Senate Standing Committee on Agriculture and Environment

Aloha and welcome to the hearing with Senate Committee on Economic Development and tourism. Today is February 11, Tuesday, this is one o' clock agenda and we are in conference room two to nine. Hearing is being streamed live on YouTube. An unlikely event that we must abruptly end this hearing due to technical difficulties.

The Committee will reconvene for any outstanding business on Thursday, February 13, 2025 at 1:05pm in Conference Room 2 to 9. We have several different agendas to go through today in our 90 minute slots. I encourage you all to stand on your testimony in support if we have questions.

I'm sure this committee has no problem asking every question that you need to be asked so please be a little patient with us. I am going to be taking some stuff out of order on this particular agenda.

We will hear first bill, Senate Bill 1061 and then I will recess and I will switch over to give to do the next two agendas because of time constraints and people having to leave. So first up, Senate Bill 106-1061 relating to digital equity. First testifier, Lieutenant Governor Sylvia Luke.

Thank you. Good afternoon.

Thank you. Next up, Derek Yoshimi from University of Hawaii.

Supported with comments. Happy to answer your questions.

Thank you. Next up, late testifier Rosie Davis in support on Zoom.

Aloha. Can you folks see me? Sorry, yes. My name is Rosie Davis. I'm the Executive Director of Maui County Area Health Education center and we have a history with digital equity. We have gone throughout the island of Molokai and we have a need for digital equity on our island.

We also would like to support this bill in strong favor of this Bill. We provide telehealth, we provide mini clinics and I think Molokai should be included in this bill. We ask for your support and thank you.

Aloha, thank you. Anybody else in this room wishing to testify in this measure? Seeing non Committee Members. Any questions?

Since she made it a point to come down to see us, we should ask her a couple questions. Lieutenant Governor, I've been waiting for this for a long time. Since you were a finance chair, I've been always waiting.

So you know, I know that the feds have put money in for this for broadband and so forth and then this bill has an appropriation. So it's is this going to be federal monies or is this state money?

Yeah. So the current bill as drafted it was General funds but at this point in time we don't require General funds. Because the Federal Government provided significant funds. That these navigators that we're discussing can. Be funded through federal funds.

Yeah, if you want to. Or I think, because this bill, along with there's other digital equity bills or digital or broadband bills, you know, our hope is we combine all the efforts and perhaps fix it up at some point because there are other bills moving as well.

Okay, so we should make that change.

Okay, so one consolidated. Yeah. Okay. Can you. Anything else I can ask her?

That's hard since you got here. The money part out of the way. Anybody else have any questions? Seeing none, I will recess this agenda. Recess. Okay.

Hi. Welcome to a hearing with joint Senate Committee on Economic Development and Consumer- Commerce and Consumer Protection. Today is 11, 2025, Tuesday. This is our 1:02 pm agenda, and we're in conference from 229. We have one bill on this agenda. We'll start off with Senate Bill 135 relating to the labeling of macadamia nuts.

Each testifier has one minute. First up on the testifiers list, we have Hawaii Farm Bureau, Brian Miyamoto.

Thank you, Chair. The Hawaii Farm Bureau will stand on its written testimony, respectfully opposing this measure.

Thank you. Next up, Haleakaloha testifying for Hawaiian Host Group.

Thank you. Next up, Ed Schultz on Zoom.

Hi. Both joint committee chairs. This is Ed Schultz. I'm the CEO of Hawaiian Host Group. We strongly support SB 135 as we feel, you know, over the course of the time that it's going to take the island to get together and build a processing facility that benefits everybody, small growers, large growers and jobs in Hawaii.

It is important that we have the entire industry focused on a processing solution. We feel this amendment, you know, we'll do that to the bill that was signed last year.

And lastly, I'll just say that it- it will, you know, we're open to a date, a deferred date change, but we feel it is necessary so that again, we get all parties together, big and small growers, working on a solution for everyone.

And if we don't have this, we- we fear that it is going to be some and not everybody included. And we- we just. It is- It is important that we do this. Thank you.

Thank you. Next up, Nathan Trump, Hawaii Mac Nut Association, on Zoom.

Aloha. Chair DeCoite, Chair Keohokalole, members of the committee. Stand on our written testimony in opposition. We feel like we need to focus on investing in infrastructure and not on labeling for processing macadamia nuts. Thanks.

Thank you. Next up, Jeffrey Clark testifying for Hamakua Mac Nut Company on Zoom.

Aloha. Chairs, vice chairs, members of the committees, thank you for hearing this. My name is Jeff Clark. I'm the President of Hamakua Macadamia Nut Company and we are opposed to this laws written. There's existing law in the books that govern made in Hawaii processing labeling already.

We also oppose it because there's not enough processing in the state to process all the macadamia nuts that are grown in the state. Therefore it's impossible to have them all processed here in the state. So we stand in opposition. Thank you.

Thank you. Next up, Rod Schiffer, senior manager, Hawaiian Host Group in support. Michelle Leongrero, Hawaiian Host Group in support. Hawaii Food policy team testifying in support. Kamala Grace in support. Merle Alvarado in support. Andrew Trump in opposition. Bonnie Self in opposition. Ish Jarrah in support. Glenn Yamasaki in support. And Bea Anderson in opposition.

Anybody else in the room willing to testify in this bill? Seeing none. Committee members, any questions?

Yeah, I have a question for maybe Hamakua Macadamia Nut Company.

Am I- Am I reading your testimony right? You oppose including products that reference macadamia nuts that are processed outside of Hawaii, but you want to strengthen the labeling law for macadamia nuts sold in Hawaii that are grown in Hawaii?

Yes.

I oppose the law because of the timing that I have no problem with. I like the idea of having something that strengthens processing in Hawaii, but currently we don't have the infrastructure, ironically because of the factory that was closed by Hawaiian hosts back in 2022. So it's impossible to process everything.

I'm not opposed to a law that does that, but the time would have to move out many years to allow to- to build a facility eventually to be able to process everything here.

What- Do you know? Or I guess, well, this question isn't limited to you, but I'm asking you.

Yeah.

Where are we with the- with the construction or the plans for construction of a new facility on Hawaii Island?

It's very early. The Governor just signed- just awarded some money to be- to start the process to bring on some engineers to design a facility. So it's still very early on in that process. So probably several years in the making before anything gets built.

So after the construction of the facility then I'm assuming there wouldn't be any opposition to this?

No.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you, chair.

Yes.

Any other questions? From the committee? DOA Department of Bank.

Good afternoon, Chair.

Good afternoon. How will this bill affect Hawaii producers either positively or negatively?

Good afternoon. Cedric Gates, Department of Agriculture. With this bill, I know there is, I guess both ends of it have something to gain for both sides. I guess for the department's stance. We haven't, I don't think, submitted testimony on this measure.

But I know from dealing with this issue that with the labeling right now, people are able to go here and exp- and send out the mac nuts to be processed in foreign countries and then still have the labeling of being 100% Hawaii grown. And I think that this bill is trying to address that issue.

If it's not being processed and grown here, the labeling should reflect that.

So I guess my bigger question is, have any Hawaii processors contacted you with problems that they have with the current labeling law?

I believe that there have been some challenges with that in terms of big markets requiring those labeling laws.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any other questions? Seeing none, we will go into decision making now. Okay. Okay. Decision making. So, you know, after, after a lot of the testimony, reviewing the testimonies that we've had, you know, there have been a lot of mixed information, mixed messages. The testimony we received has mixed concerns raised on both sides of the bill.

I'm going to defer this bill indefinitely and hopefully you guys can spend some time together working on it. With that being said, this hearing is adjourned.

Okay. Good afternoon. This is Tuesday, February 11, 2025. This is the 1:06pm agenda in Conference 229, Conference Room 229 at the Capitol. We're reconvening on SB 1601. This measure was heard by the joint committees of Economic Development and Tourism and Commerce and Consumer Protection relating to condominiums.

After conferring with the EDT chair on this measure, the recommendation on this bill is to pass with amendments inserting language to clarify that the HPIA may contract with community development financial institutions for the condominium loan program. Clarifying loan eligibility conditions.

Clarifying the condominium loan loss reserves program is intended to incentivize community development financial institutions to provide loans at competitive rates and terms to condominium associations to allow them to make necessary maintenance and repairs.

Clarifying that the condominium loan revolving Fund shall be audited by a firm of independent certified public accountants selected by the HGIA and that the Hawaii Green Infrastructure Authority and that the HGIA shall provide the results of the audit to the Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism and the Legislature and inserting a defective effective date of July 1, 2050 to encourage further discussion.

The first provision pertains to HPIA. Okay, thanks. Okay. Yeah. Any other discussion? Seeing none. Vice Chair passing with amendments. Chair votes aye.

Is it HPIA or HDIA the whole way through?

Members, any comments or questions? Senator McKelvey.

I'm so excited you can't find a vote?

Thank you, Vice Chair also votes aye. Senator McKelvey. Yes. Senator Richards is excused. Senator Awa, your measure is adopted.

Committee on Economic Development and Tourism. Same request for the vote. Chair votes aye.

Aye vote yes. Senator Fukunaga, aye. Senator Kim. Aye. Senator awa, aye Chair your recommendations adopted. Thank you.

Thank you.

And with that, we are adjourned. Thank you.

Reconvening back on our agenda for what? The one o' clock with Economic Development in Tourism. Moving on to Senate Bill 1657 relating to agribusiness Development Corporation. First up testifying is Don Chang for Department of Land and Natural Resources.

Department stands on it's written testimony, offering comments.

Thank you. Next up, Agri Development Corporation, Wendy Gady.

Chair, vice chair, Wendy Gady of ADC. We stand in support of this measure and are available for comments.

Thank you. Anybody else wishing to testify on this matter? Seeing none. Committee, any questions? ADC.

Hi, Wendy.

Hi.

So do you currently see lands that you will seek to condemn if this bill passes? And if yes, where do you see those lands at?

Chair, it's Wendy Gady with ADC and we currently do not have anything specified on our radar for future condemnation.

Thank you. Members, any questions? Okay. See none. Moving on to Senate Bill 1539 relating to Agribusiness Development Corporation. First up, Wendy Gady, Agri Development Corporation.

Moving on to Senate Bill 1539. Relating to Agribus Development Corporation. First up Wendy Gady, Agri Development Corporation.

Chair, vice chair, members of the committee, I'm Wendy Gady with ADC. And the Waiahole water system feeds 5,000 acres. It has over 70 farmers. The majority of the land is already zoned IAL. The original bond was for $8.5 million. The farmers and therefore the community, the people of Hawaii that buy local product have already paid 9.6 million.

And we're asking for 4.4 to save the Hawaii people $5.6 million. And I'm available for any questions.

Thank you. Next up, Brian Miyamoto, Hawaii Farm Bureau.

Thank you chair. The Hawaii Farm Bureau will stand on it's written testimony in support.

Thank you. Next up, Hunter Hevlin in support. David Arakawa in support. Leah Iaya in support. Larry Jeffs in support. Robbie Melton in support. Julian Chiabo in support. And Bill Goetz Caldera in support. Anybody else wishing to testify in this measure? Seeing none. Members, any questions? Seeing none. ADC.

Wendy, how many more farms can the Waiahole water system support in the future?

It depends on the si- I'm sorry, chair. Wendy with ADC. It depends on the size of the farms. But I can see, and I have actually talked to Chair Chang about potentially expanding the footprint. And I'm going to say it three times. Not asking for more water. Not asking for more water.

Not asking for more water. To include additional areas. And I would say you're looking at at least 20 to 30 additional farms that could benefit from having this water service.

So I guess my next question would be then, if your farm was the size of Larry Jeff's, how many more of Larry Jeff's farms could absorb the waihole ditch?

One, two.

Okay, so 20 of his farms could not absorb the waiahole ditch.

No, I'm looking at most of the users. I would say 90% of the users are small and medium and they are immigrant farmers.

Small is 1 acre, 2 acres, 5 acres?

It's 10 acres.

10 acres.

Or 10 to 20.

Okay, thank you. Any other questions from the committee? Okay. Seeing none. Moving on to SB 891 relating to economic development. First up, DBEDT, James Tokioka.

Okay.

Jimmy Tokioka. DBEDT offers comments on this bill, and I'm available for any questions that the committee may need.

Thank you.

I'm sorry. We agree with portions of it. There's some portions that we would like to still have discussions with it, but--

Okay, thank you. Next up, Chris Sadayasu.

We stand in our, on our comments. Thank you, chair.

Thank you. Next up, Daniel Naho'opi'i for HTA.

Aloha. Daniel Naho'opi'i with HTA. We stand on our testimony with comments.

Thank you. Next up, Erin Midby, testifying for Boyd Gaming.

Good afternoon, chair, members of the committee. Thank you so much for bringing and hearing this bill. I'm Erin Midby with Boyd Gaming Corporation. We stand in strong support of this measure and offered some amendments in our testimony, and I'm happy to answer any questions. We think this is a phenomenal first step for the state to consider a comprehensive gaming public policy framework. So thank you very much.

Thank you. Next up, Stanford Carr for Stanford Carr Development, in support, John Kealoha Garcia, testifying for Nation of Hawaii in opposition, Brandon Makaawaawa. Aloha.

Aloha. I'm here today to oppose this bill. I believe that the Native Hawaiian people have a right to be at this table right now and I don't think we're represented much in a lot of these new industries that come out, but the state has a obligation for reconciliation for our people, and these gaming bills that are coming out, we should be included because we will be the most affected by it and I believe leaving us out of the equation is not in adherence with free and prior and informed consent. I believe it is in violation of U.S. Public Law 103-150.

And I encourage the Senator and everyone here to please include some of our voices because we've been meeting with Native American leaders all across this country trying to understand what gaming, the benefits are and the negatives to it, and I believe that leaving our voice out and including voice of industry people instead is not going to give us the result that I think we're looking for which is a beneficial result as much as possible. So I think Hawaiians need to be at this table. Mahalo.

Thank you. Next up, Pu'u Anua Ponki Konahile.

Just wanted to add that my testimony I submitted yesterday, this historical context, Akaka Bill and the redaction of gaming rights for Native Hawaiians, it is also essential to recognize the history surrounding the Akaka Bill which sought federal recognition for Native Hawaiians in 1998 when this bill was first introduced. Gaming provisions were initially included as part of the discussion.

However, in a significant step backward for our community, the provisions were later redacted, effectively preventing Native Hawaiians from having a say in in the future of gaming development within our own homeland. Akaka Bill's passage without gaming provisions marked a loss of self-determination and a denial of our ability to participate in the economic opportunities that could help sustain and strengthen our community.

These Senate Bills 891 and 893, by further entrenching external control over gaming, continue the historic--the history of exclusion and further diminish our ability to address the economic needs of our people. Thank you.

Mahalo. Thank you. Next up, Jacob Wiencek, in support, and then Natalie Graham Wood, in opposition. Anybody else wishing to testify on this measure? Seeing none. Members, any questions? Senator Kim.

DBEDT. So, Jim, reading this bill, how many members will be on this?

Two, three, four, five, six, seven--ten.

I count ten, but then it says, 'other interested parties with relevant experience and expertise invited by the co-chairs of the working groups.' So does that mean it can be on the committee, or how does that work?

I guess that's the part I was talking about, clarification for all of us. And the other thing specific to that which my testimony was with comments is we're asked to oversee this but we're not on the committee.

Okay, well it helps when you have those kinds of comments that you articulated because you just stand on your testimony without articulating. The public don't know. I mean, we got it in writing, but the public don't have an understanding where you're coming from on this.

Thank you.

How many, how many bills and studies have there been on gaming in the last ten years?

Can I call up Dr. Tian? He's been doing this more than anybody else.

Currently, I'm leading a working group and Senator DeCoite is a member. It's called Sports Wagering Group. So this is only the working group on any type of sports.

You didn't answer my question. How many studies are those in the past so many years?

We did only one. It's a shipboard, shipboard company. It was done 30 years ago.

Well, I'm looking at a gaming timeline back from June 1997, 95. Bills: Senate Bill 14: Gaming and Lottery, Senate Bill 1237: Gaming Slot Machines, Senate Bill 1238: Gaming Slot Machines, Senate Bill 2004, Senate Bill 2867. House bills is about--I don't know--two, four, six, eight, ten, twelve house bills. 2011 to 2012--my God--Senate Bill 602, Senate Bill 1097, Senate Bill 1528. And you saying there's only one shipboard?

Yeah. We never did any study on any of the bills. We did only one about letting--

I didn't ask you on a study of the bill, I asked you how many bills and how many studies--how many bills have been introduced over the years and how many studies have we done? That was my question.

I believe, I think most of the bills has nothing to do--you know, we are not involved. DBEDT was not involved.

That's not my question. My question is--

We did only one study.

Do you know how many bills have been introduced over the last ten years on gaming?

I'm sorry, I don't know that.

Okay, then. Thank you. Okay. But I would think you folks would want to look at the multitude of what we've had in the past. If this group is going to be looking at everything, we should be looking at all of that.

So, Senator, in our discussions about this specific bill, that's exactly what we talked about: getting all the information from all of the different bills that were heard at the Legislature prior, getting all of that information to give to whatever this group turns out to be and have that discussion there. But as Dr. Tian said, it's never been requested to have a working group like this that passed anyway.

Understand, but if we're here for information and a public hearing for the public, they should have understanding what we're talking about as to why perhaps this group might be needed if these bills continually get introduced year after year, and studies have been asked for, constitutional amendments have been asked for in this measure because I know I've introduced a couple of them.

So I just think that, you know, when we're talking about stuff like that, you folks should have some of this information if you're supporting it as to why--because if we already have that information, how many bills, then we don't need a group for that, but if we're going to analyze and look at it, I don't know what you're going to come up with just looking at the number of bills and what topics they hit because it doesn't necessarily give any kind of data or any kind of justification in the bill itself because you know anybody can introduce any kind of bill.

Right. So if the Legislature decides that we should do gambling of some sort, then certainly we need to get more information to talk about the pros and cons of what that could be--beneficial, whether it's financially beneficial, whether it's good for the community and all of that, and so I think this bill tries to address some of that, but it just, we just need to get a little bit more clarity.

Do you guys have recommendations?

Well, one of them. One of them is to have, to have us in the, on the working group because we have to, we have to convene this group and, you know--

You can convene it and not be on it.

Well, it's in here. All the different things that the bill is asking for broadly touches the things that I just said.

Okay, but what is, what is your recommendation for the number of members on the group? Because you don't want to have it too big, you don't have it too small, so--

Exactly. We don't want it--I would say that, you know, the comment that this gentleman brought up about having Hawaiians on--and I saw you shaking your head with yes--I think that's a great request. We would have to work with you on what that number is, and you guys will ultimately be the--

Well, ideally, right? I mean, you can just have other interested parties--

Yeah, I mean you kind of have more than 21 because it's just, it's hard to convene. You all know, we all know that when you have way too many people, it's hard to get quorum, it's hard to get people together. Maybe--ten is certainly not enough.

Fifteen?

All right. We'll take 15, yeah. Seven in that area.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you. Any others? Senator Fevella.

Thank you for allowing me in your awesome committee, chair. My concern was, previously, this commission thing was heard in a previous committee and the people that was testifying on the Zoom, I asked them the question, 'how is this commission is going to be formed?' It's the same thing I'm asking and I know it's being talked about.

And you know the people that was on the Zoom at that time, not one local person was going to be on the commission. I know this one is a little bit different, but having outside entities from other continents coming here telling Hawaiians--I just gonna say Hawaiians because we're all Hawaiian, yeah--how to do things, not gonna be too good for the people.

And I know you're gonna do the best and, you know, you're a good deputy over there, but do the best to keep our local people engaged. But again, we gotta make sure that our people have a seat at the table.

So just give you a background. I'm gonna give you this. Since 1995 to 2012, there was over 20 gaming bills, a lot from the House, too much from the Senate. But I guess all the bills didn't do well.

I'm gonna give you this so you get an idea and then you guys can stop whatever, whatever the committee decide. You guys gonna decide, but my thing that I want to emphasize is that make sure that our people have a seat at the table first.

And I think, Senator Fevella, I think it's in the bill, the way it's drafted, especially the first three are certainly House and Senate, and so I know that that's going to be at the top of the mind when the House and Senate makes their selections, and then when the--Number Seven--three members from the public, in my mind the public means people from Hawaii.

Yeah, I understand that and that's not a problem. Three--what is the specification? Three Hawaii people. I mean, I understand that. Hawaii people in a sense of what? What I'm--okay, nevermind.

No, no. I think what, what we're going to probably do is name them, Senator Fevella, so name the three that you can--we can discuss.

Yeah, but I would also say to the chairs and the members is that we also need the expertise too. I don't think anybody's saying that we don't. So that, I get that over here that was inserted into the bill, but I'm--I, I'm with you 200%, Senate. With this one, 200%.

Okay, thank you. Thank you, chair, for your time.

Thank you. Any other questions from the committee? So--oh, sorry. Since you guys here, so the Legislature has not passed legislation relating to any form of gaming. So this bill attempts to frame a comprehensive gaming policy that can serve as a catalyst for economic development activities. Can DBEDT assist the working group to do this and what do you estimate it would cost us to support this group in preparing our report for 2026 Legislature?

The first question is yes. The second question, the cost, I don't want to shoot out a number right off the top of my head right now. We've got to go back and huddle and, if you pressure me, I'll give you an answer that might not be the right answer, I don't know. But I think we--I know we can go back and come up with a number for you.

Okay, thank you. Any other questions? Seeing none. We're going to recess for decision making.

Okay, thank you.

Reconvening for decision making on Senate Bill 1061 relating to digital equity. The amendments we're going to pass with an SD1 and include Molokai and Lanai in Section 2. See on page 2 of the Bill.

And we will make any technical amendments and defect effective date to July 1, 2050. Included in the recommendations from the Lieutenant Governor and incorporate them in the Committee report to enable further discussion on this Bill. Any discussion? Seeing none. Vice Chair for the vote. Chair goes aye.

[Roll Call] Chair your recommendations adopted.

Thank you. Next up. Senate Bill 1657 relating to the Agribusiness Development Corporation. We will pass this with an SD1 and make any technical amendments as necessary and defect effective date to July 1, 2050. Any discussion Members? Seeing none. Vice Chair for the vote. Chair goes aye.

Aye vote yes. Senator Fukunaga, Senator Kim. Aye. Senator awa. Aye. Chair your recommendations adopted.

Thank you. Next Bill, Senate Bill 1539 relating to the Agribusiness Development Corporation. We will pass this also as an SD1 and make any technical amendment as necessary and defect the effective date to July 1, 2050. Any discussion? Seeing none. Vice Chair for the vote. Chair goes aye.

I vote yes. [Roll Call] Chair, your recommendations adopted.

Thank you. Next up, Senate Bill 891 SD1 relating to economic development. While we had a lot of discussion on this bill, I know it takes a lot of work to even address what we've been talking about for many many years. So I am going to pass this with an SD1 by making the following changes on page 1,

line 1, insert tourism and before gaming working group page 1, line 8 insert tourism before gaming policy, page 3, line 1 D, make appropriate changes to reimburse expenses incurred by and those who are employed by the state and those who are members who do not represent for profit gaming organizations.

Members from private gaming organizations must pay their own expenses for serving on the working group. And then in- then on line seven, page two, actually line 17, number seven we are going to add. We're deleting number seven and we will add a seat for one Native Hawaiian. Also one from social services dealing with addiction and behavior.

Also adding seat for Department of Business Economic Development DBED for adding a member of the law enforcement agency and number five or not number five and adding the fifth seat, somebody within the Tax Department or somebody in the professional capacity of tax. And then making any- make any technical amendments as necessary and effective date to July 1st, 2050 and incorporating any recommendations from DBEDT to relate to the staffing of the working group in the committee report.

Note, LRB can be asked to report on past gaming legislation. And deleting number eight on line 19. Members, any questions or discussion? Okay, seeing none. Vice chair for the vote. Chair goes aye.

I vote yes. [Vote is called]. Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. And with that we are adjourned.

Hello and welcome to the hearing with Senate Committee on Economic Development and Tourism. Today is Tuesday, February 11, 2025 and this is our 1:05 pm agenda. We are in Conference Room 229. This agenda is a decision-making for SB 1641 relating to the State of Hawaii Film Commission.

Members have a copy of the amendments and will be passing this Bill out as an SD1. So.

Members, any discussion questions? Okay, so relating to the State of Hawaii Film Commission. Recess.

Senate Bill 1641 decision-making relating to the State of Hawaii Film Commission. It establishes the State of Hawaii Film Commission within the Hawaii Film Office as administratively attached to the Department of Business, Economic Development and Tourism to support the state's film and media industries. It requires the reports to the Legislature and appropriate funds.

So Senate Bill 1641 decision-making. One is first to fix the description below the title by inserting Hawaii Film Office as administratively attached to the Department of Business, Economic Development and tourism. Two, to establish the Hawaii State Film Office in DBED. Establishes powers and duties of the office including prioritizing development and support of cultural productions.

Require annual reports to the Legislature. Three, establishes the film Commission within the office. Director of DBED is Chair. It clarifies the membership and duties of the Commission. Four, establishes the Hawaii Film and Creative Industries Development and makes special funds and make conforming amendments. Members, any questions? Seeing none. Vice Chair for the vote. Chair goes aye.

I vote yes. [Roll Call] Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you. And with that we are adjourned.

Aloha and welcome to the hearing with Joint Senate Committee on Economic Development, Tourism and Agriculture and environment. Today's Tuesday, February 11, 2025. This is our 1:01 pm agenda in Conference Room 229. We have two bills on the agenda. We'll start off with Senate Bill 522 relating to Halaula Agriculture Parcel. First up, Department of Agriculture.

Good afternoon. Chairs, Vice Chairs, Members of the Committee, Cedric Gates here on behalf of the Department of Agriculture. The Department stands on interest in support here for any questions.

Thank you. Next Up, Wendy Gady from Agro Development Corporation.

Good afternoon. Chairs, vice chairs, Members of the Committee and we stand in strong support and have your friends.

Thank you. Next up, Farm Bureau, Brian Miyamoto.

Thank you. Chairs, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Brian Miyamoto here on behalf of the Hawaii Farm Bureau. You have a written testimony support. We just wanted to highlight a couple of things. We support this effort.

In fact, this Committee or the Economic Development Committee just passed a similar Bill, SB 1003, which asked the ADC to purchase land in Kau. So we did ask that the Legislature look at other areas of Hawaii island and this does that. But we also requested the Legislature consider Maui County, also. We'd like to increase ADC's portfolio.

Again, these lands, any ag lands that are up for sale are in jeopardy of being developed the wrong way. Gentlemen farms or the state has a mission to promote agriculture with ADC. So we are in strong support of this measure. Thank you for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you. Next up, Nathan Trump on Zoom testifying for Island Harvest.

Aloha Chair DeCoite, Chair Gabbard. Nathan Trump on behalf of Island Harvest Macadamia Nut Company located very near the Halal agricultural parcel. We believe that this parcel has a lot of agricultural potential and would be best suited under the management of Agribusiness Development Corporation. Thank you for the testimony available for questions.

Thank you. We have a lot of people in support for this measure. Bill Chantel Koala Corporation in support. North Koala, John Winter in support. Leland Park, North Kaula Community Resource in support. Kaula Medical Herb Farm in support. Botello and Hawaii Enterprises in support of Hawaii Food. Janie Mariano in support. Caroline Ozelski in support.

Donna Malt, Shannon Atkinson, Beth Robinson, Rasha Marie, Billy Wong, Tanisha Gasper, Marley Reese, all in support. And the list goes on. We have one person in opposition, Sadie Garcia. Is there anybody else in the room wishing to testify on this measure? Seeing none. Members, any questions? Okay. Seeing none.

Moving on to Senate Bill 558 relating to value added products. First up, Department of Business Economic Development team.

Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Community, we stand in strong support on this measure.

Thank you. Next up, Department of Ag. Thank you. Next up Agri Development Corporation, Wendy Gady.

Good afternoon, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. Wendy Gady, ADC and this is not a paid endorsement that I was over on Maui in October for two different conferences. I had my son with me and it was the first chance I had to really tour the Maui Innovation Center.

They did not know that I was coming so they couldn't stage it. But the number of farmers and the amount of energy and the number of people using that facility with is absolutely astonishing to me.

And then after the conference they were having kind of a market of some of the entrepreneurs under a giant, literally a giant tent. And that was fun to see and it really caught the interest of my son in all of the different opportunities that there are in regards to value added product.

But I am going to be meeting with the Maui Innovation center on Friday because they are asking for support of this and we're asking to do this statewide and fulfill our statute.

Thank you. Next up, University of Hawaii, Della Teraoka.

On behalf of the community colleges, we stand on our written testimony in support of Senate Bill 558.

Thank you. Next up, Brian Miyamoto, Hawaii Farm Bureau.

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

Thank you. Myong O for Local Food Coalition.

Aloha, Chair and Vice Chair. Local Food Coalition standouts in its recent testimony and support.

Thank you. Next up, Mariah Yoshizu, Ulupono Initiative, in support. Lawrence Zurbo, Hawaii Food Industry Association, in support. Ronald Waden Bach, Hawaii Fish Company in support. Kohler Hor Bundero, support. Julian Kiabo, in support. Pamela Tumpa, Maui Chamber of Commerce, in support. Sherman Orr, Chamber of Hawaii in support. Geistier President, Hawaii Forest Industry Association in support.

Anybody else wishing to testify on this measure? Oh, hang on. We have somebody on Zoom. Alex, Alexis Champion, go ahead.

Good afternoon, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. I'm actually Alexis Chapman for HFI in place of Lawrence Herbal. We are. We have HFI has proudly produced the main Hawaii festival for over 30 years and we stand on our testimony and support and I'd be happy to answer any questions.

Thank you. Anybody else wishing to testify? Seeing none. Any questions from the Members? Seeing none. Okay. With that, we're going straight into decision making. First up, Senate Bill 522 relating to the Halaula Agriculture Parcel passing when SD1 and making any technical amendments is necessary and defect effective date to July 1, 2050. Any discussion?

Seeing none, register for the vote. Chair goes aye.

[Roll Call] Chair, your recommendations adopted.

Thank you. Next up, Senate Bill 558 relating to that. Oh, yeah, sorry, sorry.

Same recommendation on SB 522. Members for AEN. Any questions? Concerns? Chair votes aye. Senator Rhoads?

Chair's recommendation SB522 is do pass with amendments. [Roll Call] Recommendations adopted. Thank you Members.

Thank you. Next Bill, Senate Bill 558 relating to value-added products. We will pass this on SD1 and defect the effective date to July 1, 2050. Any discussion? Seeing none. Vice Chair for the vote. Chair votes aye.

I vote yes. [Roll Call] Chair, Recommendations adopted.

Thank you.

Same recommendation for AEN on SB 558. Any discussion? Chair votes aye. Senator Rhoads.

Chair's recommendation SB 558 is to pass with amendments. Chair Gabbard votes yes. Senator Richards is excused. [Roll Call] Recommendations adopted.

Thank you. And with that, we are adjourned.

Aloha and welcome to hearing with the Joint Senate Committee on Economic Development, Tourism and Government Operations. Today is Tuesday, February 11, 2025. This is our 1:03 pm agenda and we are in Conference Room 229. We have one bill on this agenda and we'll start off with Senate Bill 583 relating to naming rights.

First up, Director Budget and Finance with comments. Okay, next up, Chris Sadayasu for Stadium Authority Department.

Good evening chairs. Chris Sadayasu with the Stadium Authority. Testimony in support. Thank you.

Okay, Next up, Daniel Nahoopii HTA.

Aloha chairs and committee members the Hawaii Tourism Authority stands on its support of SB 583.

Thank you. Next up, Winston Welch in opposition and in person.

Aloha Senators. My name is Winston Welch. I'm Executive Director at the Outdoor Circle and we stand on our opposition to 583. It's going to be 100 years next year since the people of Hawaii came together and unanimously rejected billboards, off site advertising, logos, naming rights and the like.

We saw that the public's feelings on this last year with overwhelming testimony against the stadium and convention center, naming rights and sponsorship. This bill is even more troublesome and egregious in that it encompasses all state facilities. It offers them for sale or for lease. How difficult would it be to reverse a sale?

People and companies fall in and out of favor. Think of Enron or Bill Cosby. What buildings and facilities had their names stripped after those scandals? We ask that you keep the public assets and facilities with locally relevant place names, flora, fauna, historical persons or people with decades of service to Hawaii.

Even from a branding perspective, Hawaii Aloha Stadium or Kamehameha Stadium certainly has more resonance compared to Miller Light Stadium or Union Carbide Stadium. The courts have also found--

-that our preservation is very strict. For this we urge you to reject Senate Bill 583. Thank you.

Thank you Mr. Welch your time is up we have your testimony.

Thank you. Next up, Whitney. Also- Also in opposition. Anybody else wishing to testify on this measure? Seeing none. Members, any questions?

Quick question.

Go- Go ahead. Senator McKelvey.

Oh, it's hard to see. Is BNF around? They've only submitted written. No. Okay, Chris, I guess you're the lucky guy. Closest thing to a state I see here, so. I noticed the BNF testimony which could talk about huge tax liabilities to the State of Hawaii because of the tax incremental financing prohibits the usage of.

Have you guys looked at that testimony? Do you have any response to the concerns they put out there on this whole thing?

Senator, thank you. No, I haven't seen their testimony. No.

Okay, but check it out when you get a chance because it's definitely informative. Some potential unintended cytokines.

Yes, thank you.

Thank you, Chair.

Anybody else, any questions? Senator Wakai.

Chris, you can- you can stay there.

This bill doesn't say anything about billboards, right? I mean you could have the naming rights of your stadium and like simplify arena at UH, Stan Sheriff Center. There's no simplifying outside of the stadium. So the discussion of somehow this circumventing the billboard law is to simply not true.

Thanks Senator.

I did not see any language that- that exempted anything from the billboard laws.

Right, so it will allow you to sell naming rights to whoever might want to associate themselves with any parts of your entertainment district, but doesn't mean that we're going to emblazon that entity's name to showcase the people on the freeway and in the neighborhood. Correct?

Correct.

And then tell us about how important this is at this juncture of your stadium development. I understand your negotiations with Stanford Carr. Wouldn't this be an added tool for him to ultimately give the public a better, bigger, better, more luxurious stadium than what $350 million can buy?

You are correct, yes. As part of his financing and the development of it, it would benefit from this revenue source.

Thank you. Thank you chair.

Thank you, Senator Kim.

Well, I'm going to just follow up on GOV chairs concerns and reference to the BNF testimony and I think I should read it for the record. They say they have serious concerns that payments remaining rights for improvement finance by tax exempt bonds will be considered private business use under the Internal Revenue Code.

Federal tax law imposes restrictions on the private use of the proceeds of taxes and bonds and on the capital improvement projects finance with such proceeds. Tax exempt bonds have been used to finance CIPs throughout the state.

Failure to comply with the federal rules on the private use of bond proceeds and bond finance property could jeopardize the tax exempt status of the bonds resulting in significant adverse consequences to bondholders or forcing the state to incur costly measures to remediate the tax law violations. So hearing that, what's your thoughts?

We'd have to confer with them to- to and accept their testimony as correct. And so I defer to them on their--

Well, I would hope- You guys meet, right? Don't you guys have cabinet meetings? Regular cabinet meetings?

I'm- I'm not part of that. Sorry.

Yeah, but the department heads do, right?

Yes.

So you would think they would talk about some of this stuff, right? Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Any other questions from- Senator Wakai?

So, Chris, I know that Stanford is looking for tax increment financing as a potential tool here, right?

But he doesn't have it. So that idea of th- this jeopardizing TIF, that probably doesn't exist because you don't even have the benefit of tax increment financing at this juncture.

Yes.

At this juncture. But it is being explored. But yes, not at this juncture.

So if the TIF were to go through, this- it only allows you to do this, then you could just say, I don't want to do this, and then we can let the TIF go.

Because the TIF would probably bring in more revenue.

So this just gives you another option. If TIF doesn't happen, you can raise revenue. This way, if TIF happens, you don't have to effectuate any of the language in this bill.

Correct.

Well, I would think you need to articulate that somewhere because just the way the bill is written is really doesn't- It's not clear. Certainly not clear to the public, certainly not clear to- to BNF.

Thank you.

Senator Gabbard.

Question. So who makes the final decision in terms of the name rights? And number one, and number two, what happens when you have more than one party that is it the highest bid? What's the criteria?

Yeah, I mean, it'd be negotiated with the same authority as well as the Aloha Lava District Partners and be by a highest bid. Or we would ask for proposals as to how much they would provide in revenue.

I see. Thank you.

What if there's opposition? Like, what if you put in, you know, some cannabis name or some, you know. What if I mean, the public don't like it? I mean, is there a recourse?

It's something that had to be considered by the stadium authority and voted upon.

But it's not just the stadium authority. It still applies to across the board. Right. All state facilities.

I'm speaking for the stadium.

Yeah, but I'm saying that's the recourse. There needs to be some because we may not agree with the naming. Just because they're giving us, you know, $1.0 trillion, we still might not agree with the name. Right. So there needs to be some detailed process on how that will be selected.

Senator McKelvey.

It's real quickly. On the BNF thing, one last thing it talks about about tax exempt bonds generally, not just tip. So we- do we use tax exempt bonds for financing these public projects normally? I mean--

I would defer to BNF, but I believe general obligation bonds are- are--

Yeah. So pretty much anything with GO bonds would fall under this. So it's not just about TIF, right. It's also about the general financing that we use right now. So. Okay, thank you for the clarification chair. Appreciate you letting me jump in there.

Just following up. So who gets notified when a public building is being renamed?

That's- It depends if it's DAGS, if it's stadium, if it's Tourism Authority, I'm not sure who owns it. But we would provide the public notice through for the stadium through a board meeting and then there'd be a decision making process.

Okay, and then how will you determine a price for the naming rate?

It'd be negotiated between us and the developer as well as the advertiser for the entity.

Okay.

Any- Assemblymember Wakai--

Well, the airport was renamed. Was anybody notified? We did we do a resolution on that was a reso. But that was it.

I mean Assemblymember Kim.

So--

I'm not sure did Daniel Ko.

Well, there were a lot of names.

Opposition.

Highway names.

I mean, you know, different type of names in UH does a lot of naming too. So I think if this is going to be all encompassing that we should have an all encompassing procedure and process to follow for naming.

Thank you. Okay, any other questions?

Seeing none. Recess for decision making.

Okay, we are back for decision making on Senate Bill 583.

You know I think this- this bill needs some help. You know there's a lot of issues. Again, whether or not those issues can be worked through, we want to continue having the discussion. I think it raises serious concerns with BNF as well as some of the comments and testifying that was done today.

Again, I want to incorporate those. Okay. I'm going to pass on SD1 and make any necessary technical amendments and effective effective date to 07-01-2050. Also want to reflect the-

reflect the concerns raised by BNF reflecting to the tax exempt status of these bonds in a committee report and the discussion that we've had also reflected in the committee report of the members here. With that--

If I can--

Any discussion. Sure.

I can articulate. I would hope to see in the community report the discussion regarding a global type of process in which we would do the naming and how you would public would have input into that possibly.

I think the concerns about billboards were brought up and that, you know, perhaps that's something that we put in the final draft if that's what's warranted. Since it's not said anything about billboards here. Yeah. And just those concerns.

Noting the concerns of Senator Kim that they reflect the committee report. Any other discussion? Seeing none. Oh, oh yeah. Defected the date to July 1st, 2050. Senator McKelvey?

No, actually Senator Fukunaga.

Oh, Senator Fukunaga.

I do have a number of concerns regarding this bill. But if there is a potential for correcting and addressing, you know, the impact of the tax exempt bonds, I think we should look for other ways to achieve some benefits with specific individual projects. Rather than a broad based mandate for all projects.

So noted. And I'd like to also have Senator Fukunaga's comments reflect in the committee report as well.

Thank you chair. I just want to concur with your recommendation and I discussed it with the author of the bill some potential changes. However, in respecting their decisions on how the bills to look, we're going to go ahead and continue the conversation along these lines.

So I think it's important to note that one for the record as well.

Noted. With that being said, vice chair for the vote. Chair goes aye.

[Vote is called]. Chair, the recommendation is adopted.

Okay. Committee on Government Operations of same recommendations Noted my reservations. However, I will be going straight up in the bill vote your conscience. I vote yes.

Thank you.

On SB 583 for the vote, chair votes aye, vice chair votes aye. Senator Moriwaki, excused. Senator San Buenaventura, excu- is excused and Senator Fevella. Measure passes.

And with that we adjourned. Thank you everybody.