language. We'll throw it to your office.

Okay. All right. We'll. We'll have SMA work on some language. For us, then we'll get that to. You and we'll have them check with you as well. Okay. For the Committee on Water and Land, Chair's recommendation on SB 1308 relating to plans to pass with amendments. Okay. Any discussions? Hearing None. Vice Chair for the vote. Chair goes Aye.

[Roll Call] Madam Chair, recommendations adopted.

Thank you. Your Committee. No, no, no.

Yeah. Government operations. Same recommendation. Senate draft 1. I vote Yay.

Members present. Are there any no votes or reservations for GBO? Senator, you need to say the quote. Oh, it is. Senate B13. Eight passing with amendments. [Roll Call]

Thank you, guys for helping me make it official.

Aloha, everybody. Welcome to the Committee. Joint Committee hearings of government operations and our amazing friends from agriculture and environment. I will turn it over to my co chair for housekeeping and for the builds. Okay.

Good afternoon. It's February 11th. We're convened here in room 225 and video conferencing which includes the audio and video of remote participants that's being streamed live on YouTube. And in the unlikely event that our hearing is cut short, we will reconvene business on Wednesday, February 12 during AEN's time slot and public notice will be posted.

And because of our 90 minute time limit, there will be a 2 minute time limit for all testifiers. And let's see. First measure is SB539 relating to toxic chemicals. Requires state agencies that monitor environmental toxins and pollutants to establish environmental action levels to ensure the preservation of a safe environment.

Prohibits modifications to EALs unless certain procedural requirements are met and establishes a process to allow any resident to petition for modifications to an established eal. First up, Hawaii State Department of Health.

Good afternoon. Chair Gabbard and Chair McKelvey, Members of the Committee. Grace Simmons representing the Department of Health. We stand on our written testimony providing comments and want to ensure that the Department is. It's important for us to maintain trust and communication with the community.

And our testimony outlines the fact that we do want to maintain our conversations with the community and we can do further education and provide training, excuse me, not training, provide webinars to the community. Thank you. Thank you.

Next up is Ted Boland from the Climate Protectors, Hawaii.

Good afternoon, Chair Gabbard, Chair McKelvey, let's see. Vice chairs, Members of the committees, Ted Boland. For the Climate Protectors, Hawaii environmental action levels are an important threshold, a basic tool to identify kind of goals and limits that ought to be realized in order to protect people from health risks.

There are various times when it's important to have these and I think this bill is a good bill to try to establish that fundamental environmental protection. So I urge you to pass the bill. I'm available for any questions if you have any. Thank you.

Thank you, Ted. Next is Melody Adduha from the Environmental Caucus of the Democratic Party.

Good afternoon. Chairs McKelvey and Chair Gabbard, thank you very much for this opportunity. This is a very good bill. We are very much in favor of it because the ESLs, they are essential for protecting public health and the environment from harmful contaminants.

And we know that the Department of Health has the jurisdiction over the EALs, which is the environmental action levels. Now this Bill is good because it provides that for public notice and a minimum of 30 day comment period before the Department of Health can modify the eals.

But more importantly, it also provides for a process for residents to petition for any modification of the EALs. And this is really important because there are discrepancies between the EALS and the EPA mcls, which is the maximum contaminant level. Let me give you an example.

We've got diopsins and furons, which is the most toxic chemical known to science and that occurs from waste incineration such as from H power. And for the EAL, according to the DOH, the parts per billion is 0.0004 parts per billion versus the MCL from the EPA is 0.0003 parts per billion. So there's that discrepancy.

We don't want to see that discrepancy. More importantly is regarding pfas. A lot of the pfas the Department of Health has been in alignment. However, there's one that's very important than which they are not and that is PFBF, in which case it's 2000 parts per trillion. And for the EPA's MCL it's 4 parts per trillion.

And this occurs in food, packaging materials, firefighting foam, nonstick cookware, stain resistant fabrics, waterproof items, a lot of consumables. And yet we are allowing for that high of an amount of PFBS. So therefore I would petition the DoH to make sure that it is congruent with the EPA mcl. Thank you very much for that opportunity.

Thank you Melody. Next up is Jamie on Zoom. Jamie, are you there on zoom?

Not present on Zoom Chair.

Okay, thank you. Also we have Kohar Bandera from Kalanani Ohana Farm in support as well as Sherry Pollock and Rosalie Luo also in support. Anyone else either online or present wanted to testify. Members, any questions?

Senator McKel guess it would be Department of Health. I'm just curious. Will this allow them to petition for the state standards? If they're deviating the federal right, this.

bill will allow that, yeah.

So what if the Feds eliminate? I'm hearing the Feds are going to wipe out or eliminate or severely revisit all of these standards under this new EPA. What if that happens?

Your guess is as good as mine. I'm sorry, I don't. I don't mean to be flippant, but may I ask our state toxicologist to join me? I mean there's some he might be able to explain some of these numbers. And you know what?

That's okay. To respect the Joint Committee's times, we'll follow this conversation offline. But it does throw an interesting monkey wrench into this bill as far as being carried out. So thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay, moving on to the second measure. On the agenda is SB617 relating to the environment. Requires for each draft environmental assessment and draft environmental impact statement a public hearing in the community directly affected by the underlying proposed action. First up is Mary Alice Evans from OTSD, the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development.

Thank you, Chairs and Members. We have comments with concerns, but we understand the issue that the bill is addressing. And we would be open to a different approach, which would be to amend the 343 rules to require a public meeting in a community that is directly affected by a proposed project.

We could do this by amending the rules. Doesn't have to require a statutory amendment that would then honor the drafter's intent, which is to have the public scoping meeting that applicants and proposing agencies are required to hold prior to issuing a draft. EIs in the community directly affected. And I think that makes a lot of sense.

Okay, thank you very much. Next is Emma Ewan from DLNR.

Department of Land and Natural Resources. And we did offer some comments with some concerns about the sometimes statewide types of projects that we. Issues such as biocontrol releases and the difficulty of having public hearings in those in this statewide.

And also the issues with, you know, the pandemic and all these other problems with air travel might also make this a bit difficult. So you have our comments. Thank you. Aloha.

Thank you. And we also have Kathy Goel, Stacy Alai and Ki Shizuma in support. Anyone else online or in person wanted to testify on this measure? Members, any questions? Okay. We have quorum.

Yes. Coming.

No, I'm with you.

At least you'll have. I gotta tell you the first ones.

Okay, we're ready to go.

Okay, we'll go right into decision making on SP5.

Wait a second, Wait a second. If we need Wood sheets, we have both sheets for gbu. Yeah, that's it.

Yeah. We got a vote sheet, right?

Yes.

All right. On SB539 related to toxic chemicals, the chair's recommendation requiring state agencies that monitor environmental toxins and pollutants to establish environmental action levels to ensure the preservation of a safe environment. The Chair's recommendation will be do pass, as is any discussion. Chair votes Aye. Senator Rhoads.

[Roll Call] Your recommendations adopted.

Okay, thank you. Committee on Government Operations. Same recommendation. Five39. Senate draft one. I vote yes.

Oh, yeah, sorry, where's my vote sheet? Chair votes aye. Vice Chair votes aye. [Roll Call]

And the measure passes. Shifting back here to SB617 on the requiring the public hearings for the EAs and for EISS. Chair's recommendation will be to pass with the amendments that was brought forth by the from OPSD to have a hearing in the infected community, wherever that is. Any discussion.

So it would be for the EISS but not for draft EA's?

Correct.

Okay.

And the public does have a Chance as a 30 day period for input on the EAs. Yeah.

So, yeah, I think this is focused more at specific projects in specific areas than generally statewide.

Okay. Okay. Any discussion? Chair votes Aye.

Chair recommendation. SB617 is to pass with amendments. [Roll Call]

Recommendations adopted. Thank you. Members. A Committee in Government Operations, Same Recommendation. Senate Bill 617, Senate Draft 1. I vote yes.

[Roll Call] Measure passes. We pal, right? We are pal.

And I'll do the honors.